Sentences with phrase «other defendants knew»

Not exact matches

Another defendant was already in a California prison on unrelated charges and 14 others, including four whose true names are not yet known, are fugitives mostly believed to be in Mexico.

But we jurors may have only those portions of it which the attorneys and the judge decide we must know in order to decide whether the defendant is guilty of the specific charge against him — no more, no less, and very little other, however interesting and important it might be.

Such of these other manufacturers, including defendant, whose use of the word «Tabasco» came to the knowledge of plaintiff and its predecessors, have been warned to the effect that they have no right to use the word in connection with the sauce, or to use similar packages, and quite a number of suits for infringement have been filed by plaintiff, most of which have been terminated by consent decrees.

But I could not know that until I saw the will, and the defendant refused me a sight until discovery; I then took what steps I could to reduce the costs» you would almost certainly not have to pay the other side's costs, and you might be awarded your own.

The defendant, from in or around March 2008 to in or around October 2013, in the County of Monroe, acting in concert with others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and intentionally entered into and engaged in and continued to engage in a contract, agreement, arrangement, and combination in unreasonable restraint of combination and the free exercise of activity in the conduct of business, trade, and commerce, specifically, to restrain competition in the bidding process of Monroe County for the Public Safety Contract, by means of bid rigging.

Asiedu Nketia, the 2nd Defendant, said «No» and that they needed cash so the Plaintiff decided to issue two cheque payment vouchers on 7th December, 2015 for GH cents 2,000,000.00 and the other one on the same 7th December, 2015 for GH cents 2,199,340.00 and the said vouchers, according to the 2nd Defendant, were received by Gyanu Edgar, an employee of the Electoral Commission.»

As its battle with Amazon continued, Macmillan knew that, because the other Publisher Defendants, via the Apple Agency Agreements, had locked themselves into forcing agency on Amazon to advance their conspiratorial goals, Amazon soon would face similar edicts from a united front of Publisher Defendants.

Before Apple even met with the first Publisher Defendant in mid-December 2009, it knew that the «Big Six» of United States publishing --- the Publisher Defendants and Random House (collectively, the «Publishers»)-- wanted to raise e-book prices, in particular above the $ 9.99 prevailing price charged by Amazon for many e-book versions of New York Times bestselling books («NYT Bestsellers») and other newly released hardcover books («New Releases»).

Forfeiture: the defendant no longer possess or retains custody of any animal during the period of the defendant's probation or parole or other period, as designated by the court.

«According to the complaint, defendants» Class Period statements were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose and misrepresented the following adverse facts which were known to or recklessly disregarded by defendants: (a) Battlefield 4 was riddled with bugs and multiple other problems, including downloadable content that allowed players access to more levels of the game, a myriad of connectivity issues, server limitations, lost data and repeated sudden crashes, among other things; (b) as a result, Electronic Arts would not achieve a successful holiday season 2013 rollout of Battlefield 4; (c) the performance of the Electronic Arts unit publishing Battlefield 4 was so deficient that all other projects that unit was involved in had to be put on hold to permit it to focus its efforts on fixing Battlefield 4;»

Yet a defendant threatened with punishment for injuring a nonparty victim has no opportunity to defend against the charge, by showing, for example in a case such as this, that the other victim was not entitled to damages because he or she knew that smoking was dangerous or did not rely upon the defendant's statements to the contrary.

It was submitted on behalf of the defendants that Mr Imerman could not assert a claim of breach of confidence against Mrs Imerman because they were husband and wife at the time the server was accessed and therefore no right of confidence existed between them («there is no such duty, no such right enforceable against the other»).

No, under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 section 31 (2) class members, other than a representative plaintiff / representative defendant, are not liable for costs except with respect to the determination of their own individual claims.

The ball and chain was put on [the bacherlor] with his consent and the defendant [the brother] did not know that [the bacherlor] was grossly intoxicated and a threat to others.

In other words, they may have no way of knowing at that point what the defendant's understanding was at the time of their alleged crime.

