The claimant started
an action against the defendant for damages for those lost items.
We hold that a person who sues on or settles a claim for a non-malignant asbestosis - related disease with one Defendant is not precluded from a subsequent
action against another Defendant for a distinct malignant asbestos - related condition...»
$ 85,000 Verdict in favor of steel fabricator Plaintiff in a breach of contract
action against Defendant for failure to pay for steel used in the creation of a United Airlines Terminal vestibule at O'Hare Airport.
Additionally, Plaintiff brought a negligence
action against the defendant for damages associated with the accident that he caused.
Not exact matches
The class
action, filed in United States District Court,
for the District of Illinois, Eastern Division, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Akorn's securities between March 1, 2017 through February 26, 2018, both dates inclusive (the «Class Period»), seeking to recover damages caused by
defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder,
against the Company and certain of its top officials.
Jack, District Judge: Plaintiff, McIlhenny Company, a corporation of the State of Maine, which, with its predecessors,
for many years past, has manufactured at Avery Island, Louisiana, a condiment known as «Tabasco Pepper Sauce,» brings this
action against defendant Ed.
But since 2006, if a criminal
action is commenced
against a
defendant for one of those worst child sexual abuse crimes, the victim has five years from the date the criminal
action is ended to file a civil suit
against only the abuser.
The suit by his lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), showed Dokpesi also praying
for a perpetual injunction restraining the
defendants or their agents from further making any defamatory publications
against him, and N50million as cost of the
action.
Lawyers
for Charlotte Osei also demanded the list of workers who were behind the petition «to enable us commence legal
action against them
for the defamatory statements contained in their petition failing which our client will be constrained to proceed
against you alone as
defendant in the suit our client intends to commence
against them since you are to all intents and purposes, their agent.»
She said this was «to enable us commence legal
action against them
for the defamatory statements contained in their petition failing which our client will be constrained to proceed
against you alone as
defendant in the suit our client intends to commence
against them since you are to all intents and purposes, their agent.»
In the suit by his lawyer Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), Dokpesi is also praying
for a perpetual injunction restraining the
defendants or their agents from further making any defamatory publications
against him, and N50million as cost of the
action.
Also, «
for those
defendants previously convicted and who have failed to satisfy the financial obligations imposed at sentencing, we will consider federal civil forfeiture
actions against their pensions to satisfy criminal judgments,» the prosecutor said.
The class
action seeks damages «
for the purchase of e-books, an injunction
against pricing e-books with the agency model and forfeiture of the illegal profits received by the
defendants as a result of their anti-competitive conduct which could total tens of millions of dollars.»
I. AMENDED COMPLAINT This is an
action for damages brought by individual consumers,
against Defendant, H&P Capital, Inc.,
for Defendant's violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (hereafter -LSB-...]
(b) With respect to an
action brought to enjoin violations of the chapter or fraudulent or unconscionable conduct, the administrator may apply to the court
for appropriate temporary relief
against a
defendant, pending final determination of the proceedings.
The South Florida Lawyers blog reports that the auction rate securities
action filed
against Wachovia in federal court in Florida is, well, going poorly
for the
defendant at the moment.
The Gillette Company (Gillette) brought this
action against four former employees (collectively, the «individual
defendants») alleging that they misappropriated Gillette's trade secrets to develop a wet shaving razor
for defendant ShaveLogic, LLC (ShaveLogic).
Acting
for the
defendants in respect of substantial and complex fraud claims arising out of a commercial transaction, which involved dealing with freezing injunctions obtained
against the
defendants and the co-ordination of
actions in various jurisdictions.
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 lawsuit.
Defeating conditional certification of a national FLSA collective
action filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California alleging unpaid overtime
for all nonexempt employees of a national furniture retailer and getting claims dismissed
against the individual
defendants;
The insurer denied coverage to Mr. Hoang, and the plaintiffs were forced to bring an
action for coverage, under section 258 (1) of the Insurance Act directly
against the
defendant insurer to have the insurance money payable under Mr. Hoang's motor vehicle policy applied toward satisfaction of the judgment.
Albers v. Woolworth Canada Inc., 1999 CarswellAlta 856 Acting
for the plaintiff in this
action for damages
for personal injury sustained in a fall on the sidewalk adjacent to the
defendants» property, I was successful in having an application
for summary judgment
against the plaintiff dismissed.
[1] The plaintiff, David Ellis, has brought an
action against the
defendant, Orlex Saul Fallios - Guthierrez,
for battery, claiming that he suffered significant physical and emotional injuries.
January 29, 2003 835 So.2 d 1251 2003 Store patron had no claim
for spoliation of evidence
against department store that was also
defendant in patron's underlying negligence
action.
Attis represents important appellate Court guidance
for the class
action bar as, prior to Attis, certain decisions, most notably Poulin v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada, earmarked class counsel as a potential payment source
for defendants in situations where the plaintiffs were unwilling or unable to cover costs ordered
against them.
