Sentences with phrase «favor of motions by»

Not exact matches

The motion, a broadly worded declaration of support for foreign policy, received 158 votes in favor, below the necessary majority of 160 votes and was followed by a chorus of opposition calls for the government to «quit, quit, quit».

After discussion, the motion passed by a vote of 21 in favor, 4 against and two abstentions.

The motion was supported by an overwhelming majority, in which both party members and unions voted 70 % in favor of the motion.

State Supreme Court Justice John A. Michalek on Thursday ruled in favor of a New York State Education Department's (NYSED) motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the school.

[3] The theatre with a capacity of 1150 and a flanking office building were designed by architect L. A. Smith in the Spanish Colonial Revival architecture that was favored by architects of motion picture theaters during the 1920s.

The judge stayed a motion filed by Monson and Hauge seeking resolution of the case in their favor and «promised» to decide before month's end whether to grant the DEA's motion to dismiss.

And, if it a litigation matter and if after a month of trial on that one matter and we KNOW, we are absolutely certain that the LAW and the facts that came out at trial warrant a finding by the Court in our favor, but the Judge rules in our favor and on our motion might even grant a new trial and so we start over again, how can one figure that in?

Summary Dismissal Victory Achieved by Phillip E. Seltzer and Shawn Grinnen In Defense of Lawyer on Claim of Legal Malpractice May 2017 — A first responsive motion for summary dismissal of a legal malpractice claim was recently granted in favor of a Defendant - Lawyer represented by Lipson, Neilson.

A first responsive motion for summary dismissal of a legal malpractice claim was recently granted in favor of a Defendant - Lawyer represented by Lipson Neilson attorneys Phillip E. Seltzer and Shawn Grinnen.

Acting on a motion for summary judgment filed by Hueston Hennigan, U.S. District Court Judge William H. Orrick held that although courts «sparingly grant summary judgment in trademark cases because they are so fact - intensive,» the evidence here tilted so heavily in favor of the defendants as to make summary judgment appropriate.

That motion judge's ruling was reversed by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey (our intermediate appellate court), ruling that giving such a presumption in favor of the custodial parent is improper in cases where the children's surname was chosen by the parties at the birth of each child and especially in cases where the parents share joint legal custody.

«Having found that [defendant] father and son relationship has been damaged by the alienation of the child toward the defendant, the next logical step is to determine what the court must do to correct the situation... «[Father's motion to modify from joint custody to sole legal custody in his favor, granted; prohibitions of various alienating behaviors on the part of mother and her family; restrictions on mother's attendance at doctor visits and parent - teacher conferences.

¶ 1 After purchasing a home in Enid, Oklahoma, Plaintiff Jason Stauff (Buyer) filed an action alleging violations of Oklahoma's Residential Property Condition Disclosure Act (Disclosure Act) and negligence against the sellers, real estate broker, and home inspectors.1 Buyer appeals a single trial court order granting 1) summary judgment in favor of Defendants Kimberly Bartnick and her husband, Roy Bartnick (collectively the Bartnicks or Sellers) and also 2) the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to 12 O.S. 2011 2012 (B)(6) filed by Defendant Paramount Homes Real Estate Co. (Broker or Paramount).