«The government has failed miserably in trying to
make a false statements case,» Linda Mangano's attorney, John Carman, told jurors before ending his closing argument.»
Not exact matches
Specifically, Defendants
made false and / or misleading
statements and / or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company was engaged in predatory lending practices that saddled subprime borrowers and / or those with poor or limited credit histories with high - interest rate debt that they could not repay; (ii) many of the Company's customers were using Qudian - provided loans to repay their existing loans, thereby inflating the Company's revenues and active borrower numbers and increasing the likelihood of defaults; (iii) the Company was providing online loans to college students despite a governmental ban on the practice; (iv) the Company was engaged overly aggressive and improper collection practices; (v) the Company had understated the number of its non-performing loans in the Registration Statement and Prospectus; (vi) because of the Company's improper lending, underwriting and collection practices it was subject to a heightened risk of adverse actions by Chinese regulators; (vii) the Company's largest sales platform and strategic partner, Alipay, and Ant Financial, could unilaterally cap the APR for loans provided by Qudian; (viii) the Company had failed to implement necessary safeguards to protect customer data; (ix) data for nearly one million Company customers had been leaked for sale to the black market, including names, addresses, phone numbers, loan information, accounts and, in some
cases, passwords to CHIS, the state - backed higher - education qualification verification institution in China, subjecting the Company to undisclosed risks of penalties and financial and reputational harm; and (x) as a result of the foregoing, Qudian's public
statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.
As the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Comey prosecuted Stewart in 2003 for
making false statements to federal investigators, among other charges, related to a stock trading
case.
In the celebrated
case New York Times v. Sullivan, the U.S. Supreme Court held «the First Amendment protects the publication of all
statements, even
false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when
statements are
made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are
false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity).»
Gazidis is a hack... he will never get another substantive job in this sport unless Kroenke is the owner... enough of dealing with the amateurs, anybody who believes that this man has any real say in the day - to - day operations of Arsene Inc. hasn't followed this club very closely... in fact I used to empathize with him; who would come out and
make some of the
statements he has, especially regarding our financial capabilities, unless he was instructed to do so under
false pretenses... let's face it, if that wasn't the
case, he would have been thrown to the wolves long ago... on the other hand, if he did know and public deception was well within his job description, he's truly a piece of shit
After the Phil Woollas
case it is now in English Law that if you
make false statements during an election campaign you will be thrown out and the election for that seat held again.
Former New York state Senate Majority Leader Pedro Espada Jr. (far left with son Pedro) was hit yesterday with two new charges - of
making false statements - in his federal corruption
case.
Both agencies acted with official city and state misconduct, and in both
cases, honest, credible evidence was repeatedly dismissed and ignored, and so was the corruption that remains to date — where knowingly
false statements were
made to discredit me (then later completely reversed during oral argument by my accusers), and both the DOI investigators (who appeared at my doorstep many times to collect evidence) and MTA Office of the Inspector General investigators invited me back to their headquarters (more than six times), from 1989 to 2008), and continued to take no action to restore and reinstate my city job, pension and social security contributions.
She faces charges that include conspiracy to obstruct justice and
making false statements in that
case.
Lately, criminal charges for
making false statements to the NIH in order to obtain research funding have been levied in at least one prominent
case.
In the
cases announced today, the Commission charged seven operations with violating the FTC Act and the Credit Repair Organizations Act (CROA) by
making false and misleading
statements, such as claiming they can substantially improve consumers» credit reports by removing accurate, negative information from their credit reports.
The
case is about a handful of recklessly
false and defamatory
statements made on the web page.»
While you have of late
made some clear shifts in your thinking and have, much to my surprise, but also appreciation as I literally thought it not possible, in this
case you have retreated to form: Straw Men,
false statements, declarative claims that do not match reality.
But, other consumer protection laws
make false statements actionable, even if there is no reliance upon the
statement or harm caused, in which
case statutory damages might be recoverable.
In a defamation claim, the plaintiff normally has to show that the defendant
made a
false statement and that the defendant carelessly «published» or in this
case, broadcasted the
false information.
In the U.S., it is merely necessary to show in a
case like this one (because it involves a matter of public concern) that the
statements were
made with knowledge that they were
false, or with reckless disregard to the truth or falsity of the
statements made.
In this
case, though Impact Team hacked and leaked data, AshleyMadison.com — nor its employees —
made false statements of fact about users.
The plaintiffs challenged eight restrictions on judicial conduct: 1) the prohibition on judicial candidates campaigning as a member of a political organization, 2) the prohibition on judicial candidates
making speeches for or against political organizations or candidates, 3) the ban on judicial candidates
making contributions to political causes or candidates, 4) the prohibition on judicial candidates from publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, 5) the prohibition on judges from acting as a leader or holding office in a policitical organization, 6) the prohibition on judicial candidates knowingly or recklessly
making false statements during campaigns, 7) the ban on judicial candidates
making misleading
statements, and 8) the prohibition on candidates
making pledges, promises, or committments in connection with
cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court.
And in the seminal
case Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs Legal Committee (U.S. Supreme Court), we persuaded the Supreme Court that private tort suits predicated on purportedly
false statements made to the F.D.A. are impliedly preempted by federal law.
● in an unusual
case and the first of its kind, an individual was found to be in contempt of court as a result of
false statements which she had
made during the course of personal injury proceedings which had been compromised after the disclosure of surveillance evidence.
We ask placing parents,
case workers, or therapists who have witnessed a child
make false allegations to sign a
statement about the behavior.
Article 15 (
Case Interpretations for Article 15) REALTORS ® shall not knowingly or recklessly
make false or misleading
statements about other real estate professionals, their businesses, or their business practices.