Sentences with phrase «arguments in court against»

But the county has filed multiple arguments in court against repayment.

My father was a lawyer and used his own life as an argument in court against his idea that it was utopian and that we couldn't build a compassionate world or business structure because he did it.

Not exact matches

Mr. Siegal's other client successes include securing a 2016 trial victory in federal court defending Marvel Entertainment against a claim that it stole a patent - holder's design for a Spiderman role play web - shooting toy, and numerous federal and state appellate arguments in criminal and civil matters.

Now the entertainment conglomerates that own U.S. television networks are waging a legal fight, culminating in Tuesday's Supreme Court argument against a startup business that uses Internet - based technology to give subscribers the ability to watch programs anywhere they can take portable devices.

NEW YORK, April 16 - A lawyer for victims of terrorist attacks in Israel on Monday urged a federal appeals court to revive their lawsuit against Facebook Inc, saying Mark Zuckerberg's congressional testimony undermined the social media company's argument that it bore no responsibility for content on its platforms.

The Niskanen Center is already preparing challenges against eminent domain for pipelines that feed liquefied natural gas exports terminals, though the argument has not been tried in court yet.

A federal judge will hear arguments Monday on a temporary restraining order against an Oklahoma referendum that would ban the use of Islamic religious law in state courts.

Your arguments are absurd, immaterial to the issue, and if you were arguing this in a court of law, you would most assuredly be ruled against.

By Richard Allen Greene, CNN London (CNN)- Christian activists in Britain are furious at the arguments their government will use against them when Europe's highest court considers whether employees have the right to wear crosses that show over their uniforms.

In a celebrated case brought by a group of civil libertarians to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1942, Chief Justice Robert Jackson, against the strong argument of civil libertarians on the issues of «interrogation without the due process of law» and prolonged detention of suspects, gave his famous ruling that the United States «Constitution is not a suicide pact»In a celebrated case brought by a group of civil libertarians to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1942, Chief Justice Robert Jackson, against the strong argument of civil libertarians on the issues of «interrogation without the due process of law» and prolonged detention of suspects, gave his famous ruling that the United States «Constitution is not a suicide pact»in 1942, Chief Justice Robert Jackson, against the strong argument of civil libertarians on the issues of «interrogation without the due process of law» and prolonged detention of suspects, gave his famous ruling that the United States «Constitution is not a suicide pact».

At 10:15 a.m., leaders from New York's organized labor movement will hold a news conference as the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME, the latest in a series of attacks by the wealthy and corporate interests against ordinary working people, outside the Senate lounge, 3rd Floor, state Capitol, Albany.

While it didn't hold up in the supreme court, people have argued that the income tax is unconstitutional because it's not specifically mentioned (legally that's a questionable argument), but there is a feeling that the constitution defends the libertarian against an overreaching government (sorry - that's too general).

Whereas Michael Boxer could have recommended immediate reinstatement that could have made me «whole» again, he chose to conclude his own internal report that was three years delinquent by stating that, «Serious questions are raised about Mr. Iritano and record falsification,» which was simply not true, and firmly supported by the Transit Authority's complete reversal of all misconduct allegations against me during oral argument in Appellate Court, Second Department, on May 9, 1991.

[The] three departments of the government... being in certain respects checks upon each other, and our being judges of a court in the last resort, are considerations which afford strong arguments against the propriety of our extra-judicially deciding the questions alluded to.

While dismissing the arguments relating to the first two of those values, the Court accepted that the barrier raised against others by a veil concealing the face in public could undermine the notion of «living together».

MANHATTAN FEDERAL COURT — «Power, greed, corruption» are at the heart of the case against former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, federal prosecutors said Tuesday during opening arguments in the trial.

Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley is launching a new digital ad Friday, foreshadowing one of his arguments in his campaign for Senate against Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill: her vote against Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch last year.

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Chief Judge Royce Lamberth, who earlier had ruled against the National Institutes of Health, this time came down on NIH's side in several key arguments in the case.

In January, the three - judge appeals court panel heard arguments for and against the dismantling of North Carolina's teacher tenure system.

