Sentences with phrase «claims court district»

Contact the county clerk in the small claims court district closest to the residence or business of the person you are suing.

Not exact matches

The SEC will litigate its claims against Balwani in federal district court in the Northern District of Caldistrict court in the Northern District of CalDistrict of California.

His rapid pace of nominations and confirmations have outpaced predecessors, and, in September, he hit 65 combined nominations between appeals courts, district courts, the US Tax Court, and the US Court of Federal Claims.

Uber says it will carefully review the claim from the District Court of Frankfurt, but that it plans to appeal the claim and «vigorously defend» its stance.

«MoFo's policies and practices are emblematic of the «old boys» club» that permeates law firms, suppresses female advancement, and stereotypes women,» claims the lawsuit, which was filed in U.S District Court in San Francisco.

Among those expected to attend a hearing at the federal district court in Manhattan is Stormy Daniels, the adult - film star who claims she had sex with Trump in 2006 and took a $ 130,000 hush payment shortly before the 2016 election.

A federal district court judge has found that claims against Intel Corporation's Investment Policy Committee for its retirement plans is time - barred under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act's (ERISA)'s three - year statute of limitations.

Cunningham and Cunningham, et al. v. Electronic Data Systems Corporation is a purported collective action filed on May 10, 2006 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York claiming that current and former EDS employees allegedly involved in installing and / or maintaining computer software and hardware were misclassified as exempt employees.

The Enrollment Program also authorizes a superior court to have jurisdiction over enrollees by allowing it to «appoint a receiver, monitor, conservator, or other designated fiduciary or officer of the court for a defendant or the defendant's assets,» as well as authorizes the Commissioner of Business Oversight to «include in civil actions claims for ancillary relief, including restitution and disgorgement, on behalf of a person injured, as well as attorney's fees and costs, and civil penalties of up to $ 25,000» for up to four years after the purported violation occurred and «refer evidence regarding violations of the bill's provisions to the Attorney General, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the United States Department of the Treasury, or the district attorney of the county in which the violation occurred, who would be authorized, with or without this type of a reference, to institute appropriate proceedings.»

On May 2, 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York gave preliminary approval to a settlement of $ 280 million to resolve claims against JPMC that it misled investors in billions of dollars» worth of mortgage backed securities.

So did U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who on December 9 rejected the archdiocese's claim that WMATA's refusal to post the ad violated its First Amendment right of free speech.

Rubashkin's lawyers claimed Thursday that U.S. District Court Chief Judge Linda Reade, the judge in the case, met with the law - enforcement team that participated in the May 2008 immigration raid of Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa.

The Organic Trade Association's amended complaint — filed on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia — argues that this new claim by USDA is a «novel and erroneous» view of OFPA that «conflicts with every prior administration's approach to rulemaking under the OFPA and the National Organic Standards Board.»

In a December 3, 2017 order dismissing the case that is likely to be viewed with some relief by many dairy companies, US district judge Katherine B Forrest agreed with Dannon, noting that a court handling a similar false advertising lawsuit about «non-GMO» claims on dairy products fed GM feed (Gallagher v. Chipotle Mexican Grill) rejected a similar claim at the pleading stage.

While we are pleased that the District Court found us likely to succeed on several of our claims, we are nevertheless disappointed by the court's ultimate decision to deny our Motion for Preliminary Injunction to block the implementation of the Vermont GMO labelinCourt found us likely to succeed on several of our claims, we are nevertheless disappointed by the court's ultimate decision to deny our Motion for Preliminary Injunction to block the implementation of the Vermont GMO labelincourt's ultimate decision to deny our Motion for Preliminary Injunction to block the implementation of the Vermont GMO labeling law

Any claim arising from the information contained on the eDairy News website shall be submitted to the competence of the ordinary courts of the First Judicial District of the Province of Cordoba (Primera Circunscripción Judicial de la Provincia de Cordoba), Republic of Argentina, in the city of Córdoba, excluding any other jurisdiction (Federal jurisdiction is also excluded).

