Sentences with phrase «act of the defendant»

The date of knowledge is the date by which the claimant became aware (or, in the court's opinion, would reasonably have become aware) that the injury was sufficiently serious to justify bringing a claim for damages and that the injury was attributable to an act of the defendant.

(1) As a general rule, a plaintiff [injury claimant] can not succeed unless she shows as a matter of fact that she would not have suffered the loss «but for» the negligent act or acts of the defendant.

The role of the expert witness is to measure the acts of the defendant according to the standard of care that the expert himself brings to the table.

His claim was rejected, for the loss «must inevitably flow from the tortious act of the defendant» (see Burton, per Baron Bramwell), which this did not.

This means either the victim died as the result of a negligent act of the defendant.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: DECLARES that T. has been the subject of clear and unequivocal parental alienation by Plaintiff; GIVES act of Defendant's declaration that his door will always be opened for her daughter; DECLARES that T. may see and visit Defendant as less, or preferably as much as she so wishes.»

Not exact matches

The class action, filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 18 - cv - 02213, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired BRF American Depositary Receipts («ADRs») between April 4, 2013 and March 2, 2018, both dates inclusive (the «Class Period»), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the «Exchange Act») and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

The class action, filed in United States District Court, for the District of Illinois, Eastern Division, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Akorn's securities between March 1, 2017 through February 26, 2018, both dates inclusive (the «Class Period»), seeking to recover damages caused by defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

Using a barrage of Freedom of Information Act lawsuits, TRAC has been able to gather data buried in the Justice Department's own computer files (minus the individual case numbers that might be used to identify defendants).

Defense attorneys have already said the 21 - year - old defendant committed all the crimes he is accused of, but they also contend Tsarnaev did so in an act of subservience to his older brother, not because of a personal passion.

Plaintiff seeks to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the «Exchange Act») and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder.

«To place defendants» argument in a real world context,» she wrote, «they assert that for the payment of approximately $ 100 a year to the Copyright Office (the payment for a Section 111 compulsory license) and without compliance with the strictures of the Communications Act or plaintiffs» consent, that they are entitled to use and profit from the plaintiffs» copyrighted works.»

On May 3, 2013, the lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint alleging that, during that same period, all of the defendants violated Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule

In re HP Securities Litigation consists of two consolidated putative class actions filed on November 26 and 30, 2012 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging, among other things, that from August 19, 2011 to November 20, 2012, the defendants violated Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Exchange Act by concealing material information and making false statements related to Parent's acquisition of Autonomy and the financial performance of Parent's enterprise services business.

On May 3, 2013, the lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint alleging that, during that same period, all of the defendants violated Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b - 5 (b) by concealing material information and making false statements related to Parent's acquisition of Autonomy and that certain defendants violated SEC Rule 10b - 5 (a) and (c) by engaging in a «scheme» to defraud investors.

The class action, filed in United States District Court, for the Central District of California, and docketed under 17 - cv - 09157, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Crypto securities, seeking to recover compensable damages caused by defendants» violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The class action, filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 17 - cv - 09903, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Qudian's American Depositary Receipts («ADRs») pursuant and / or traceable to Qudian's false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus, issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering on or about October 18, 2017 (the «IPO» or the «Offering»), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants» violations of the Securities Act of 1933 (the «Securities Act»).

The class action, filed in United States District Court, for the Southern District of New York, and docketed under 18 - cv - 00646, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Xunlei securities, seeking to recover compensable damages caused by defendants» violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On March 6, 2018, Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that virtual currencies are commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and therefore subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) anti-fraud and anti-manipulation enforcement authority.1 Granting the CFTC's request for a preliminary injunction against the defendants who allegedly engaged in deception and fraud involving virtual currency spot markets, Judge Weinstein noted that «[u] ntil Congress clarifies the matter,» the CFTC has «concurrent authority» along with other state and federal administrative agencies and civil and criminal courts over transactions in virtual currency.2

I understand that maybe being a defendant in a Tribunal in Iran where a Half Moon stands behind the judge might be oppressive, since many violence acts are committed in the name of Islam, a country ruled by the Shariah.

