Sentences with phrase «lower than the defendant»

And the guy's guidelines range was lower than the defendant from United States v. Grinbergs, 470 F. 3d 758 (8th Cir.

Not exact matches

In Metzler v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., the plaintiff alleged that the defendant, an operator of vocational colleges, had manipulated student enrollment data, and that plaintiff suffered losses when the company issued a press release showing lower earnings than the false data had suggested.

This is lower than the conviction rate for the normal population, in which 68 % of felony defendants who aren't police officers are convicted, and 48 % are incarcerated.

The Amazon - led $ 9.99 retail price point for the most popular e-books troubled the Publisher Defendants because, at $ 9.99, most of these e-book titles were priced substantially lower than hardcover versions of the same title.

White defendants were mislabeled as low risk more often than black defendants.»

[34] The defendant argues that Ms. Mariano's injuries should be consistent with a modest low impact accident and anything more than modest injuries from the accident are an unreasonable consequence.

Sanctions which are specified are stay until retrospective compliance, an order for costs (including small claims track unreasonable behaviour costs), deprival or lowering of interest on money awarded to the claimant and enhanced interest on money payable by the defendant (but not more than 10 % over base).

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?

The burden for proving that a defendant's negligence was the legal cause of a plaintiff's injuries is lower, however, than it is in a standard personal injury case.

For instance, the defendant in an action may offer to settle for a lower amount than is really justified by the facts of the case and the lawyer is obliged to present this offer to the client.

This will no doubt be a disappointing decision for defendants who had welcomed Master James» earlier decision, which sought to encourage the usage of mediation where it was available rather than incurring considerable costs of litigation for low value quality complaints claims.

The Defendant argued the opposite noting «that the limited remaining life expectancy of a person in Mr. Mathroo's situation justifies a lower award than would otherwise result.

It is a common tactic of a defendant to offer a lower than acceptable offer; often swaying a cautious plaintiff to accept the offer due to the risk of failing to beat the offer in court.

That defendant would seem to have an incentive to obstruct justice, in order to create a Blakely factor, so that then a judge could be free to sentence lower than the guidelines.

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?

This revealed wide - spread concerns that defendant insurers» first offers in settlement are set significantly lower than what would be awarded by a judge in court.

That's because with aggravated damages, the victim is em - powered to seek or not seek such damages; Type II errors are more likely, since the victim - vindication model doesn't purport to restrict the plaintiff from either forbearing from seek - ing punitive damages or to settle at an amount lower than what is necessary to signal to the defendant to forbear from such misconduct in the future.

When a defendant's misconduct kills or injures a poor person — i.e., someone whose death or injury triggers smaller payouts in compensatory damages under conventional valuation models — such misconduct will yield a lower punitive damages award where there is a requirement that punitive damages be based on compensatory damages than if the defendant killed or injured a wealthy per - son.

Where a defendant makes a Part 36 offer and the claimant does not accept it: If the claimant succeeds at trial but is awarded damages that are lower than the amount offered by the defendant, the claimant will only be able to recover costs on the standard basis up to the last date on which he could have accepted the defendant's offer.

The standard of proof in a civil suit is lower than that of a criminal case, which means that you may be able to recover compensation even if the defendant has been found not guilty in a criminal trial or if the charges have been dropped.

But rather than accede to the submission that the defendants should get the lower range for crack or meth, she agreed with the Crown's submission that «as a matter of logic and common sense, if another drug is equally harmful and dangerous, or more so, then the range for that drug should increase.