Federal judge Richard Paul Matsch ordered the venue for the trial be moved from Oklahoma City to Denver, Colorado, citing that the defendants would be unable to receive a fair trial in Oklahoma.

Chamlee moved for new trials for all defendants.

The defense moved for a retrial and, believing the defendants innocent, Judge James Edwin Horton agreed to set aside the guilty verdict.

The defense moved for another change of venue, submitting the affidavits quoting hundreds residents about their intense dislike for the defendants, to show there was " overwhelming prejudice " against them.

The defendants moved to dismiss based on a two-pronged argument.

In December, 1999, similar venue changes occurred in the Amadou Diallo murder case in which the NYPD defendants ' trial was moved to Albany.

On October 25, 1999, the defendants moved for summary judgment, asking that the complaint be dismissed on the basis of the pleadings ( in effect a motion to dismiss or demurrer ).

Attorneys for the eight other defendants said only that there was no proof of their clients' guilt.

More basically, they allow guilty defendants to avoid accepting responsibility for their wrongs.

Appointment of counsel for indigent defendants was nearly universal in federal felony cases, though it varied considerably in state cases.

It was not until 1963 that the U. S. Supreme Court declared that legal counsel must be provided at the expense of the state for indigent felony defendants, under the federal Sixth Amendment, in state courts.

According to Pasternak, during the 1937 show trial of General Iona Yakir and Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky, the Union of Soviet Writers requested all members to add their names to a statement supporting the death penalty for the defendants.

He stated that " the fact that my name and address along with my picture can appear on the front of the papers before the so-called ' victim ' has even signed a statement proves that anonymity for rape defendants is a must and that the law must be changed.

Typically, federal courts are thought to be more favorable for defendants, and state courts more favorable for plaintiffs.

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 increases defendants ' ability to remove state cases to federal court by giving federal courts original jurisdiction for all class actions with damages exceeding $ 5, 000, 000, exclusive of interest and costs.

The preamble to the Class Action Fairness Act stated that some abusive class actions harmed class members with legitimate claims and defendants that have acted responsibly ; adversely affected interstate commerce ; and undermined public respect for the country's judicial system.

In one paper presented at an ABA conference on class actions in 2007, authors commented that " competing cases can also provide opportunities for collusive settlement discussions and reverse auctions by defendants anxious to resolve their new exposure at the most economic cost.

Because mass actions operate outside the detailed procedures laid out for class actions, they can pose special difficulties for both plaintiffs, defendants, and the court.

The charges against three of the original defendants, Ruth Schwartz ( owner of Mordam Records ), Steve Boudreau ( a distributor involved in supplying Frankenchrist to the Los Angeles Wherehouse store ), and Salvatore Alberti ( owner of the factory where the record was pressed ), were dismissed for lack of evidence.

The split on the jury was 7 to 5 in favor of acquittal for all of the defendants.

Since 2008 the United States has charged at least 57 defendants for attempting to spy for China.

Thus, if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution.

Unlike defendants who are found guilty of a crime, they are not institutionalized for a fixed period, but rather held in the institution until they are determined not to be a threat.

Authorities making this decision tend to be cautious, and as a result, defendants can often be institutionalized for longer than they would have been incarcerated in prison.

The guidelines for the M ' Naghten Rules ( 1843 ) 10 C & F 200, state, inter alia, and evaluating the criminal responsibility for defendants claiming to be insane were settled in the British courts in the case of Daniel M ' Naghten in 1843.

The test has much more lenient guideline for the insanity defense, but it addressed the issue of convicting mentally ill defendants, which was allowed under the M ' Naghten Rule.

Prominent Communists who became victims of these purges and were defendants in the Prague Trials included Rudolf Slánský, the party's general secretary, Vlado Clementis ( the Foreign Minister ) and Gustáv Husák ( the leader of an administrative body responsible for Slovakia ), who was dismissed from office for " bourgeois nationalism ".

The other defendants in that case ( Grokster and MusicCity, makers of the Morpheus file-sharing software ) initially prevailed against the plaintiffs on summary judgment ( Sharman joined the case too late to take advantage of that ruling ).

Under the circumstances presented by this case, we conclude that the defendants are not liable for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement and affirm the district court's partial grant of summary judgment.

On 14 February 2006, the plaintiffs filed motions for summary judgment as to the liability of the remaining defendants, StreamCast and Sharman.