Bohrer wrote the information in these interviews «directly undermine crucial elements of the crime charged: that Percoco was a State official at the time he performed an official act, and that he was a State official, held himself out as a future State official, at the time he entered into a quid pro quo agreement with the Syracuse defendants.»

An order of perpetual injunction directed at the office od the 1st Defendant restraining it from acting or purporting to act on behalf of Honourable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the said petition before the 2nd Defendant; and Any further or other orders as this honourable court would deem feet in the circumstances.

The plaintiff is seeking: A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the provisions of the 1992 Constitution, particularly Articles 88 (5), 218 (a) and (e), 284 and 287 thereof, the 1st defendant can not act as the legal representative for Honourable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta, the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Ghana, in a pending investigation bordering on conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whdefendant can not act as the legal representative for Honourable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta, the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Ghana, in a pending investigation bordering on conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever;

«It is ordered that an order of injunction is hereby made restraining the 2nd defendant (INEC) from issuing a certificate of return to the 1st defendant (Ogah) while the claimant (Ikpeazu) remains in office in accordance with section 143 (1) & (2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and pending the determination of the motion on notice.

On appeal, the Second Circuit found that the jury instructions were too broad, permitting the juries to convict the defendants of corruption charges on a theory that fell outside the definition of «official act,» which the Supreme Court had provided in McDonnell.

The commission accused the defendant of forging the Memorandum of Loss of Lagos State Certificate of Occupancy in respect of a property located in Lagos, so it could be acted upon as genuine.

An Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation [75] into the use of firearms by Metropolitan Police Officers, which was published on 19 December 2013 once a verdict had been reached in the defendants» trial, concluded that the officers who had used force on 22 May 2013 had «acted entirely appropriately» and had shown «skill and professionalism».

1st Defendant is the Ghanaian constitutional body mandated under Article 45 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and the section 2 of the Electoral Commission Act, 1993 (Act 451) with the mandate of conducting all public elections including Presidential and Parliamentary elections inter alia.

The defendant, from in or around March 2008 to in or around October 2013, in the County of Monroe, acting in concert with others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally entered into and engaged in and continued to engage in a contract, agreement, arrangement, and combination in unreasonable restraint of combination and the free exercise of activity in the conduct of business, trade, and commerce, specifically, to restrain competition in the bidding process of Monroe County for the Public Safety Contract, by means of bid rigging.

A DECLARATION is hereby made that by virtue of the provisions of Section 4 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the 1st Defendant / Respondent is under a binding legal obligation to provide the Plaintiff / Applicant with up to date information on the spending of recovered stolen funds, including:

A declaration that the conduct of the 1st Defendant acting through its Chief Executive Officer and Acting Editor of the Crusading Guide newspaper, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in releasing the contents of the petition, through publications in the Crusading Guide newspaper, his personal facebook page, public screening of the audio — visual recordings in support of the petition at the Accra International Conference Centre on the 22nd September, 2015, containing the evidence in support of the petition, is in violation of Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional...&acting through its Chief Executive Officer and Acting Editor of the Crusading Guide newspaper, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in releasing the contents of the petition, through publications in the Crusading Guide newspaper, his personal facebook page, public screening of the audio — visual recordings in support of the petition at the Accra International Conference Centre on the 22nd September, 2015, containing the evidence in support of the petition, is in violation of Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional...&Acting Editor of the Crusading Guide newspaper, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in releasing the contents of the petition, through publications in the Crusading Guide newspaper, his personal facebook page, public screening of the audio — visual recordings in support of the petition at the Accra International Conference Centre on the 22nd September, 2015, containing the evidence in support of the petition, is in violation of Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional...»

