Sentences with phrase «request of the defendants»

Burkwit noted that the lawsuit originally was filed in Monroe County, where Tammy Cleveland now lives, and was shifted to Niagara County at the request of the defendants.

Any foreclosure filed prior to Jan. 14, 2010 that wasn't already subject to the settlement conference and has not yet reached judgment is subject to a conference at the request of the defendant.

Having been served with the plaintiff's reports, at the request of the defendants, the plaintiff underwent two defence medical examinations.

[12] At the request of the Defendant, the Plaintiff met with an orthopaedic surgeon, Dr. Michael Ford on February 21, 2012.

They enable Bulgarian courts to order the parties, and / or where relevant, a third party to disclose relevant evidence upon request of the defendant or the claimant.

Not exact matches

«A criminal defendant, we hold, need not request special interrogatories, nor need he acquiesce in the Government's request for discrete findings by the jury, in order to preserve in full a timely - raised objection to jury instructions,» Justice J. Ginsburg wrote in her explanation of the court's decision.

== > Related: Despite multiple requests by AIG, AIG has been unable to gain access to the loan files for nearly all of the RMBS underwritten by Defendants.

On March 6, 2018, Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that virtual currencies are commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and therefore subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) anti-fraud and anti-manipulation enforcement authority.1 Granting the CFTC's request for a preliminary injunction against the defendants who allegedly engaged in deception and fraud involving virtual currency spot markets, Judge Weinstein noted that «[u] ntil Congress clarifies the matter,» the CFTC has «concurrent authority» along with other state and federal administrative agencies and civil and criminal courts over transactions in virtual currency.2

«Some of these organizations have returned the donated funds; some no longer exist; some have advised that they donated the Nemazee funds to charity upon learning of the defendant's arrest; some have declined to return the funds, and some are in the process of reviewing their records and evaluating the government's request,» prosecutors wrote.

Plaintiff further states that the proper instrument to govern the exercise of the 1st Defendant's vested discretionary power to charge fees or to request of a deposit of fees for the general elections 2016, ought to be a statutory instrument and not a constitutional instrument.

Plaintiff states again that 2nd Defendant has not said a word against this marauding show of power without any legal justification by the 1st Defendant's request of a deposit of filing fees for the 2016 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections thereby embolden 1st Defendant in perpetuating these obvious illegalities against the political parties and individual candidates in this 2016 general elections.

Judge Caproni denied the three jurors» requests to be dismissed, telling them that while she was «incredibly sympathetic» to the burdens of jury duty, the prosecutors and the defendants were entitled to the jurors» best efforts.

Later, the defendants asked Judge Valerie Caproni to strike the list of collected records so that it could be resubmitted as sealed information, a request she granted.

The letter states: «Defendants are almost totally unable to prevent extradition, despite a high likelihood of incarceration abroad, even where no charges have yet been brought in the requesting country.

The application was opposed by the prosecution counsel, Sylvanus Tahir, who argued that the request of the defence is unnecessary as the defendant (Metuh) is in court as a credible witness and can testify.

Although she refused a defense request to dismiss charges, the judge added, «The U.S. attorney, while castigating politicians in Albany for playing fast and loose with the ethical rules that govern their conduct, strayed so close to the edge of the rules governing his own conduct that defendant Sheldon Silver has a nonfrivolous argument that he fell over the edge to the defendant's prejudice.»

An expert on Freedom of Information Law is saying the City of Buffalo has more to gain in complying with a Freedom of Information Law request than a defendant has to lose in a federal civil rights case.

Caproni called the venue change request «insufficient,» siding with prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan that keeping the case in New York City is appropriate because some of the alleged crimes included emails and calls between the Buffalo defendants and individuals in New York City.

While no official statistics are available on SBS prosecutions, Toni Blake of the American legal consulting firm 2nd Chair Services says that at least 2,000 to 3,000 lawyers and defendants have contacted her over the past decade to request assistance on SBS trials and appeals around the country.

As defendants in the Vergara trial were asking the court to dismiss the case, attorneys for the state's two biggest teachers union met with reporters outside the courthouse to offer a preview of arguments they intend to make if the judge denies their request, and the trial resumes next month with witnesses for the defense.

After failed efforts by the state to get the case dismissed in the last year, a judge granted a request by the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers to join the lawsuit as defendants May 2.

«In any proceeding brought under subsection (c) of this section to enforce subsection (b) of this section, or in the event neither the Attorney General nor any defendant files a request for a three - judge court in any proceeding authorized by this subsection, it shall be the duty of the chief judge of the district (or in his absence, the acting chief judge) in which the case is pending immediately to designate a judge in such district to hear and determine the case.

B. Upon the written request of an authorized representative of the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, Settling Defendants shall submit written reports or respond to written interrogatories, under oath if requested, relating to any of the matters contained in this Final Judgment as may be requested.

In addition, Settling Defendants must, upon written request, prepare written reports relating to any of the matters contained in the proposed Final Judgment.

