Civil Litigation
Showing 166–180 of 980 resultsSorted by price: high to low
Filter by: FEDERAL DISTRICT
Filter by Price
Filter by: FILE TYPE
Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR, regarding deposition and corporate names
motion to add punitive damages
motion for leave to add punitive damages
Defendant Motion in Limine Excluding EEOC Findings
Defendant Motion in Limine excluding EEOC findings
Motion to Release Funds Held in Court Registry
MOTION TO RELEASE FUNDS HELD IN COURT REGISTRY
Defendants Motion Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 60(b) to Reconsider Order and Certificate of Conferral with C.R.C.P. 121’1-15(8)
DEFENDANTS MOTION PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 60(b) TO RECONSIDER ORDER RE: INTEREST RATE ON PROMISSORY NOTE AND CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL WITH C.R.C.P. 121 ‘ 1-15(8)
Defendant’s Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence Pertaining to Impairment Ratings
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO IMPAIRMENT RATINGS
Defendant’s Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OR ARGUMENT REGARDING TRAFFIC CITATIONS, DRIVING RECORDS
AND PRIOR UNRELATED TRAFFIC OFFENSES/CHARGES
Defendant’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS
Defendant Motion for New Trial
Federal criminal case defense motion for new trial pursuant to Rule 33. US District Court for the District of Colorado.
Defendant Motion for Discovery and Inspection under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 16
Federal criminal case motion for discovery and inspection pursuant to Rule 16. US District Court for the District of Colorado.
Defendant’s Motion In Limine to Preclude Evidence of Uncharged Tax Years
Motion by a criminal defendant in the US District Court for the Western District of California to preclude the inclusion of specific evidence. In this case, to exclude evidence of tax filings for ax years not included in the Government’s charges.
Motion to Preclude Client from Introducing Evidence or Testimony – Plaintiff was not Informed of Her Right to Undergo Testing
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE PLAINTIFF FROM ARGUING, OR INTRODUCING EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY, THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT INFORMED OF HER RIGHT ON AUGUST 1, 2012, TO UNDERGO TESTING TO DEFINITIVELY RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITY OF INFECTION
Defendant’s Motion for Leaving to Conduct Ex Parte Meetings with some of Plaintiff’s Treating Health Care Providers
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO CONDUCT EX PARTE MEETINGS WITH SOME OF PLAINTIFF’S TREATING HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS
Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude Standard of Care Opinions by Name, M.D. Pusuant to C.R.E. 702
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE STANDARD OF CARE OPINIONS BY NAME, M.D. PURSUANT TO C.R.E. 702