In a Charge No: KB / HC / 27C / 2017, the defendants were accused of committing offences contrary to and punishable under Sections 19 and 26 (1)(c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.

«This defendant manipulated and abused taxpayer - subsidized benefits so she could get paid for more than three months of not working, and then compounded her culpability with a forged Family and Medical Leave Act application to protect her job,» said Inspector General Catherine Leahy Scott in a news release.

Mr. Silver, who resigned on Monday as speaker after being arrested on federal corruption charges in January, was accused of essentially facilitating the harassment by not acting forcefully to prevent Mr. Lopez's behavior as leader of the Assembly, which was also named as a defendant in one of the lawsuits.

In one of the counts, the EFCC alleged that Fani - Kayode, who it listed as the second defendant in the charge sheet, and his co-defendants conspired among themselves to «indirectly retain the sum of N1, 500, 000,000, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: stealing.»

Allowing defendants to use funds restrained under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to fund their private defence in our view would also limit the strain on legal aid budgets.

A declaration that the statements that Plaintiff «has constituted herself into the Commission's Tender Review Committee contrary to the Procurement Act», «unilaterally awarded a contract of about $ 25,000 to a South African company... to change and re-develop the Commission's logo under the guise of rebranding...» set out at paragraphs 6, 18, 23, 27 of the petition attached to Defendant's letter conveying the petition to His Excellency the President of the Republic of Ghana are defamatory of Plaintiff.

The three are seeking an interlocutory injunction «to restrain them from holding out [Freddie Blay] as acting chairman of the party and convening and attending meetings without the purportedly suspended chairman of the party (Chairman Afoko) being the convenor of the meetings and to restrain the defendants from taking decisions in any meeting not convened by Chairman Afoko, until this dispute is finally determined.»

It names as defendants the Adirondack Park Agency, APA Chairwoman Lani Ulrich, the state Department of Environmental Conservation, and Basil Seggos, the DEC acting commissioner.

The main defendant is former shop owner Kordell Jackson, who has been an outspoken critic of the SAFE Act.

First, the DACA Rescission Memorandum violates the due process guarantee of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution by substantially altering DHS's prior assurances regarding the use of information contained in DACA applications; Defendants should be equitably estopped from acting contrary to these assurances.

In one of the counts, the defendants were accused of conspiring among themselves to «indirectly retain the sum of N1, 500, 000,000.00 which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: stealing.»

The Federal Government further stated that the first defendant has in furtherance to the offence he was charged, inaugurated Biafra Security Service, adding that such an act is a grave threat to national security and unity of the country.

Accountant John Maggio, who took a deal to testify against the other defendants, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of attempted violation of the Donnelly Act.

«Both the complaint and the indictment are wholly silent with respect to any specific acts, overt acts, facts, criminal conduct or non-criminal conduct by the Buffalo defendants having occurred in the Southern District of New York,» one of the court filings state.

By Section 270 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, a plea bargain agreement is allowed as in this case, wherein the first defendant has provided relevant information to aid the prosecution of this case... it appears to me that by the above provisions of the ACJA, under a plea bargain agreement, the appropriate sentence to be recommended should be within the appropriate range of punishment stipulated for the offence charged.

According to the prosecution, the defendants forged a Memorandum of Loss of a Lagos State Certificate of Occupancy registered as No. 33 at page 33 volume 1011 at the Lagos State Land Registry, Alausa, Ikeja, in order that the document be acted upon as genuine.

In a statement, Acting Brooklyn District Attorney Eric González said, «Instead of calling an ambulance or offering aid, this defendant heartlessly left the scene after allegedly striking and killing a beloved member of the community.

Parts of the judgment read: «A DECLARATION that by virtue of the provisions of Section 4 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, the Defendants are under a binding legal obligation to provide the Plaintiff with up to date information relating to the following:

The prosecution said the defendants acted contrary to sections 18 (a) and15 (2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 and are liable to punishment under Section 15 (3) of the same Act.