In June»98 a U.S. District Court in Maryland threw out the suit in summary judgment, ordering Antonious to pay Spalding's court costs and issuing a $ 30,000 sanction against Stroup's law firm, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, for failing to do an adequate prefiling investigation of Antonious's clCourt in Maryland threw out the suit in summary judgment, ordering Antonious to pay Spalding's court costs and issuing a $ 30,000 sanction against Stroup's law firm, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, for failing to do an adequate prefiling investigation of Antonious's clcourt costs and issuing a $ 30,000 sanction against Stroup's law firm, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, for failing to do an adequate prefiling investigation of Antonious's claims.

The decision, made Wednesday by the 2nd District Appellate Court in Elgin, settles a 1995 suit filed by the park board, in which it laid claim to 90 percent of the lake bed.

The district court held that the composition claims were inherently misleading because «they imply a compositional difference between those products that are produced with rb [ST] and those that are not,» in contravention of the FDA's finding that there is no measurable compositional difference between the two.

Citing disagreements on the law that have emerged in different federal appeals courts, Silver claims that at trial, U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni applied the wrong standards to money laundering, bribery and extortion charges.

State of New York Court of Appeals Supreme Court, Appellate Division Supreme Courts (Trial Courts) County Courts Family Courts Surrogates» Courts Court of Claims District Courts New York City Civil Court New York City Criminal Courts New York City Courts Problem Solving Courts Town and Village Courts Judicial selection in New York

A seventh alleged victim, whose case is being handled by a different law firm from the other six defendants, planned to sue in U.S. District court, claiming civil rights violations, according to people familiar with that case.

Judge Robert Johnson, the former Bronx district attorney, has not acted on a motion allowing it to proceed, claiming a court backlog.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis rejected the Justice Department's claim that courts should not intervene in Trump's exercise of «prosecutorial discretion» to eliminate the protections former president Barack Obama created in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

Warren County District Attorney Kate Hogan will join the state Court of Claims as a judge following her confirmation by the state Senate yesterday.

District auditor Ian Pickwell, a government - appointed accountant who monitored council finances, claimed that this move was reckless and illegal, taking Camden Council to court.

The arguments come nearly six months after the court heard a dispute over Wisconsin legislative districts that Democrats claim were drawn to maximize Republican control in a state that is closely divided between the parties.

The Missouri Supreme Court «agreed with the trial court's decision to dismiss several counts (including partisan gerrymandering claims), but remanded for a determination of whether the congressional districts (particularly districts 3 and 5) were sufficiently compact under state constitutional law.&rCourt «agreed with the trial court's decision to dismiss several counts (including partisan gerrymandering claims), but remanded for a determination of whether the congressional districts (particularly districts 3 and 5) were sufficiently compact under state constitutional law.&rcourt's decision to dismiss several counts (including partisan gerrymandering claims), but remanded for a determination of whether the congressional districts (particularly districts 3 and 5) were sufficiently compact under state constitutional law.»

In a complaint filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, Bharara's office claims Glenwood's Liberty Plaza luxury rental building at 10 Liberty Street in the Financial District «was designed and constructed with scores of inaccessible features» for those with disabilities.

The lawyer for Daniel A. Lewis, a college librarian from Amherst, plans to file a lawsuit on Lewis» behalf in U.S. District Court claiming that his rights to possess property — his guns — and receive due process before his permit was suspended were violated along with federal privacy laws regarding his medical records, according to the Buffalo News.

«The court concludes that the plaintiffs have failed to establish their claim that the state has not met its constitutional obligation to provide the students in the eight small city school districts with the opportunity for a sound, basic education,» O'Connor wrote in her ruling.

But after the vote, Miles maintained she was an «excellent» administrator and filed a lawsuit in federal court Tuesday claiming the board's leaders, the borough president and his staff wanted her fired because of her age, not her abilities as district manager.

The claims process is part of a settlement agreement previously approved in the U.S. Bankruptcy court in Wilmington, Delaware and supported by Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, 23 other states, and the District of Columbia.

U.S. District Court Judge James Ware threw out a discrimination claim in Crangle's suit last fall, but the jury ruled that Stanford had acted «with malice» toward Crangle, a part - time senior research scientist who did not hold a formal faculty position.

The district had claimed in court that when the elementary grades were returned to resegregated neighborhood schools, safeguards would be installed to ensure that equity was monitored, and that programs would be implemented to foster student integration.

