Frankly, I have sometimes found it difficult to keep up with the fluctuating
positions of the Defendants.
The third parties filed brief supporting
the position of the defendant.
It remains necessary to ask what it is that a reasonable person in
the position of this defendant ought to have done in response to the risk they could foresee.
What, then, is
the position of the defendant in these proceedings that are most often conducted in private chambers under Rule 23 (2) and not in open court on the public record?
I have concluded that
the position of the defendant, and the legal and ethical position of defence counsel, are less difficult to maintain than many lawyers think.
«I consider
the position of the defendants to be completely unacceptable.
Nevertheless,
the position of the defendants was made abundantly clear to the plaintiffs.
Before holding that a person's standard of care has fallen below the objective standard expected and so finding that he acted negligently, the court must be satisfied that a reasonable person in
the position of the defendant (ie the person who caused the incident) would contemplate that injury is likely to follow from his acts or omissions.
Nor is the remote possibility of injury enough; there must be a sufficient probability of injury to lead a reasonable person (in
the position of the defendant) to anticipate it... The question is whether a reasonable 13 year old boy, in the situation that [the defendant] was in, would have anticipated that some significant personal injury would result from his actions in playing tag as he did.»
Lord Justice Aikens adopted the same analysis: «Before holding that a person has acted negligently so as to be liable in an action for negligence, the court must be satisfied that a reasonable person in
the position of the defendant (ie the person who caused the accident) would contemplate that injury is likely to follow from his acts or omissions.
Nor is the remote possibility of injury enough; there must be a sufficient probability of injury to lead a reasonable person (in
the position of the defendant) to anticipate it.»
By following the steps set out in the ESR report, an employer would not be in
the position of the defendant in this case.
Not exact matches
«The court finds the
defendant was in a
position of trust and he abused that
position,» said McHenry County Judge Sharon Prather in sentencing Marcus Sabo.
Counsel for the
defendants on record — the House
of Representatives and the Speaker, Mr. Yakubu Dogara — Mr. Kalu Onuoha, aligned with Kareem's
position.
«The
defendant was not in any
position to have restored the money allegedly belonging to the the claimant, as the claimant never had any such money in the possession
of Intercontinental Bank Plc..»
It argued that the information was «relevant not only to the
defendant's moral character, but to the use
of his official
position for private benefit.»
A Colden town judge, Victoria Zach, has resigned amid allegations that she used the prestige
of her
position to advocate for a drunken driving
defendant in another court.
The «nature and circumstances
of the crimes charged are shocking and appalling as the
defendants... are alleged to have grossly and outrageously violated their
positions of trust and operated in a manner more akin to criminal enterprise than a district attorney's office,» the letter said.
Assemblyman Eric Stevenson, a Democrat, was arrested in a bribery investigation that also led another state assemblyman charged with crimes to cooperate with the understanding that he would resign his
position with the arrests
of Stevenson and four other
defendants.
As part
of the unlawful agreements, and seeking to leverage its installed user base and dominant
position via the Apple iOS platform, Apple and the Publisher
Defendants agreed that prices for Publisher
Defendants» eBooks that were offered through the iBookstore would be calculated by a formula tied to physical books.
Of course, the United States»
position is that
Defendant acted unreasonably — indeed, criminally — by attempting to poison cats.»
Even if a settlement
of the claim was not forthcoming, it enabled the plaintiff to obtain an understanding
of the
defendant's
position and the reasons for that
position.
Through tradition and custom, rather than any specific law, the
defendant will remain in the dock, usually located at the back
of court, (a
position that has come under challenge in the European Court
of Human Rights).
The
defendants both moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Otis»
position in this case was opposite
of his
position in the underlying case and the doctrine
of judicial estoppel barred his negligence and 93A claims.
It remains to be seen whether judges will adopt the
position that a
defendant «knows if he did it», or whether a measure
of flexibility will be read into the guidelines.
It follows that the Order should cover the entirety
of the litigation apart from the initial period when service was being acknowledged and a Defence considered only for the purpose
of preserving the
position so that the
Defendants could agree the extent to which SGP1 [the
defendant] should defend the proceedings and how these should be funded.
A volume practice based on
defendants is in an entirely different
position; there, repanelling by a hostile general counsel or company takeover can, at a stroke, remove huge swathes
of revenue which for a quoted entity could be disastrous.
