Sentences with phrase «supreme court action against»

Not exact matches

A class action case headed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday against Spokeo is being closely watched by Google, Facebook and others.

«The DOL has created a new private right of action,» said Fleckner, who led Goodwin's successful defense of an excessive fee claim against John Hancock in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in 2014, and was a signatory to an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court on behalf of the Securities Industry Financial Markets Association in Tibble v. Edison.

While Jesner suggests that five justices likely would rule that the federal courts should not recognize an ATS cause of action against American corporations for their overseas activities, several federal appeals courts have exhibited little willingness to limit the scope of ATS liability unless directly ordered to do so by the Supreme Court.

Last month, WestJet Airlines filed an appeal after the Supreme Court of British Columbia refused to throw out a proposed class - action lawsuit accusing the company of fostering a corporate culture that tolerates harassment against female employees.

As for my part, I am filing a complaint with the Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice and asking her and The Court to mark Tony Jones as a Vexatious Litigant in that state (he has to get judicial approval to sue); asking The Court to take action against Tony Jones» attorney's (M. Sue Wilson's) law license; and asking the Court to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue WiCourt Chief Justice and asking her and The Court to mark Tony Jones as a Vexatious Litigant in that state (he has to get judicial approval to sue); asking The Court to take action against Tony Jones» attorney's (M. Sue Wilson's) law license; and asking the Court to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue WiCourt to mark Tony Jones as a Vexatious Litigant in that state (he has to get judicial approval to sue); asking The Court to take action against Tony Jones» attorney's (M. Sue Wilson's) law license; and asking the Court to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue WiCourt to take action against Tony Jones» attorney's (M. Sue Wilson's) law license; and asking the Court to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue WiCourt to order an investigation into the family court judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue Wicourt judge who signed the Order (as it has been alleged that she is possibly the former law partner of M. Sue Wilson.

Melbourne lawyer Mark Elliott, via his specialist class action vehicle Melbourne City Investments, has pursued a separate class action against Treasury in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

In a case similar to the Gaidry case, New Iberia Extract Co. v. McIlhenny Sons, the New Iberia Company had recently recovered damages against McIlhenny Sons in the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on a similar cause of action, New Iberia Extract Co. v. E. McIlhenny, 182 La. 150 [8 T. M. Rep. 189], the decision having been based largely on the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, cancelling the Mcllhenny Company registration of «Tabasco» as its trade - mark.

The Supreme Court Justices also ordered that where applicable, criminal Action should be instituted against accused persons by the Attorney General.

Fordham Law School professor and former congressional candidate Zephyr Teachout on Friday emailed supporters from her political action committee urging them to mobilize against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch.

I was not stupid not to understand that if I commenced any action in the Supreme Court while those cases were still pending the ignorant public may think I was siding with the judges accused of corruption against Anas Aremeyaw Anas, which would not have been the case.

He argued that a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision tossing out the corruption case against former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell showed that his actions also did not involve illegalities.

Their actions are planned to be filed in state Supreme Court of Erie County against Gabryszak; his former chief of staff, Adam Locher; Assembly Majority Leader Sheldon Silver; the Assembly; and New York state, according to interviews and copies of the planned litigation prepared by Niagara Falls lawyer John Bartolomei.

On 21st December, 1993 the New Patriotic Party (NPP) instituted an action at the Supreme Court against the Government of Ghana per the Attorney — General for the following reliefs:

Lawyers for Ragusa were in Queens Supreme Court Tuesday to file an action against Bart Haggerty and Ognibene.

An ad from the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action warns that Democratic former Sen. Evan Bayh, who's seeking his old seat against GOP Rep. Todd Young in Indiana, would help Clinton fill another seat on the Supreme Court.

In June 2012, the «peeved and remotely controlled» Martin Alamisi Amidu instituted an action at the Supreme Court of Ghana against the Attorney General, Waterville Holdings (BVI) Limited, Austro Invest and Mr. Alfred Agbesi Woyome, coming under Articles 2 and 130 respectively of the 1992 Republican Constitution of Ghana.

Sheriff who accused Makarfi of using the victory at the Supreme Court as a licence to victimize party members, however appealed to members and supporters of his deposed leadership faction to remain calm and refrain from further legal action of any sort against the party.

My fears that the chaos at the Commission would lead the present young crop of the NDC to self - destruct was confirmed when I discovered on 29th and 31st July 2017 respectively that the author of the second petition for the removal of the two Deputy Commissioners was Emmanuel Korsi Senyo, the concerned citizen, who had acted in the past as an NDC surrogate commencing action against the General Legal Council in the Supreme Court in defence of Francis Sosu, who had contested the primaries in my constituency, Madina, for the NDC.

