Substantial Justification means that the initial position of the agency, as well as the agency's position in the proceeding, has a reasonable basis in law and fact.
Substantial Justification means that the initial position of the agency, as well as the
Substantial Justification means that the initial position of the Division of Taxation, as well as the Division of Taxation's position in the proceedings, has a reasonable basis in law and fact.
Examples of Substantial Justification in a sentence
Substantial Justification Even if EAJA did apply to Mr. Geisen’s enforcement proceeding (but see Part II, above) and he did in fact “incur” the attorneys’ fees and expenses in question, Mr. Geisen’s EAJA application would still fail because the NRC Staff’s position in the enforcement proceeding was substantially justified.
More Definitions of Substantial Justification
Substantial Justification means that the initial position of the agency, as well as the agency’s position in the proceedings, has a reasonable basis in law and fact.” Section 42-92-2(7).
Substantial Justification means that the initial position of the agency, as well as the agency‟s position in the proceedings, has a reasonable basis in law and fact.” Sec. 42-92-2 (7). Our Supreme Court has held that in applying the substantial justification test, “the Government now must show not merely that its position was marginally reasonable; its position must be clearly reasonable, well founded in law and fact, solid though not necessarily correct.” Taft, 536
Substantial Justification means “justification to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person that parties could differ as to whether the party was required to comply with the disclosure request.” Preuss v. Kolmar Labs., Inc., 970 F. Supp. 2d 171, 175 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (quoting Am. Stock Exch., LLC v. Mopex, Inc., 215 F.R.D. 87, 93 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)). “The test of substantial justification is satisfied if there exists a genuine dispute concerning compliance.” CIL Ltd., 2019 WL 1750909, at *8. “A failure to provide the disclosure mandated by Rule 26 is harmless when there is no prejudice to the party entitled to the disclosure.” Id. Before precluding testimony, courts within the Second Circuit generally weigh four factors: “(1) the party’s explanation for the failure to comply . . . ; (2) the importance of the testimony of the precluded witness; (3) the prejudice suffered by the opposing party . . . ; and (4) the possibility of a continuance.” Softel, Inc. v. Dragon Med. and Sci. Commc’n, Inc., 118 F.3d
Substantial Justification means “reasonable people could differ as to the appropriateness of the contested action.” Knight through Kerr, 856 F.3d at 812 (citing
Substantial Justification under the EAJA means that
Substantial Justification under the EAJA means that the government’s position must have a reasonable basis in law and fact.” Corbin, 149 F.3d at 1052. “The government’s posi- tion must be substantially justified at each stage of the pro- ceedings.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Where, as here, the ALJ’s decision was reversed on the basis of procedural errors, the question is not whether the govern- ment’s position as to the merits of Shafer’s disability claim was substantially justified. See id. at 1052-53. Rather, the rel- evant question is whether the government’s decision to defend on appeal the procedural errors committed by the ALJ was substantially justified.6 See id. at 1053.