Search for: "Smith v. Martinez" Results 81 - 100 of 194
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jun 2011, 6:30 am by John Elwood
Battaglia, 10-75 (held since 11/23/10, probably for CSX) Rivera-Martinez v. [read post]
30 Aug 2008, 4:58 pm
Martinez-Bahena    Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville 08a0523n.06 Grange Mutual Casualty Company v. [read post]
4 Apr 2022, 3:58 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Here, the plaintiff failed to state causes of action sounding in breach of contract, legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud, as she failed to adequately allege the element of [*2]damages with respect to each of those causes of action (see Denisco v Uysal, 195 AD3d 989; McSpedon v Levine, 158 AD3d 618, 621; Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d 843, 848; Smith v Chase Manhattan Bank, USA, 293 AD2d 598,… [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 11:56 am by Lyle Denniston
Martinez, et al. (08-1371). [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 1:27 pm by Stephen Bilkis
In Smith, the Supreme Court held that, in this second step of the inquiry, a court should be guided by the seven factors which it had first outlined in Kennedy v Mendoza- Martinez: (1) whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint; (2) whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment; (3) whether it comes into play only upon a finding of scienter; (4) whether its operation will promote traditional aims of punishment-retribution and… [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 8:35 am by Jon Sands
Smith, and Benitez, D.J for the S.D. [read post]
1 Aug 2008, 2:43 pm
Unfortunately, the court does not revisit the seven Mendoza-Martinez factors as the court did in Smith. [read post]
11 May 2007, 6:12 am
See Smith, 194 F.3d at 1052 ("[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 8:50 am by Reference Staff
Martinez was part of the legal team that represented the petitioner in the landmark case Griggs v. [read post]