The state's highest court this month ruled against a coalition of poor rural districts, which claimed that significant differences between rich and poor jurisdictions violated the right to an education under the state constitution.

These «findings» by the lower court about the purported benefits of neighborhood schools were based entirely on the claims of Oklahoma City School District officials, claims which are currently echoed across the country by school districts seeking to be released from their desegregation orders.

Nineteen low wealth, poorly performing districts returned to the court in 1999 with a claim that the education system was still inadequate.

While district reform collapsed, and claimed the court case on the never - implemented voucher program as collateral, charter parents will ensure that school choice carries on in this Colorado suburban county.

In 1996, parents of three Catholic families sued the Bedford Central School District, in Westchester County, New York, for activities — including yoga classes taught by a Sikh minister — that they argued promoted satanism, paganism, and «New Age spirituality»; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit dismissed the parents» claims.

If the court claims that charters remove students from the «local control» of their district, how can a Washington student enrolled in a public school in Oregon be under the «local control» of its sending district?

The Landmark Legal Foundation has filed suit in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on behalf of Mary Amaya, a Fontana, Calif., woman who claims her son was denied an intelligence test on the basis of his race.

In California, school officials «fought so hard to block the claims of a student that Judge Oliver W. Wanger of United States District Court took 83 pages to berate the district's «hard - line position» and its law firm for «willfully and vexatiously» dragging out the case so long that the former student is now 24District Court took 83 pages to berate the district's «hard - line position» and its law firm for «willfully and vexatiously» dragging out the case so long that the former student is now 24district's «hard - line position» and its law firm for «willfully and vexatiously» dragging out the case so long that the former student is now 24.»

In ruling on the due - process question, the appeals court overturned a district court's decision to dismiss the case, which involved a San Antonio science teacher's claim that he was «constructively discharged «3from his position without a hearing prior to his dismissal.

Although the claim of «unfunded mandate» has been asserted almost since the day NCLB was signed into law, School District of the City of Pontiac et al. v. Spellings constitutes the first major legal challenge to the historic education law to be filed in federal court.

This past July, the D.C. Association of Chartered Public Schools filed suit in federal district court claiming that the District of Columbia has been underfunding charter schools in violation of the U.S. Constitution and fededistrict court claiming that the District of Columbia has been underfunding charter schools in violation of the U.S. Constitution and fedeDistrict of Columbia has been underfunding charter schools in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal law.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week let stand a lower - court decision finding that Arizona school districts could be sued for damages in federal court, in a case brought by an employee who claimed she was fired for objecting to district requests that she affix a flagpole to her wheelchair to make her more visible to studCourt last week let stand a lower - court decision finding that Arizona school districts could be sued for damages in federal court, in a case brought by an employee who claimed she was fired for objecting to district requests that she affix a flagpole to her wheelchair to make her more visible to studcourt decision finding that Arizona school districts could be sued for damages in federal court, in a case brought by an employee who claimed she was fired for objecting to district requests that she affix a flagpole to her wheelchair to make her more visible to studcourt, in a case brought by an employee who claimed she was fired for objecting to district requests that she affix a flagpole to her wheelchair to make her more visible to students.

In response to the Fourteenth Amendment claim, the court said that at some point, removing M.C. from the classroom and putting him in timeout might have gone so far as to deprive him of a protected interest in a public education, but the circuit judges, unlike the district court, concluded that 21 timeouts totaling approximately 12 hours over two and a half months did not go that far.

The District Court granted summary judgment to the school district, finding that state law did not bar the district's use of the racial tiebreaker and that the plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government iDistrict Court granted summary judgment to the school district, finding that state law did not bar the district's use of the racial tiebreaker and that the plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government idistrict, finding that state law did not bar the district's use of the racial tiebreaker and that the plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government idistrict's use of the racial tiebreaker and that the plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.

In the Seattle case, the District Court granted the school district summary judgment, finding, inter alia, that its plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government iDistrict Court granted the school district summary judgment, finding, inter alia, that its plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government idistrict summary judgment, finding, inter alia, that its plan survived strict scrutiny on the federal constitutional claim because it was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest.