Court Report 1. The name of the case is “Malaysia Venture Capital Management Berhad Vs. Mobifusion‚ Inc” and case number is 112CV236774. 2. Date and time of the session I attended is February 20th‚ 2014 at 9:00 a.m. 3. Number of department is Dept. 2‚ and the name of the judge is Patricia M. Lucas. 4. John V. Komar is the attorney for the plaintiff (Malaysia Venture Capital Management Berhad) and Chris Kao is the attorney for the defendant (Mobifusion‚ Inc) 5. Nature of dispute: a) The plaintiff
Premium Contract Plaintiff Defendant
COURT VISIT Date of court visit: 25 October 2010. Court name: Snaresbrook Crown court. Courtroom visited: court 1. Judge: T. Lamb QC. (Queen’s Counsel) Name of case viewed: Trial part heard; Remo Rossi. (Rape of a juvenile family member). Representation: V.Girling QC (Instructed by L.Lewis solicitors) for the defendant. G.Reece QC (Instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown. On Monday the 25th of October 2010‚ I attended Snaresbrook Crown court at court 1 which was hearing
Premium Jury
probabilities of cases being appealed in the three courts are given in the 3 Total rows in the table. For Common Pleas Court‚ the probability of an appeal is .0401; for Domestic Relations Court‚ the probability of an appeal is .00348; and for Municipal Court‚ the probability of an appeal is .00461. Appeals are much more likely in Common Pleas Court. But‚ even there‚ only 1 in 25 cases are appealed. The unconditional probability of an appeal across all 3 courts is (1762 + 106 + 500)/(43‚945 + 30
Premium Court Appeal Ranking
Tayum‚ Abra‚ and thus proclaimed punong barangay in accordance with Section 5 of R.A. 6679. However‚ his election was protested by private respondent Rapisora‚ who placed secondin the election with one vote less than the petitioner. The Municipal CircuitTrial Court of Tayum sustained Rapisora and installed him as punong barangay in place of the petitioner after deducting two votes as stray from the latter’s total. Flores appealed to the RTC‚ which affirmed the challenged decision in toto. The judge
Premium Court Appeal
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the performance of the Hamilton county judges‚ in three different courts. The data is compiled from information gathered over a three year period and includes a total of 182‚908 cases handled by 38 judges in Common Pleas Court‚ Domestic Relations Court‚ and Municipal Court. The information presented should help determine how many cases have been appealed‚ reversed‚ or a combination of stated variables which will help determine the amount of errors made
Premium Court Appeal Judge
City‚ Philippines In partial fulfillment in the subject Political Science 6 "Court Visit" Submitted to: Atty. Grace Isanor Giduquio- Larona Submitted by: Jean Bulac Marcos Court Visit Date of court visit: February 10‚ 2014 Courtroom visited: Room Judge: Wilfredo A. Dagatan On Monday the 10th of February 2014‚ we‚ the Political Science 6 students attended a court hearing at Mandaue Palace of Justice at court _ which had a four hearings on the same day. The said hearing started at 9 in the
Premium Cebu City Trial Central Visayas
June 20‚ 2011 Case Study #3 Case Problem: Hamilton County Judges Three major court systems in Hamilton County were reviewed in depth‚ and case information from the Common Pleas‚ Domestic Relations‚ and Municipal Courts were reviewed. This study compiles information from 38 Judges who had a total of 182‚908 cases presented to them over a three year period. This study shows the number of cases that were disposed‚ appealed‚ and reversed. This study is to aid in determining which judges have a
Premium Court Judge Law
or is for a continuous period of six months absent from India‚ or leaves India for the purpose of residing abroad‚ or is declared an insolvent‚ or desires to be discharged from the trust‚ or refuses or becomes‚ in the opinion of a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction‚ unfit or personally incapable to act in the trust‚ or accepts an inconsistent trust‚ a new trustee may be appointed in his place by: (a) The person nominated for that purpose by the instrument or trust (if any)‚ or
Premium Fiduciary Trustee Trust law
AJ 101 Course # Court Visit On November 29‚ 2011‚ I had the opportunity to go to Los Angles Superior Court and was able to sit and observe during a Preliminary Hearing. The case that I sat in was about a rape case in which a young girl of approximately twelve years old said that her grandfather‚ who was about sixty years old would sexually touch her and do certain things to her everytime she would go over to her grandparents house. The prosecutor asked the young girl a serious of questions such
Premium Question Jury Family
discuss the Drug Court program that is aimed at decreasing drug use. I will also discuss the impact of the program. Drug misuse and abuse has become a part of the social norm for many. There are some individuals who make silent cries for help‚ but do not know who or where to turn to get the help they need. One program designed to decrease drug use is Drug Courts. The purpose of drug courts is to rehabilitate those suffering from drug abuse‚ and mental health issues (What Are Drug Courts‚ n.d.). Instead
Premium Drug addiction Addiction Substance abuse