Search for: "State v. Brochu" Results 1 - 16 of 16
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jul 2015, 1:10 pm by Daily Record Staff
” After a three-day trial, and two days of intensive deliberations, the jury convicted Brochu of one count of sexual ... [read post]
23 May 2016, 10:12 am
Brochu had been permanently barred from any securities industry dealings in the state of New Hampshire, the SEC barred Brochu from an association with any broker, dealer, investment adviser, municipal securities dealer, municipal adviser, transfer agent, or nationally recognized statistical rating organization.A resident of Wells, Maine, Brochu registered his company Kleossum, Inc. with the SEC in 2010 and then with the state of New Hampshire in 2012. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 1:01 pm by Daily Record Staff
Civil Procedure — Petition for restitution — Demonstration of inability to pay After Michael David Brochu, appellee, was convicted of sexually abusing a child who lived next door, the child — D.G., appellant — filed a petition for restitution in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County seeking $25,000 to cover the projected cost of ... [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 3:16 am
Free speech and whistle blowingBrochu v City of Riviera Beach, 304 F.3d. 1144 The Brochu case interweaves allegations of the suppression of free speech, whistle blowing and retaliation into its fabric. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
United States, 880 F.2d 84, 86-87 (8th Cir. 1989).Kansas: Savina v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 1:41 pm by Eugene Volokh
Selectmen Brochu also is uncomfortable with the request and agrees with Selectmen Picard. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 4:38 pm by Zosha Millman
Brochu of Shipman & Goodwin on their School Law blog Shared Office Space—The “Uber” of Commercial Real Estate? [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 12:50 pm by Bexis
  Unless and until the New Hampshire Supreme Court rules otherwise, Bartlett has performed the additional public service of cleaning up the mess that Brochu v. [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 1:54 pm by MacIsaac
The Saint John Railway Company (1899), 30 S.C.R. 218 was cited, in which the court stated at 239: It is perhaps impossible to prevent jurors looking at a case in this way, but at least they ought not to be invited to do so, and such direct resorts or appeals to the feelings and interests of the individual jurymen can only exercise a disturbing or misleading influence. [6]             In Brochu v. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant.  [read post]