Today, on Milton Friedman Legacy Day, the Nevada Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in two lawsuits against the state's education savings account (ESA) law.

Separately, last week Barnes & Noble (s BKS) and the American Booksellers Association requested permission to file an amici curiae, or «friend of the court,» brief in the case, saying that «if the Court were not to permit ABA and Barnes & Noble to serve as amici in this matter, it is likely that DOJ's numerous arguments in that filing that are specifically directed against Barnes & Noble and ABA, complete with their factual inaccuracies, would go unrebutted by any party currently before the Court.&rcourt,» brief in the case, saying that «if the Court were not to permit ABA and Barnes & Noble to serve as amici in this matter, it is likely that DOJ's numerous arguments in that filing that are specifically directed against Barnes & Noble and ABA, complete with their factual inaccuracies, would go unrebutted by any party currently before the Court.&rCourt were not to permit ABA and Barnes & Noble to serve as amici in this matter, it is likely that DOJ's numerous arguments in that filing that are specifically directed against Barnes & Noble and ABA, complete with their factual inaccuracies, would go unrebutted by any party currently before the Court.&rCourt.»

The motion to dismiss the case, filed in a New York court, gave a particularly scathing view of the argument against Apple peppered with such memorable phrases as the following:

Loudoun County's policy prohibiting the adoption of pit bulls from the county shelter ended up in court this week, with two days of arguments over whether it amounts to discriminating against the breed.

When in - court arguments began, Atari pressed two separate lines of defense against Nintendo's charge that the Tetris rights they claimed to own were ill - gotten.

Last week's decision by Judge Ernest A. Goldsmith of state superior court in San Francisco offers a second look at some of the arguments being made against A.B. 32, the state climate - change law passed in Sacramento in 2006.

As we have previously considered (see previous article cited above) the courts will give significant weight to Art 10 arguments in claims brought against the media.

Nevertheless, the arguments are frequently crunched through, probably because of an important Illinois Supreme Court ruling from 1990 which is still good law, Rollins v. Ellwood, involving claims brought against a Baltimore police officer, among others, sounding in intentional tort for his role in the apprehension of a misidentified criminal defendant and Illinois resident in Illinois, for which the Court found the officer was not subject to Illinois jurisdiction.

The court has, in many cases, been prepared to hear argument and see evidence from them (usually on limited issues) and has also been prepared to consider costs awards against them and in their favour depending upon the outcome of their involvement.

Your defense attorney can appeal the sentence against you by filing an argument with the court where it is explained how the trial in which you were found guilty was conducted inappropriately or how some other error caused your rights to be violated.

* One of the major roles of an Anchorage criminal defense attorney is to present arguments and proofs in the court of law to defend his / her client against criminal accusations.

Among the newly specified dodgy arguments against a MF — delicately put as «factors which should not outweigh the presumption in favour of allowing the assistance of a MF» — are the confidentiality of the proceedings and sensitivity of information in the court papers relating to the family's affairs; the LIP's apparent capacity to proceed without a MF; the fact that the LIP is unrepresented through choice; the fact that the hearing is a directions or case management hearing; and the MF's membership of an organisation which promotes a particular cause.

As for the argument raised against the principle of specialisation — to avoid creating a court with a «rigid» jurisdiction that might not be justified in the light of future workload — well, the same argument could actually be invoked against the creation of a «super-GC» whose future caseload is unlikely to double in the near future.

Lessig's arguments in the case hinged on a morsel dropped by the Supreme Court in ruling against him in its 2003 decision Eldred v. Ashcroft.

The court will hear arguments tomorrow in a case where a Toronto doctor is appealing a Superior Court decision that dismissed his libel action against a former head of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association and ordered him to pay more than $ 310,000 in ccourt will hear arguments tomorrow in a case where a Toronto doctor is appealing a Superior Court decision that dismissed his libel action against a former head of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association and ordered him to pay more than $ 310,000 in cCourt decision that dismissed his libel action against a former head of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association and ordered him to pay more than $ 310,000 in costs.