The most recent convention, held in 1967, was initiated by legislative action and approved by voters following a series of Supreme Court decisions that ruled against New York's redistricting process.

The Nov. 9 high court action leaves intact a ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court that said the voucher program's inclusion of religious schools does not violate the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of relicourt action leaves intact a ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court that said the voucher program's inclusion of religious schools does not violate the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of reliCourt that said the voucher program's inclusion of religious schools does not violate the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of religion.

That action resulted in a long boycott against the buses in Montgomery lasting 381 days and led to a Supreme Court action which overturned such discrimination laws.

Ironically, in the New York Times case, the Supreme Court decided that the newspaper was protected from liability for an ad it ran that was critical of Alabama officials and their actions against the civil rights movement.

In 2008, Best Friends brought legal action against Macerich Westside Pavilion to enforce a state supreme court ruling that allowed public information demonstrations inside a mall devoted to public traffic.

PARENTEAU: It's testing these theories which are very similar against a body of state law, in different states as you just mentioned, and so it's probing, it's trying to find a breakthrough case where you can find a state supreme court willing to make a really bold decision finding not only a right to a healthy environment, or a safe climate, stable climate, but also finding a duty on the part of the government to take real tangible action to address that.

In future class action claims against nationwide corporate defendants, it appears that the U.S. Supreme Court is generally requiring piecemeal litigation in each state where a plaintiff was injured, instead of allowing for a single consolidated class action in a single state court lawCourt is generally requiring piecemeal litigation in each state where a plaintiff was injured, instead of allowing for a single consolidated class action in a single state court lawcourt lawsuit.

In Bristol - Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, No. 16 - 466 (June 19, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a state court does not generally have specific personal jurisdiction to entertain class - action claims by non-resident plaintiffs against a company headquartered outside of the forum state (here Bristol - Myers Squibb was not based in CaliforCourt of California, No. 16 - 466 (June 19, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a state court does not generally have specific personal jurisdiction to entertain class - action claims by non-resident plaintiffs against a company headquartered outside of the forum state (here Bristol - Myers Squibb was not based in CaliforCourt held that a state court does not generally have specific personal jurisdiction to entertain class - action claims by non-resident plaintiffs against a company headquartered outside of the forum state (here Bristol - Myers Squibb was not based in Califorcourt does not generally have specific personal jurisdiction to entertain class - action claims by non-resident plaintiffs against a company headquartered outside of the forum state (here Bristol - Myers Squibb was not based in California).

In 2006, the Florida Supreme Court «threw out a $ 145 billion class - action verdict against cigarette makers.»

In both the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, and New Jersey Supreme Court, the Appellate Practice Group successfully defended against an action for attorney's fees pursuant to New Jersey Court Rule 4:42 - 9 (a)(6).

Mandates encompass being lead Canadian counsel for the Joint Administrators of Nortel UK and 23 Nortel entities in Europe, Middle East, and Africa regarding the division of Nortel's $ 7 - billion in cash and claims against the Canadian estate; representing Katz Group Canada at the Supreme Court of Canada; representing Tim Hortons in a $ 65 - million claim; being class counsel in a $ 100 - million class action against Canada Cartage Systems Ltd.; and acting for General Motors Co. dealers in a $ 250 - million multi-party action.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide whether a class - action settlement in a suit against Google met requirements of federal law when $ 5.3 million of the $ 8.5 million...

Bivens is the 1971 Supreme Court opinion in which the Court held that there was an implied right of action against federal employees for violations of constitutional rights.

Justice Perell especially relied on Central Trust v. Rafuse, where the Supreme Court of Canada held that a mortgage lender's cause of action against the lawyers arose when the validity of the mortgage was first challenged, NOT when the mortgage was first put on title, and NOT when a court finally declared that the mortgage was Court of Canada held that a mortgage lender's cause of action against the lawyers arose when the validity of the mortgage was first challenged, NOT when the mortgage was first put on title, and NOT when a court finally declared that the mortgage was court finally declared that the mortgage was void.

Canadians could face an uphill battle to enforce local privacy laws against social media companies if the Supreme Court of Canada upholds a B.C. Court of Appeal decision to halt a class action against Facebook, Toronto privacy lawyer Peter Murphy tells AdvocateDaily.com.