The victim must show that the defendant's actions have caused visible physical symptoms such as migraine headaches, ulcers or other known illnesses.

The defense will want to know if there were any statements made at the time of the accident where their agents or representatives gave «admissions against interest» — in other words, said things that admitted the defendant is to blame for what happened.

To establish a case, the injured party, known in legal terms as the «plaintiff» must show that the truck driver or other party (the «defendant» or «defendants»):

In other words, the transit authority and its driver are no longer «protected defendants».

A premises liability action (also known as «slip and fall accident») is like other negligence actions, in that you, as the plaintiff, are required to establish the defendant had a duty of care, that duty was breached, and that breach of duty resulted in your injuries.

Other sample directions include those related to situations where the complainant and defendant were known to one another or had a previous sexual relationship, and cases involving «provocative dress, hard drinking and flirtation», lack of resistance, and absence of a recent complaint.

[64] Prosecutors engaged in plea negotiations in serious and complex fraud cases are directed by the Attorney General's Guidelines to liaise with any counterparts known to have an interest in the defendant, in accordance with the Prosecutors» Convention and any other relevant agreement or guidance.

«In other words, he will know about the financing, but the defendant will not — and no defendant yet has come up with any justification for being told about a plaintiff's sensitive financial arrangements other than pure voyeurism,» wrote Christopher Bogart, CEO of Burford Capital.

In U.S. v. Lawson, on the other hand, the federal Fourth Circuit addressed at length the reliability concerns presented by reliance on Wikipedia.32 The issue arose when, despite the trial court's explicit instruction not to conduct research on the internet or otherwise, a juror reviewed, during deliberations, a Wikipedia definition of an element of the crime with which the defendant was charged.33 The juror no longer had the original Wikipedia entry but obtained a printout two weeks later in anticipation of his appearance before the court on complaints of juror misconduct.

For professional negligence claims, you may need to know how well the potential expert knows the intended defendant and in what context — have they ever worked together, how long ago, did one train the other?

If you think that what Judge Kozinski did was bad, I know of federal appellate judges who have publicly admitted to viewing child pornography: Of course, those other judges did that in the context of adjudicating appeals in which a criminal defendant was challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a child pornography conviction.

That holding is only true for the retributive (and arguably the complete, not optimal, deterrence) part of extra-compensatory damages; by their nature, augmented damages for the sake of cost - internalization involve only matters of empirical estimation (ie, what's the likelihood the defendant would escape having to compensate this plaintiff), and thus are no different than compensatory damages (which ask, among other things, what kind of pain and suffering did the defendant's action cause?)

The defendant knows if he / she has or has not so the only available answers under oath are «yes» or «no» - the jury knows this too so any other answer will be seen as disingenuous.

In September 2004, on the instructions of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the deputy head of mission at the British embassy in Iceland identified the defendant, who was already known to him, and gave him a copy of the claim form and other court documents including the response pack.

The defendant knew or should have known that this was a private matter and it was a secret to be kept from other family members.

If Defendant wanted to secretly change terms of contract they can use one of the 3 methods listed above (other ways too) to modify contract terms remotely on emails in the Inbox of anyone who received the original email, and do it without anyone knowing it.

While Supreme Court judge William Grist found the Vancouver suburb only partially responsible, assessing the city 20 per cent of the fine, Delta could well be on the hook for the entire $ 3 million, as the other defendants named in the lawsuit may no longer have the necessary financial assets.

To prove fraud, a defendant must make a false statement that the defendant either knows is false or recklessly does not try to confirm as true; the statement must have been made with the intent to defraud; the statement must be relied upon; and the other party suffers damages.

The Act prohibits «deception, fraud, misrepresentation, or the knowing concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon [it], in connection with the sale or advertisement of... real estate,... whether or not any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby...» The court noted that when the alleged wrong is an omission or failure to disclose, the plaintiff must show knowledge on the part of the defendant, as intent is an element of that type of fraud.