The bias against pro se litigants is reinforced every time someone makes irrelevant and badly formed arguments in court.

While acknowledging the reality of this threat, the Court noted that the argument «flies in the face of the rule against nonparty preclusion,» which «perforce leads to relitigation of many issues &» Smith, slip op.

In response to the policy argument against allowing relitigation of class certification, the Court noted that stare decisis and comity are the legal system's remedies for repetitive litigation that falls outside of the rules of preclusion, and that once a class action is removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), 28 U.SCourt noted that stare decisis and comity are the legal system's remedies for repetitive litigation that falls outside of the rules of preclusion, and that once a class action is removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), 28 U.Scourt under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), 28 U.S.C.??

Of greatest significance for the prospects of Bill C - 14, in Canada (Attorney General) v. E.G., 2016 ABCA 155, the Alberta Court of Appeal recently flatly rejected the interpretation of Carter that was offered by the Attorney General of Canada in the arguments against the authorization (which are the same arguments the government has offered in support of Bill C - 14).

The British Columbia Supreme Court recently released a decision that further supports the argument that Chief Justice Wittmann and the ABCA erred in striking the claim against the ERCB.

The court will hear arguments tomorrow in a case where a Toronto doctor is appealing a Superior Court decision that dismissed his libel action against a formcourt will hear arguments tomorrow in a case where a Toronto doctor is appealing a Superior Court decision that dismissed his libel action against a formCourt decision that dismissed his libel action against a former...

Their view accords with my own in any event but, in my judgement, therefore, the decisions of the English Courts do create an issue estoppel against the Defendant in raising the argument that the waiver is insufficient where recognition, enforcement and execution are concerned.

The Court of Appeal rejected the Appellant's submission that the Court's interpretation of the Charter in Legroulx was not sine qua non the question and that Charter values can still lend support for the argument against civil jury fees.

In other words, Mr. Voisey's argument was better than in any of the cases above, but the costs ordered against him were the same amount as in Cain, where the court declined to even take jurisdictioIn other words, Mr. Voisey's argument was better than in any of the cases above, but the costs ordered against him were the same amount as in Cain, where the court declined to even take jurisdictioin any of the cases above, but the costs ordered against him were the same amount as in Cain, where the court declined to even take jurisdictioin Cain, where the court declined to even take jurisdiction.

The full width of the argument was not readily to be anticipated and there was no culpable conduct on the part of the Claimants in failing to put it before the Court as a point which might be taken against them;

Jay J summarised that argument at [29] as follows: «For the purposes of the discrimination claims in the Employment Tribunal and the County Court — and here the focus must be on the claims against the NMC — it was necessary for the appellant to state that she had been struck off since that would found her claim for damages and moreover the longer that she was struck off the greater would be the damages.

In the Court of Appeal, Sir Alan Ward LJ, dissenting, agreed that there was irresistible logic to the argument that Article 8 is engaged where a private landowner seeks possession against an individual occupying land as their home.

I do not consider that the full width of the argument was readily to be anticipated or that there was any culpable conduct on the part of the Claimants in failing to put it before the court as a point which might be taken against it.

In view of this deficit, Clarke LJ heard arguments as to whether non-party costs orders should be made against the funders pursuant to Section 51 (3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, and concluded that they should all be jointly and severally liable to pay the defendants» costs on the indemnity basis (subject to the «Arkin cap» as further discussed below).

A US court has confirmed a US$ 1.3 billion ICSID additional facility award in favour of Canadian mining company Rusoro against Venezuela, rejecting arguments that the arbitrators exceeded their authority in calculating damages or that enforcement should be stayed pending a challenge to the award in France.

Even though Alphamix concerned a domestic arbitral award, the attitude of the Judge in scrutinizing the arguments against the enforcement of an award when a litigant has gone through all the proper court procedures, even public interest ones, is most welcome and sends a strong signal to public bodies which choose to have their commercial disputes resolved by way of arbitration, that they should take arbitration proceedings and arbitral awards made against them seriously.