For purposes of this Final Judgment, it will not constitute a Price MFN under subsection 3 of this definition if a Settling Defendant agrees, at the request of an E-book Retailer, to meet more favorable pricing, discounts, or allowances offered to the E-book Retailer by another E-book Publisher for the period during which the other E-book Publisher provides that additional compensation, so long as that agreement is not or does not result from a pre-existing agreement that requires the Settling Defendant to meet all requests by the E-book Retailer for more favorable pricing within the terms of the agreement.

Within thirty days after a Settling Defendant provides notification of the joint venture or business arrangement, the Department of Justice may make a written request for additional information.

If the Department of Justice makes such a request, the Settling Defendant shall not proceed with the planned formation or material modification of the joint venture or business arrangement until thirty days after substantially complying with such additional request (s) for information.

A. For purposes of determining or securing compliance with this Final Judgment, or of determining whether the Final Judgment should be modified or vacated, and subject to any legally recognized privilege, from time to time duly authorized representatives of the Department of Justice, including consultants and other persons retained by the Department of Justice, shall, upon written request of an authorized representative of the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, and on reasonable notice to Settling Defendants, be permitted:

Among the relief requested by the department in the lawsuit is the nullification of the Apple Agency Agreements and «any agreement between a Publisher Defendant and an ebook retailer that restricts, limits, or impedes the ebook retailer's ability to set, alter or reduce the retail price of any ebook or to offer price or other promotions to encourage consumers to purchase any ebook, or contains a retail price MFN (most favored nation status.)

This is a document that is provided at the beginning of the lawsuit to tell the defendant what is being requested and what must be done to respond to the complaint.

... The person seeking a protective order may further request the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either the petitioner, defendant or minor child residing in the residence of the petitioner or defendant.

Both the plaintiffs and the defendant were requesting that the high court rule on the subject of amateurism.

The amount of information you can request is also staggering: from the value of property damage or loss, offender - victim relationship, prior convictions, and even pre-sentence reports including the defendant's behavior in court, as well as his or her mental history.

The format was straightforward — two hours each for the plaintiffs and the defendants, and the judge had provided us with a series of questions on the essential physics that he wanted addressed, as well as requesting a timeline of how our understanding of climate change has evolved over the past 150 years.

However — the judge also requested information about specific documents, item # 9, from the lawyers accusing the oil company defendants of conspiracy:

Because the charge of defamer is so damaging, Defendant Steyn has taken this process seriously... On February 12th, he responded to Dr Mann's Requests for Discovery, and is looking forward to Plaintiff reciprocating.

The insurers relied on a decision by Maddison J in IB V CB [2010] EWHC 3815 in which he acceded to a compensating insurer's request to insert a contingent obligation on the claimant within a PPO to the following effect: that in the unlikely event of the defendant's insurers wishing to find an appropriate annuity provider, then the claimant would be required to undergo a medical examination by the proposed annuity provider.

The Blog of the Legal Times reports that in one recent case in the District of Columbia Superior Court, the court granted the prosecutors» request for a jury instruction that, if the jury found that the defendant had tried to change his appearance with eyeglasses to avoid being identified, the jury could consider it as evidence of his feelings of guilt.

However, as to the defendants» claim of a due process violation, the judge did not merely accommodate the jurors» request; he consulted with counsel for all parties before doing so, and all counsel agreed.

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.

Defendant, Alexandrea K. Shepard, whose last known address is 426 21st Street, Ashland, Kentucky 41101, will take notice that a pretrial hearing is scheduled for June 18, 2018 at 3:00 p.m. on Petitioners» request for legal custody of the minor child, Zoey Brock.

Finding that the defense would be unjustly prejudiced by allowing the case to proceed toward a jury trial without permitting the defendant's expert to examine the plaintiff as the plaintiff's own expert had, the appellate court granted the writ of mandamus, forcing the lower court to honor the defendant's request.

The Judge found that the defendant surgeon «chose to provide a liposuction procedure which had been neither requested nor required» and acted in breach of her legal duty to the claimant patient.

The trial court rejected the defendant's request to arbitrate, claiming that the power of attorney document did not give the resident's son the right to agree to arbitration, and therefore, the arbitration agreement was invalid.

The defendant's request on appeal was for a writ of mandamus, which is a rarely used procedural tool that allows a higher court to order a lower court or government agent to perform a certain task.

On appeal, the plaintiffs» requested that the judgment dismissing the action against Mr. Vicentini and Ford Credit be set aside and liability be apportioned equally between those two defendants and Mr. Hoang and requested that the amount of damages be increased.

They may do this through the use of subpoenas and discovery requests, such as video of the accident that supports your version of events or evidence that shows that the defendant was aware of a dangerous condition before the accident and negligently failed to take steps to prevent foreseeable accidents.

However, as to the defendant awarded $ 601,560 in fees and $ 25,002.01, that determination was affirmed — the 20 % fee award out of requested fees and the reduced costs award had adequate substantiating bases in the record.

The Court of Appeal then rejected assignor's due process argument, finding that assignor had notice that defendant sought a fee award on a surety basis — with ample opportunity to respond to defendant's request.

Attorneys, as prevailing defendants, were awarded $ 20,765 in fees out of the total amount requested as to attorney # 1 as well as awarded $ 12,500 out of a requested $ 37,474 as to attorney # 2.