The defendants removed the case to federal district court and brought a motion for summary judgment.

The summary remedy afforded by replevin statutes can be thwarted by defendants who contest the claimant's right to possession, by contesting the plaintiff's complaint, and insisting on traditional litigation involving discovery, and in some cases, trial by jury.

The court ultimately dismissed before trial on defendants ' motion for summary judgment, but the plaintiffs appealed.

On July 25, 1987, the California Court of Appeal ( Fourth District, Division One ) affirmed summary judgment for the defendants because ( 1 ) McDonald's or any other business has no duty of care to protect patrons from an unforeseeable assault by a murderous madman ; and ( 2 ) plaintiffs could not prove causation because the standard reasonable measures normally used by restaurants to deter criminals, like guards and closed-circuit television cameras, could not possibly have deterred the perpetrator ( who did not care about his own survival ).

On September 14, 2011, the Superior Court in Morris County, New Jersey, granted SAC Capital Advisors ’ motion for summary judgment and removed SAC Capital Advisors, Sigma Capital Management, a division of SAC Capital Advisors and Steven Cohen as defendants from the case.

Generally speaking, " irect appeal statutes afford defendants the opportunity to challenge the merits of a judgment and allege errors of law or fact.

In the U. S. federal court system, criminal defendants must file a notice of appeal within 10 days of the entry of either the judgment or the order being appealed, or the right to appeal is forfeited.

On November 21, 2006, a settlement was entered in federal court under which a $ 1. 75 million judgment was imposed in one case and $ 1. 86 million in another, but the defendants were insolvent

The judgment ordered ( not withstanding any other punitive measures to be determined for damages on all counts ) the defendants within 30 days to post conspicuously in every place on the internet a retraction / corrective measure where their false statements have been posted.

The judgment required IHR and other defendants to pay $ 90, 000 to Mermelstein and to issue a letter of apology to " Mr. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald, and all other survivors of Auschwitz " for " pain, anguish and suffering " caused to them.

Domestic courts are also often called upon to apply foreign law, or to act upon foreign defendants, over whom they may not, as a practical matter, even have the ability to enforce a judgment if the defendant's assets are outside their reach.

In 1975, the defendants were found liable for negligence and conflict of interest, were removed as executors of the Rothko estate by court order, and, along with Marlborough Gallery, were required to pay a $ 9. 2 million damages judgment to the estate.

Jaffree sought a declaratory judgment and an injunction restraining the defendants from " maintaining or allowing the maintenance of regular religious prayer services or other forms of religious observances in the Mobile County Public Schools in violation of the First Amendment as made applicable to states by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

After the defendants did not appear for court, a default judgment was entered.

On May 23, 1986, the Supreme Court in Rome confirmed the judgment against the two remaining defendants, even though the prosecuting attorney had called for their acquittal.

A plaintiff named Quera Pruitt sought declaratory judgment and punitive damages from the defendants for creating a racially hostile environment.

" The defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal but the appeal was dismissed, Lord Justice Laws giving a judgment with which the Chancellor of the High Court and Lady Justice Rafferty agreed.

Within 10 days of a trial court entering a judgment and sentence imposing the death penalty, male defendants under sentence of death are transferred to the Penitentiary, where they remain in a segregation unit pending appeals and until a death warrant is issued setting the date for the execution.

Since then, the European Court of Human Rights ( ECHR ) has ruled that the trial violated Articles 6 ( right to a fair trial ) because the defendants had been refused legal aid and had only been represented by volunteer lawyers, and Article 10 ( right to freedom of expression ) of the Convention on Human Rights, again because the defendants had been refused legal aid, and awarded a judgment of £ 57, 000 against the UK government.

The judgment required IHR and other defendants to pay $ 90, 000 to Mermelstein and to issue a letter of apology to " Mr. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor of Auschwitz-Birkenau and Buchenwald, and all other survivors of Auschwitz " for " pain, anguish and suffering " caused to them.

Stuart James and Frank Jenkins, the attorneys for the Marsh family in the civil litigation, crafted a judgment that was not collectable against any of the Marsh defendants.

The court issued a declaratory judgment that Liu was responsible for violating the defendants ' rights to be free from torture and arbitrary detention.

Judge Baer added: " Again, since the al-Qaeda defendants and Iraq are jointly and severally liable, they are all responsible for the payment of any judgment that may be entered.