Sentences with phrase «defendant meets this burden»

Third, if the defendant meets this burden, the plaintiff must prove that the reasons asserted by the defendant were pretextual.

Not exact matches

In November 2017, he achieved precedent - setting victories for investors, when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that direct evidence of price impact is not always necessary to demonstrate market efficiency to invoke the presumption of reliance, and that defendants seeking to rebut the presumption of reliance must do so by a preponderance of the evidence rather than merely meeting a burden of production.

Ordering that Davis not be executed, the court stated: «The defendant has met his burden of establishing his mental retardation... the cogs in the machine must come to a halt.»

Federal bankruptcy law specifically excepts student loan debt from discharge, unless a debtor can meet the difficult burden of demonstrating «undue hardship» to themselves and their defendants.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff's expert failed to meet her burden because there was no evidence that the expert's opinion was based on information upon which experts in his field reasonably relied.

The judge ruled specifically that the defendant was not on actual notice of the accident until over eight months after the accident and that the plaintiff failed to meet the necessary burden of showing how the district would not be «substantially prejudiced» by allowing the plaintiff's case to proceed against the defendants.

[3] For the reasons elaborated upon below, I found that the Defendant / Applicant did not meet the burden of proof on the Charter application.

25249.10 (c): «In any action brought to enforce Section 25249.6, the burden of showing that an exposure meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant».

The Court of Appeal in Trudel, like most of the more recent cases, took the view once the state has made out a prima facie case for immunity (in this case, establishing that the defendant is a «foreign state» within the meaning of the Act), the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish that the criteria for an exception are met.

Helpful evidence to meeting this burden might include, defendant's medical history, testimony from the defendant and eyewitnesses, expert medical testimony, and notes and warnings about the normal side effects (and the expected duration of such side effects) of prescription medications.

If a jury in a personal injury case believes that there is a 51 to 100 percent chance that the defendant was negligent, the plaintiff has met his or her burden of proof and will prevail.

The Connecticut Supreme Court recently held that defendants were entitled to summary judgment in a premises liability case, finding that the plaintiff had failed to meet her burden of proving constructive notice of the allegedly defective condition.

The defendant does not need to disprove the elements to win, but rather, the burden falls squarely on the plaintiff to sufficiently satisfy a judge or jury that each and every one of these elements is met.

Once this burden has been met, a prima facie evidentiary foundation has been established supporting joint and several judgments against the defendants.

The jury in the trial court that heard this case found that the plaintiff did not meet her burden of proof and granted a verdict for the defendant.

To meet the burden of proof in a personal injury case, a plaintiff must prove his or her claim by a preponderance of the evidence, which means that the plaintiff must present evidence that when weighed by the judge or the jury, is more convincing than the defendant's.

To meet this burden of proof, the plaintiff must provide evidence of the following four things to show that the defendant was negligent:

The new wrinkle was plaintiffs arguing «that Defendants have not met their burden in proving impossibility because the First Amendment protects their right to communicate non-FDA approved information through other means.»

The FC's discussion on TPMs brought new clarity into the treatment of digital locks in three important areas: (1) TPMs can include a physical configuration; (2) circumvention of TPMs include the replication of the TPMs; and (3) the interoperability defence can not succeed where the defendant is unable to meet their evidentiary burden to demonstrate that the device is used for non-licenced third party software (homebrew) applications.

The policies, the court found, did not provide a clear definition of «owned,» and the defendants did not meet the burden of proof as to Manner's ownership of the Yamaha.

For the defendant to be declared liable in a wrongful death claim, the claim brought must meet the same burden of proof that the victim would have had to meet if the victim was alive.