Sentences with phrase «appealing a case based»

The most recent article includes cases where lawyers were sanctioned for appealing a case based on a knowingly false claim, the dismissal of an appeal for failing to file a brief (after two extensions of time), and a decision in which the appellate court found the controlling contract provision itself, after both sides had been arguing the wrong provision since the trial began.

Not exact matches

The provincial government filed a reference case Thursday in the B.C. Court of Appeal asking whether amendments it is proposing to the Environmental Management Act are valid and if they give the province the authority to control the shipment of heavy oils based on the impact spills could have on the environment, human health or communities.

Qualcomm has appealed the South Korean fine in court and contends the FTC's case, which was filed in the waning days of the Obama administration, is based on a flawed legal theory and fails to show harm.

Her attorney, Saif ul Malook, based the appeal on the argument that the person who brought the case against Bibi, a local cleric, should not have been allowed to do so since he didn't hear the blasphemy first - hand.

«It is a version of an appeal for the protection of free speech, and in this case it is a demand that the speech of particular persons carry the authority to define the structure of reality without regard to the basis of past decisions.

ACCC Chairman, Rod Sims, stated that the ACCC believed «that there was sufficient evidence for the Court to find that Cussons had entered into an understanding» and that the appeal will allow the Full Court to «consider whether the trial judge should have inferred an understanding involving Cussons based on the uncontested evidence in this case.»

In a case similar to the Gaidry case, New Iberia Extract Co. v. McIlhenny Sons, the New Iberia Company had recently recovered damages against McIlhenny Sons in the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on a similar cause of action, New Iberia Extract Co. v. E. McIlhenny, 182 La. 150 [8 T. M. Rep. 189], the decision having been based largely on the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, cancelling the Mcllhenny Company registration of «Tabasco» as its trade - mark.

While the second is technically true, it should be pointed out that defense lawyers have, for years, intentionally run up the cost to the state by presenting multiple appeals, even based on little to no actual legal cause, in order to drive up the cost of death penalty cases.

In a case that could have wide - ranging national significance for gay rights, a federal appeals court in New York ruled that a landmark civil rights law bars employers from discriminating against their workers based on sexual orientation.

Silver's successful appeal was based on a 2016 US Supreme Court ruling that reversed the conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and limited the definition of «official act» in a corruption case.

Cor said the last parcel has been withheld based on the city's lingering appeal of a minor decision from the previous lawsuit, even though the overall case has been dismissed.

Although based on Lamberth's previous rulings in the case, he seems likely to rule in favor of the plaintiffs and issue a permanent injunction, Robertson predicts that stay or a new version of it would remain in place while the decision is appealed.

In the Buffalo case, Arthur v. Nyquist, the appeals court held that seniority - based layoffs, as called for under a teachers» contract,...

The School challenged OFSTED's Complaints Procedure on the basis that if an organisation, such as OFSTED, has an internal Complaints Procedure it ought to be «a fair and robust process that permits a substantive challenge and which gives the complaining party the possibility, in appropriate cases, of having the decision changed» (although it was accepted that «fairness» does not necessarily require an external appeals process).

The California Supreme Court will decide this summer whether to take up an appeal by nine students in the historic Vergara vs. California case challenging our unusually protective teacher tenure laws, as well as a seniority - based layoff system that often keeps ineffective teachers in district classrooms while letting more talented but less senior teachers go.

That's precisely what occurred last week, when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the motion by Rebecca Friedrichs» attorneys to decide her case (Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association) on the basis of the pleadings, without a trial or additional oral arguments.

It is my opinion that any teacher receiving an adverse score on a VAM model therefore should have the right to understand why he or she got the score awarded and appeal that score based upon the particular facts of any given case.

(Yes, there's an appeals process in which a committee could decide your worthiness on a case - by - case basis, but I didn't get the feeling that opened a lot of doors for the great unwashed.

-- # 1: Skype or similar (with Facetime & tc)-- Great Apps... really great apps — Augmented Reality — More really amazing Apps like «What's Up» (see it if you haven't)-- Things you can only do on the Playbook (multitasking based apps, real time apps, security apps, video DJs, face recognition)-- MindManager as native (subsidise it, if needed — BBs and Playbook appeal to this market)-- Find on Page / Find in Document / etc. — Categories for photos — Improved File System access and Search — Include a docket for your choice of deluxe case (keep a good profile)-- Hardware acceleration for secure sockets — Properly communicate the Enterprise value of current Bridge.

My reading of the trial documents makes me think that the judge in the appeals case would be hard pressed to find a justification for reducing the settlement; what would the new settlement amount be based on?

In November 2009, after the OFT beat the banks in the High Court and Court of Appeal, a shock technical ruling from the Supreme Court overturned this and kiboshed the OFT's hopes in the test case; soon after the OFT decided it wouldn't continue, even based on new arguments.

The considerations for removal probably varied on a case - by - case basis, between design / appeal reasons, development time, and ROM space limitations.

So I don't think McIntyre and McKitrick would have anything to contribute on this appeal (at least not based on the subject of this post)... though if the case goes to trial they might well have something to say about the merits of the case against the Stick.

In that case, the Supreme Court will be considering the controversial decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the Alien Tort Statute (which allows lawsuits in U.S. courts for violations of international law) does not create a legal basis for such suits against corporations.

This argument is based on a legal theory that has never been tested before, and the outcome — at least at the first stage of the litigation — may be heavily influenced by which three judges happen to be randomly assigned to sit on the panel that hears the case; a broad range of political viewpoints are represented on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which hears such cases.

