Sentences with phrase «greater than the defendant»

Under this rule, a plaintiff whose negligence is equal or greater than the defendant's negligence may be barred from recovering damages.

Not exact matches

Returning her attention again to the specific rhetoric in defendants» brief, the judge offered a reminder to counsel that «I've been around awhile both in practice and on the bench, so I suspect I've seen a few more cases than you, and really, it's not all that staggering and it's not all that great a magnitude, so when your experience and mine differ, it just takes all of the punch out of those comments.»

Also, the court noted that the nuisance was ongoing, so the People did not unreasonably delay in bringing the action and there was no prejudice to the defendants: a greater prejudice, resulting from lost evidence, resulted to the People than the Defendants in defendants: a greater prejudice, resulting from lost evidence, resulted to the People than the Defendants in Defendants in this case.

in a case in which a witness's identification of the defendant is at issue, and the identifying witness and defendant appear to be of different races, a trial court is required to give, upon request, during final instructions, a jury charge on the cross-race effect, instructing (1) that the jury should consider whether there is a difference in race between the defendant and the witness who identified the defendant, and (2) that, if so, the jury should consider (a) that some people have greater difficulty in accurately identifying members of different race than in accurately identifying members of their own race and (b) whether the difference in race affected the accuracy of the witness's identification.

But I see defendants in Germany argue on the basis of prosecution history all the time, presumably because they believe that for psychological reasons the persuasive value of arguments based on prosecution history is greater than its formal legal weight.

I think that there is a greater chance of a defendant who is an active user of social media becoming aware of a claim than the more traditional substitutional service methods.

These are that: (i) the jurisdiction is to be invoked and exercised exceptionally and with great caution; (ii) there must certainly be something more than mere infringement of the criminal law before the assistance of civil proceedings can be invoked and accorded for the protection or promotion of the interests of the inhabitants of the area; (iii) the essential foundation for the exercise of the court's discretion to grant an injunction is not that the off ender is deliberately and flagrantly flouting the law, but the need to draw the inference that the defendant's unlawful operations will continue unless and until effectively restrained by the law and that nothing short of an injunction will be eff ective to restrain them.

Does a sentence within the statutory maximum under the Criminal Punishment Code violate either the Due Process Clause or Eighth Amendment when it is significantly greater than the lowest permissible sentence on the defendant's scoresheet or the offered plea and grossly disproportionate to the median sentence imposed for similar crimes within the jurisdiction?

Perhaps surprisingly, this possibility is given greater consideration in places like France than in the U.S. Indeed, the NLJ article reports that it is illegal in France to publish photos of defendants in handcuffs unless the person is convicted.

Critics rebut this assertion by saying that judicial override is just that: overriding a jury of a defendant's peers to impose a greater punishment than the jury itself deemed justified.

In deciding as to whether to grant a stay of the proceedings in Sabatini, Greene found the personal prejudice suffered by the defendants in other cases where police had improperly failed to release them was greater than in Sabatini's.

From reading paragraphs 25 - 29 of the judgement it appears that the lawyer for the defendant made a formal offer of settlement prior to trial which was greater than the judgement.

Commercial Court banking litigation in which Ravi applied and obtained a relatively rare order allowing the defendant greater than the normal 14 days within which to pay the judgment debt which was not in itself disputed.

Will a defendant be able to argue simply that an imposed sentence, no matter how low as compared to the advisory guidelines, was still «greater than necessary» to comply with the purposes specified in the Sentencing Reform Act?

Partially retaining the contributory negligence rule, it reflects the view that a plaintiff whose contribution to his own injury is greater than the contribution of the defendant does not deserve compensation.

The «local controversy» exception applies when the following criteria are met: (i) greater than two - thirds of the putative class members are citizens of the forum state; (ii) at least one defendant from whom «significant relief» is sought, and whose conduct forms a «significant basis» for the asserted claims, is a citizen of the forum state; and (iii) principal injuries related to each defendant's alleged conduct were incurred in the forum state.

That's why in my original post I stated that I have a «concern» about the «troubling» Ramirez ruling because the «panel seems to essentially abdicate its responsibility to assess the substantive reasonableness of a stat - max sentence when the defendant had viable arguments that his sentence was far greater than necessary in light of all the 3553 (a) consideration.»

In Ainslie, FMC's Robb Heintzman and Matthew Fleming successfully argued that the Act only requires a defendant to file an affidavit where it intends to lead evidence in response to a leave motion, and that allowing the plaintiffs to examine the defendants in the absence of such affidavit evidence would amount to an abuse of process, as it would afford the plaintiffs greater rights of discovery than in an action where it is unnecessary to obtain leave.

«Under the procedures established by Congress in the Military Commissions Act, Mr. Hamdan will receive greater procedural protections than those ever before provided to defendants in military - commission trials.»

Mr Jones had a licence, granted to him by the Defendant's predecessor which allowed him to use the canal for bona fide navigation (which did not permit him to remain static for any period greater than 14 days.)

[3] Defendants in political trials tend to participate in the proceedings more than defendants in non-political cases, as they may have greater ability to depart from courtroom norms to speak to political and morDefendants in political trials tend to participate in the proceedings more than defendants in non-political cases, as they may have greater ability to depart from courtroom norms to speak to political and mordefendants in non-political cases, as they may have greater ability to depart from courtroom norms to speak to political and moral issues.

It's great to require plaintiffs to disclose their financial interests and prior litigation, but in jurisdictions that seal more documents than necessary, those disclosure requirements will do very little to equip future defendants with information about the plaintiffs» histories.

The pace of added defendants in the first half of 2015 was greater than in any half - year period dating at least back through 2012.»