Sentences with phrase «appellee in»

Geoffrey Hoffman was among a group of legal scholars who submitted an amici curiae brief in support of the plaintiff - appellee in the case of City of Chicago v. Sessions.

Not exact matches

Each of appellees» possible theories of wealth discrimination is founded on the assumption that the quality of education varies directly with the amount of funds expended on it, and that, therefore, the difference in quality between two schools can be determined simplistically by looking at the difference in per - pupil expenditures.

The Court added, in failing to create the recall list, the appellees lost the opportunity for employment for a minimum of two years.»

The debt in question originated shortly after appellee's graduation from chiropractic college with the disbursement of a $ 35,322.81 consolidated student loan.5 Appellee made approximately ten years» of payments towards this debt, but defaulted after she becappellee's graduation from chiropractic college with the disbursement of a $ 35,322.81 consolidated student loan.5 Appellee made approximately ten years» of payments towards this debt, but defaulted after she becAppellee made approximately ten years» of payments towards this debt, but defaulted after she became ill.

In 1995, appellee terminated her chiropractic practice altogether, citing an inability to handle life changes.

According to appellee, her symptoms currently include «severe, short - term memory loss,» persistent ache, dramatic weight gain, and anxiety about being in public places.

She filed her bankruptcy petition in 2000.6 With principal, interest, and collection costs, appellee now owes ECMC over $ 61,000.

It reasoned that requiring appellee's ECMC loan repayment would essentially impose a «sentence of [twenty - five] years in payments on an obligation that she could never realistically expect to retire or reduce.»

At some point in 1993, appellee began to experience extreme fatigue, depression, and diminution of her mental faculties.

ECMC argues that the Bankruptcy Court erred in its determination that repayment of the debt would impose an «undue hardship» on appellee.

Fortunately, in 1997, appellee obtained appropriate professional help and has begun a recovery process.

The Father (Appellant) and Mother (Appellee) had a child together in 2004.

In addition, the evidence would be viewed in the light most favorable to the appellee wife, who was the prevailing party, and reasonable inferences would be drawn in her favoIn addition, the evidence would be viewed in the light most favorable to the appellee wife, who was the prevailing party, and reasonable inferences would be drawn in her favoin the light most favorable to the appellee wife, who was the prevailing party, and reasonable inferences would be drawn in her favoin her favor.

If the opposing party in your case appeals a final ruling of a trial court or agency or board, that party is the «appellant» and you are the «appellee.»

August 24, 2005 909 So.2 d 464 2005 As the appellee concedes, the lower court erred when it granted a new trial on damages alone, in this slip - and - fall case, without first granting a motion for additur.

In this slip and fall action, the trial court granted Appellee Wal - Mart's motion for summary judgment based on the nonexistence of any genuine issue of material fact that Wal - Mart had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition.In this slip and fall action, the trial court granted Appellee Wal - Mart's motion for summary judgment based on the nonexistence of any genuine issue of material fact that Wal - Mart had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition.

As the appellee concedes, the lower court erred when it granted a new trial on damages alone, in this slip - and - fall case, without first granting a motion for additur.

The representative of the appellant argues that the judgment of the original court which acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Japanese court in an action of the appellee who is a Japanese national claiming divorce in the present case against the appellant who has a nationality of the German Democratic Republic is against the law.

As the appellee concedes, the lower court erred when it granted a new trial on damages alone, in this slip - and - fall case, without first granting a motion for additur.

And he made new law on the extent to which litigants can badger a non-party in depositions: see 197 F. 3d 922 (1999) MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET MATTER # 1, Appellees, v. MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET MATTER # 2, Appellants.

The chancellor found that appellee's interest in Wal - Mart stock options that could not yet be exercised were not marital property but compensated appellant with an award of alimony.

In addition to the regulations held unconstitutional by the court below, appellees originally challenged Rule 143.2 prohibiting topless waitresses, Rule 143.3 (2) requiring certain entertainers to perform on a stage at a distance away from customers, and Rule 143.5 prohibiting any entertainment that violated local ordinances.

Represented the plaintiff - appellee at the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals in obtaining affirmance of substantially all of the district court judgment in excess of $ 4 million in an employment retaliation case.

The first question which arises in this cause, is an objection to the jurisdiction of the court below, made by the appellees, on the ground of the want of proper parties; and that the state of Massachusetts, being now the owners of the bridge, pursuant to the terms of the charter to the defendants, no suit could be sustained which can affect their interest in it.

In regards to the marriage of Roger E. Thompson (Petitioner / Appellant) and Tanya F. Thompson (Respondent / Appellee), under Arizona Revised Statute 25 - 408, a parent granted joint custody and legal decision making or parenting time is granted the right to a minimum of 60 days of advanced notice prior to a relocation of the minor child by the other parent «more than 100 miles within the state.»

Appellees, Playtime Theatres, Inc., and Sea - First Properties, Inc., filed an action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking a declaratory judgment that the Renton ordinance violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and a permanent injunction against its enforcement.

After calculating the average number of intensifiers per page (the «intensifier rate»), Long and Christensen found no statistically significant relationship between intensifier rate and case outcome in appellee's briefs.

The appellant, Kevin Coe («father»), and appellee, Seon Hwa Coe («mother»), married in 2004, and had a daughter, «J.C.,» in 2007.

The Court of Appeals was «willing to assume for purposes of this appeal that appellees have shown that Test 21 is predictive of further progress in Recruit School.»

What if the appellee has caught you in some mistake, perhaps even a conclusive mistake, on one of the arguments in your initial brief?

Appellant Nyquist, in his answer to appellees» interrogatories in the court below, gave the following explanation:

Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party, or neither party from counsel for the appellees received.

«The trial court found that the evidence presented demonstrated that appellant had permitted absenteeism from school, undermined the girls» relationship with, and alienated them from, appellee, obstructed appellee's regular parenting time, caused the girls to become overly identified with and involved in appellant's problems and concerns, particularly Sarah, who is «enmeshed» with appellant.»

The court did not abuse its discretion in naming appellee the residential parent, as there was evidence of both parties engaging in alienation.»