Their lawsuit contends that the new decision to look at trophy hunting on case - by - case basis should be thrown out because it goes against a recent federal appeals court ruling requiring a public comment period on new rules.

Discretionary orders of prothonotaries ought not be disturbed on appeal to a judge unless: a) the questions raised in the motion are vital to the final issue of the case, or b) the orders are clearly wrong, in the sense that the exercise of discretion by the prothonotary was based upon a wrong principle or upon a misapprehension of the facts.

In the Court of Appeal (see N v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 1369, [2003] All ER (D) 265 (Oct)-RRB- Lord Justice Laws had held that «an Article 3 case of this kind must be based on facts which are not only exceptional, but extreme» (para 40).

The Court of Appeal refused to grant injunctive relief on the basis that the claimant's case was arguable in some respects but weak in others, and it was impossible to determine its merits at the interlocutory stage.

Carter Wood at Point of Law and Dan Schwartz, guest posting at Overlawyered, both believe that Ledbetter will make the case for the importance of equal pay, which at a minimum would appeal to the female base that supported Hillary Clinton.

The Ontario Court of Appeal decision in December overturned a ruling six months earlier by Ontario Superior Court Justice David Brown, who had granted Chevron a stay in the proceedings on the basis that the case had little hope of success and that Chevron Canada's assets were not directly owned by Chevron Corp..

There are, of course, earlier cases where an appeal was allowed on the basis that the decision of the trial judge was not truly a judicial decision.

Though the Court of Appeal agreed that Mrs Owens» petition was legally insufficient to support a divorce, the case has cast a spotlight on the fault - based system of English divorce law which generally leads divorcing couples to attribute blame in «unreasonable behaviour» petitions to prove that their marriage has irretrievably broken down.

The Court of Appeal recognized that the issue was not decided by an earlier case — Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, 2001 SCC 31 — a case where a regulatory body refused to accredit TWU on the basis that the covenant might affect the ability of TWU graduates to teach in public schools in a non-discriminatory matter.

Whether an employee's actions (or omissions) are sufficiently serious to constitute «gross misconduct» is based on the facts of each case, and in the case of Adesokan v Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited [2017] EWCA Civ 22 the question before the Court of Appeal was whether an employee's «gross negligence» equated to gross misconduct.

We have written about the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love inAppeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love inappeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love interest.

The Federal Court of Appeal declined to elaborate on when a dismissal without cause will be considered «unjust», leaving this to be determined by adjudicators on a case - by - case basis.

However, all of this changed last year when the Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Joseph v. Paramount Canada's Wonderland, 1 a case in which, under Ontario's new Limitations Act, the plaintiff's attorney failed to issue the statement of claim within the limitation period.2 The Court of Appeal unanimously eliminated any discretion that the court had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawsuit.

The Virginia Court of Appeals remanded the case to the trial judge to enter a divorce based on living separate and apart for a year, instead of the fault ground of constructive desertion in favor of the wife.

In this recent Alberta case, upheld on appeal, the plaintiff was videoed in both of these situations and, based this evidence; the judge found that the plaintiff was untruthful.

In a landmark asbestosis case, The Court of Appeal ruled today that asbestosis sufferers could be entitled to proportional compensation from as low as 2.3 % from negligent employers, based upon the number of years worked.

In doing so, the Court turned its back on the approach it took in Marshall / Bernard, an approach that was the source of the arguments made by the governments of Canada and British Columbia in Tsilhqot» in Nation and the basis of the British Columbia Court of Appeal decision in this case (William v British Columbia, 2012 BCCA 285).

Represented the NYNEX Corporation and New York Telephone Company before the New York Court of Appeals in a case establishing that a breach of contract action can not be brought based on the breach of an employment handbook when that handbook contains a disclaimer.

Among other precedential matters, Mr. Miklave represented the NYNEX Corporation and New York Telephone Company before the New York Court of Appeals in a case establishing that a breach of contract action can not be brought based on the breach of an employment handbook when that handbook contains a disclaimer (Lobosco v. NYNEX).

And as the four cases and their commentary point out, it is very difficult to find a basis in the law on which a Master can set aside or change a procedurally unfair RTDRS order, especially when no appeal has been filed.

Based upon complaints filed by, among others, Washington DC based Judicial Watch, the Commission had sought to remove Judge Kendall from the bench on the basis of criticisms of his bail and sentencing decisions in specific cases, none of which had ever been appealed and each of which was soundly within his legal discreBased upon complaints filed by, among others, Washington DC based Judicial Watch, the Commission had sought to remove Judge Kendall from the bench on the basis of criticisms of his bail and sentencing decisions in specific cases, none of which had ever been appealed and each of which was soundly within his legal discrebased Judicial Watch, the Commission had sought to remove Judge Kendall from the bench on the basis of criticisms of his bail and sentencing decisions in specific cases, none of which had ever been appealed and each of which was soundly within his legal discretion.

I plan to also blog about Microsoft v. Motorola cases pending before three Munich - based courts (a preliminary injunction case, a related Federal Patent Court nullity action, and an appeal involving a patent narrowed by the Federal Patent Court last year).

There are new impaired driving cases being released by the courts across the province every day and by the Court of Appeal on a regular basis.

Applying these principles in the present case, the Court of Appeal found that the appellant met the evidentiary threshold on the basis of the offer being a «rare and exceptional event».

If the Minister is satisfied that those matters provide a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred, the Minister may grant the convicted person a remedy and return the case to the courts — a referral of the case to a court of appeal to be heard as a new appeal, or a direction for a new trial.»