bill of Particulars


Also found in: Dictionary, Legal, Acronyms, Wikipedia.
  • noun

Words related to bill of Particulars

the particular events to be dealt with in a criminal trial

References in periodicals archive ?
93) In an order dated February 21, 2007, the supreme court directed the plaintiff to provide the defendant with, among other things, the supplemental bill of particulars required by the preliminary conference order.
96) Still not having received the material, the defendant moved to enforce the order on May 21, 2007, "asserting that plaintiff failed to serve a supplemental bill of particulars within [forty-five] days of the [conditional] order and, [therefore,] that the .
100) Additionally, the plaintiff emphasized the fact "that he served a supplemental bill of particulars on [the defendant] on June 21, 2007, one day before he served his opposition to the motion [to enforce the conditional order,] and approximately 75 days after the court-ordered deadline.
103) It concluded that while the plaintiff did not timely comply with the deadlines imposed by the supreme court, the delay was not lengthy and the defendant could not "claim prejudice because of the tardy supplemental bill of particulars that plaintiff ultimately furnished.
Relying on the Court of Appeals's decision in Wilson, (108) the dissent concluded that the February 21, 2007 conditional order became absolute on April 9, 2007, as per the court's direction requiring service of a supplemental bill of particulars within forty-five days.
The dissent went on to note that under the terms of the February 21 conditional order, which it deemed absolute, the plaintiff was "precluded from offering testimony at trial with respect to the issues he was obligated to address in the supplemental bill of particulars.
128) The trial court granted a conditional order mandating preclusion, "unless the plaintiffs served the bill of particulars within [thirty] days after service of a copy of the order upon the attorney for the plaintiffs.
93) Yet, the Court denied the request for a bill of particulars, concluding "the purpose of a bill of particulars .
In 1966, Rule 7(f) was amended to eliminate the requirement that a defendant "show cause" in seeking a bill of particulars.
Despite the advisory committee's clear intent to expand the use of bills of particulars even if such expansion may harm the government's case, courts have taken the opposite approach, rarely ordering the government to file a bill of particulars.
1988) (trial court abused its discretion by denying request for bill of particulars where the indictment did not fully identify the acts giving rise to a RICO charge); United States v.
2002) (concluding that in an indictment alleging bribery, it is not sufficient for the government to allege that the defendant received identified gifts "among others," and ordering the government to file a bill of particulars identifying, in detail, all of the benefits the defendant purportedly received); United States v.
Utah 2001) (defendants charged with violations of the federal mail fraud statutes based on a scheme and artifice to defraud the right to honest services were not entitled to bill of particulars identifying the "others" whose honest services victim was deprived of, or of the names of "others" to whom defendants made misrepresentations or from whom they concealed information).
2000) (where government had produced 4,000 documents, it was required to file a bill of particulars because it had refused to identify which of the documents it intended to use in its case-in-chief).
Since the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff s complaint before any discovery was done, or any depositions were taken, the court had only the plaintiff s complaint and the defendants' answer before it, together with a bill of particulars provided by the plaintiff.