Mr. Singer was dismissed from a senior management
position with the
defendant employer in 2016 after 11 years
of service.
Because our client received vocational rehabilitative services and was placed in a work environment as part
of that rehabilitation, the
defendant's insurance company took the
position that he was able to be gainfully employed.
Among them are (1) the late service
of expert reports or (2) the
defendant's insurer taking a no - liability or defensible
position, which may result in the insurer being unprepared to make a settlement offer at mediation.
In the case
of Board
of Trustees
of National Museum and Gallery v AEW Architects (2013), the Court was critical
of the
Defendant's instructions
of an architect expert pre-action in which they did not ask «what could reasonably have been expected architects in the [
Defendant's]
position ``.
The plaintiff took the
position that the reasonable notice period was between 18 and 24 months; the
defendant did not suggest a period or range
of notice to which he says the plaintiff ought to be entitled.
Therefore, timely service
of expert reports is essential to enable the
defendant to fully know the plaintiff's case and make a fully informed decision regarding its settlement
position.
The financial package including, signing bonus and benefits was attractive to the plaintiff and was part
of the encouragement on the part
of the
defendant to have him accept the
position which he was offered.
in Argersinger, the Court today retreats to the indefensible
position that the Argersinger «actual imprisonment» standard is the only test for determining the boundary
of the Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel in state misdemeanor cases, thus necessarily deciding that, in many cases (such as this one), a
defendant will have no right to appointed counsel even when he has a constitutional right to a jury trial.
The recruitment
of the plaintiff by the
defendant when he was employed in a senior
position of significant length
of service is also a factor tending to increase the period
of notice.
The only way to defend from a
position of strength is to think «outside the box» to find innovate approaches that relate to the specific set
of circumstances for each
defendant.
He also highlighted some logical flaws in the
defendant's
position over copyright
of Litigator documents,
-- If a notice
of copyright in the form and
position specified by this section appears on the published copy or copies to which a
defendant in a copyright infringement suit had access, then no weight shall be given to such a
defendant's interposition
of a defense based on innocent infringement in mitigation
of actual or statutory damages, except as provided in the last sentence
of section 504 (c)(2).
[19] While there is no reason to suppose that the
defendants Godaddy.com, and Nozone, Inc. would do anything to evade enforcement, they would naturally tell their client
of any notice given to them, and would not be in a
position to prevent any steps taken by Mr. Mitchell and Deep Capture.
The plaintiff was hired by the
defendant on November 28, 2005 for the
position of full - time receptionist and was promoted to the
position of Executive Assistant in 2008 at an annual salary
of $ 36,000.
The
defendant argued before the Court
of Appeal that ex gratia payments made by a
defendant occupied a special
position: such payments did not «accrue» as a result
of death.
The German court asked the CJEU whether the SEP owner who had undertaken to a SSO to license its patents on FRAND terms, can use these remedies (above) against a
defendant willing to negotiate a license fee without abusing its
position of dominance in breach
of Article 102.
If, for example, the plaintiff is a child and the
defendant is a teacher or caregiver
of the child, the
defendant may be found to be in a
position of power with respect to the plaintiff, and the child - plaintiff may be found to be a plaintiff who is especially vulnerable.
The court noted that the
defendant «executed the mediation agreement, attended with full authority to settle, made an opening statement (consistent with the
position maintained all along) and offered to settle the action by way
of a dismissal not with, but rather without costs.»
Under the negligence theory, a
defendant is held liable for the results
of actions, or inaction, when an ordinary person in the same
position should have foreseen that the conduct would create an unreasonable risk
of harm to others.
Not surprisingly, the
defendants took the
position that there is no free - standing tort
of harassment and relied on the finding to this effect in a 2012 Ontario Superior Court decision dealing with workplace sexual harassment (Desjardins v. Society
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
of Canada et al.).
The standard
position is that the Claimant should pay the
Defendant's costs
of the application limited to # 250, however, if a court determines that a
Defendant is at fault for the Claimant having to needlessly issue the application, then a court will usually make the
Defendant pay the legal costs
of # 250, plus the court issue fee.
Prior to the introduction
of the Employer» Liability Portal (and for current claims worth over # 25,000), the usual
position was that when Claimant solicitors wanted to notify the
Defendant of a claim, they sent a detailed Letter
of Claim directly to the
Defendant.
It is almost as though he feels compelled to make the best case possible on behalf
of the
defendant's
position, if only for the record.