The Court held that their cause of
action against the
defendant law firm,
for allegedly providing negligent tax advice, arose when Canada Revenue disallowed their charitable tax credits, not when their litigation with Canada Revenue was settled.
If a forum state's courts have «general jurisdiction» over a
defendant, this means that the
defendant can be sued in that forum on any cause of
action against that
defendant arising anywhere in the world, regardless of any other relationship that the claim has to the forum state (except
for claims in the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts which can be brought in a U.S. District Court located in the same state, or in an arbitration forum pursuant to a valid arbitration clause that binds the parties, an issue beyond the scope of this question and answer).
In California, the plaintiff in a bad faith
action may be able to recover some of its attorneys» fees separately and in addition to the judgment
for damages
against a
defendant insurer.
The
action languished
for some time, in large part because the plaintiffs» solicitor had difficulty in resolving how to deal with the claim
against the second
defendant.
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 p
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 p
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 p
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 purpose.
The case established that the ATS provides jurisdiction over tort
actions in such «foreign cubed» cases, brought by non-US plaintiffs
against non-US
defendants for violations of customary international law, including war crimes and crimes
against humanity, committed outside the US.
[5] Conversely, a delay of approximately 7.5 years was held not to be inordinate in the context of an
action against a number of
defendants for breach of fiduciary obligations.
[1] The appellant, who is a lawyer, brought an
action in Small Claims Court
against the
defendant seeking damages in the amount of $ 14,933.22
for breach of contract.
He acts
for both claimants and
defendants, with recent experience handling
actions against financial advisers and solicitor firms.
The settlement brings to a close the consolidated class
action lawsuit brought in 2010 by multiple retirement funds
against Countrywide and other
defendants for securities violations involving the packaging and sale of MBS.
This was an
action of trespass, brought in the Court below, by the plaintiff in error,
against the
defendant in error,
for an assault and battery, and false imprisonment, to which the
defendant pleaded the general issue, and a special plea of justification.
Eight of the named
defendants brought a motion
for a summary judgment to have the claims dismissed by reason of there being no cause of
action against them.
Typically, such benefits are less than the amount that an employee might have received in a negligence lawsuit
against a non-employer
defendant for the same injury, but the trade - off is that workers» compensation cases are less likely to be contested and protracted than negligence
actions — at least in theory.
The limitation
for this cause of
action will not begin to run
against the infant plaintiff until he reaches the age of majority on February 2, 2012 and it seems to be the
defendant is no more prejudiced by a stay of proceedings then he would be had the plaintiff waited until then to commence this
action.
In a class
action, all of the various plaintiffs join together
for one claim
against the
defendant.
The arbitrator granted summary disposition in favor of the
defendants, finding that: (1) CHSI was not a proper respondent to the
action and that Weirton failed to state claims
against CHSI; (2) all of Weirton's claims, except
for the breach - of - contract claim
against Quorum, were barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel; (3) Weirton's breach - of - contract claim
against Quorum was time - barred under the applicable Tennessee statute of limitations; (4) Weirton's tort claims were alternatively barred by the gist - of - the -
action doctrine; and (5) Weirton's unjust enrichment claim was barred because of the parties» contracts (the «Second Award»).
In 2008, another federal court harshly dismissed his claims
for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
against two other creditors, noting that Flury had «filed eleven lawsuits
against various
defendants over the last four years, and with the exception of one case that ended in a default judgment, plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed every
action once the
defendant moved to dismiss the case or otherwise responded to the complaint.»
Won summary judgment
for defendant in a $ 40 million fraud, trade secret, and trademark
action against a leading water product manufacturer.
24.04 (1) Unless the court orders otherwise, where an
action against a
defendant who has crossclaimed or made a third party claim is dismissed
for delay, the crossclaim or third party claim shall be deemed to be dismissed.
D's core argument was that he had discovered his claim
against the proposed
defendants before January 1, 2004 and, therefore, the limitation period
for the
action against them was 6 years from the time he turned 18.
In the
action he claims damages
against the prosecution and police
defendants for conduct arising out of his arrest, trial
«Claimants may now be able to bring
actions in the UK
against UK resident
defendants for infringement of their rights in multiple jurisdictions.»
The plaintiff, Keith Cordeiro («Plaintiff») brought an
action against his former employer, the
defendant, Pinnacle Caterers Ltd. («Defendant») for wrongful d
defendant, Pinnacle Caterers Ltd. («
Defendant») for wrongful d
Defendant»)
for wrongful dismissal.
Another reason that victims of alcohol or drug related accidents should seek competent legal counsel and file a civil
action against the
defendant instead of hoping
for criminal restitution is that the standard of proof required to win an Indiana personal injury lawsuit is less than what a prosecutor must prove to convict a
defendant on criminal charges.
The
defendants brought a motion
for summary judgement to have the claims dismissed as
against the directors and the holding companies on the basis that they were not employers of the plaintiff and therefore have no place in the
action for wrongful dismissal.