Successful defense of over $ 40 million in claims for breach of an alleged partnership agreement, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty against a large Southern California homebuilder in a multi-state litigation, including a six week jury trial, two state court appeals, a Ninth Circuit appeal, an Idaho state court action and appeal to the Idaho Supreme Ccourt appeals, a Ninth Circuit appeal, an Idaho state court action and appeal to the Idaho Supreme Ccourt action and appeal to the Idaho Supreme CourtCourt.

The Supreme Court overturned the judgment against Miazga, and in so doing set out what is required in an action for malicious prosecution against a public official for a criminal prosecution.

The Kentucky Supreme Court recently handed down a far - reaching decision that allows employees in Kentucky the option to certify class - action lawsuits against employers over unpaid wages and overtime disputes.

HB 1575 Prohibits the supreme court from establishing court fees for civil cases and appeals of civil cases which are actions against governmental entities or officials or employees of governmental entities.

Obtained two Virginia Supreme Court rulings reversing disciplinary actions taken against attorneys

penalizes the defendant for engaging in public participation «plaintiff» means a person who initiates or maintains a proceeding against a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pagainst a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pAgainst Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pagainst whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper purpose.

Factcheck.org, (read their mission here) reports that it has investigated the National Abortion Rights Action League's national campaign against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge John Roberts.

Apparently I am not the only Factcheck.org reader to contact the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) and ask questions about Factcheck.org's negative review of NARAL's ad campaign against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge John Roberts.

As the Supreme Court affirms, travel is «a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action,» and is «a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.»

One may already stop here to wonder whether the EFTA Court is not making its life too easy speaking of an interpretation of EEA law «in the light» of fundamental rights in the present case; a more thorough reasoning would have had to grapple with the scope of EEA law in the case: Only if Iceland was acting effectively within the scope of EEA law here the fundamental rights standards of EEA law apply under the EFTA Court's supervision; otherwise one could argue that the Supreme Court of Iceland's action ought to be judged against the benchmark of domestic fundamental rights and ECHR standards (compare the rich debate on the parallel problem in EU law which focuses on Article 51 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights).

Notable mandates: Acted for Soltoro Ltd. in connection with its successful disposition by plan of arrangement to Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd.; co-counsel for Trillium Motor World Ltd. in class action against General Motors of Canada Ltd. and Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP; acted for Canadian Solar Inc. in connection with raising an aggregate of US$ 50 million in equity and US$ 100 million in debt financing for acquisition financing and working capital purposes; external counsel to the Regional Municipality of York, providing a wide range of municipal, real estate, expropriation, litigation, and commercial law advice and services; counsel to minority shareholder of a Nevis LLC worth more than US$ 500 million with respect to a claim for relief from unfair prejudice in litigation in Nevis and the Commercial Division of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court in British Virgin Islands, and in contemporaneous related actions in Belize and the United States.

The British Columbia Supreme Court recently ruled against the plaintiffs in an action for pay in lieu of reasonable notice due to the plaintiffs» failure to establish that they met their duty to mitigate.

A recent Supreme Court ruling is limiting court actions by injured patients who have filed claims against manufacturers of generic dCourt ruling is limiting court actions by injured patients who have filed claims against manufacturers of generic dcourt actions by injured patients who have filed claims against manufacturers of generic drugs.

But, here, two of the Second Circuit's active judges ruled against Marblegate, the dissent was by a senior judge who can not vote on an en banc petition, and the Second Circuit has historically granted fewer en banc rehearings than any other circuit court.5 Other avenues could include Marblegate filing a petition for a writ of certiorari with the US Supreme Court and / or pursuing other federal or state law remedies, including state law theories of successor liability or fraudulent conveyance against the new EDMC subsidiary, theories that the Second Circuit noted as potential causes of action but did not anacourt.5 Other avenues could include Marblegate filing a petition for a writ of certiorari with the US Supreme Court and / or pursuing other federal or state law remedies, including state law theories of successor liability or fraudulent conveyance against the new EDMC subsidiary, theories that the Second Circuit noted as potential causes of action but did not anaCourt and / or pursuing other federal or state law remedies, including state law theories of successor liability or fraudulent conveyance against the new EDMC subsidiary, theories that the Second Circuit noted as potential causes of action but did not analyze.

In a much - awaited decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has thrown out a huge discrimination lawsuit against Wal - Mart that had been filed as a class action by female workers.

In a case of first impression, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the en banc Superior Court's finding that «a patient does have a cause of action against either a psychiatrist or a general practitioner rendering psychological care, when during the course of treatment the physician has a sexual relationship with the patient that causes the patient's emotional or psychological symptoms to worsen.»

Representation of insurer in $ 10 million fraud claim in New York State Supreme Court, where plaintiff withdrew action against insurer.