Sentences with phrase «action against the defendant»

There was no assignment of a right of action against the defendant.

The plaintiff's action against the defendant law firm was allowed to proceed.

The plaintiff brought a civil action against the defendant after the defendant posted an explicit video of the plaintiff online, which he had assured the plaintiff he would keep private.

The plaintiffs brought a medical negligence action against the defendants (three doctors, a nurse and the hospital).

It had been her decision to commence the unsuccessful action against the defendant in the first instance.

The plaintiff filed a premises liability action against the defendant, claiming that he was negligent in having the plaintiff move the glass.

$ 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.

In Sheriff v. Apps et al., Carole J. Brown, J. summarily dismissed Sheriff's action against the defendant solicitors.

If the victim loses their life as a result of a fatal crash, Massachusetts allows the surviving heirs to bring a wrongful death action against the defendant to recoup compensation for the loss of their loved one.

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.

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...»

Olympique obtained default judgment in a Quebec action against the Defendants Pancor, an insolvent Ontario company, and Panarese, Pancor's sole officer and director.

The plaintiffs commenced a class action against the defendant, Telus, regarding alleged overbilling.

Michela et al. v. St. Thomas of Villanova Catholic School 2015 ONCA 801 Damages — Master and Servant Summary: The plaintiff school teachers brought a wrongful dismissal action against the defendant private school.

On July 31, 2002, the Plaintiff filed his legal malpractice action against the Defendants.

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.

Additionally, Plaintiff brought a negligence action against the defendant for damages associated with the accident that he caused.

(i) Ex turpi causa — the company has been held liable under competition law, so can it now rely on that wrongdoing to maintain its cause of action against the defendants?

If the plaintiff does not establish this on a balance of probabilities, having regard to all the evidence, her action against the defendant fails.

The national court therefore has its own sphere of discretion when examining the action against the defendant, and the Commission can not be considered as the judge and the party in its own cause.

Tuck v. Supreme Holdings Ltd. et al. 2014 NLTD (G) 131 Evidence — Limitation of Actions — Practice Summary: The plaintiff commenced an action against the defendants on February 28, 2012, to recover damages allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle collision that occurred on December 28, 2009.

[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.

The action against the defendant law firm was commenced in 2009.

Google, who is not a party to the action against the defendant, argued that the Court could only prohibit Google from listing the defendant's websites on «google.ca», but not on any other international sites run by Google.

Tuck v. Supreme Holdings Ltd. et al. 2014 NLTD (G) 131 Evidence — Limitation of Actions — Practice Summary: The plaintiff commenced an action against the defendants on February 28, 2012, to recover damages allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle collision that occurred... [more]

The authority subsequently brought an action against the defendants.

Action against Defendants, a pharmaceutical company, its former CEO, and its former Controller, in connection with alleged financial reporting, books and records, and internal accounting controls violations by Defendant company.

After her mother's condition worsened but before her death, the plaintiff filed an action against the defendant, seeking her mother's medical records to determine why her health had deteriorated so quickly while under the defendant's care.

24.03 Where an action against a defendant who has counterclaimed is dismissed for delay, the defendant may within thirty days after the dismissal deliver a notice of election to proceed with the counterclaim (Form 23B), and if the defendant fails to do so, the counterclaim shall be deemed to be discontinued without costs.

(1.1) Where an action against a defendant against whom a crossclaim has been made is dismissed for delay, the crossclaim shall be deemed to be dismissed thirty days after a copy of the order dismissing the action is served on the crossclaiming defendant under rule 24.02.1, unless the court orders otherwise during the thirty - day period.

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.

In a case decided in February 2016, Wolinsky v. Assiniboine Credit Union, Stuart Blake and Andrew Loewen convinced the Manitoba Court of Appeal to overturn a decision granting the plaintiffs leave to commence an action against the defendant which was otherwise commenced out of time, on the basis that the lower court committed several errors.

The claimant started an action against the defendant for damages for those lost items.

In our previous blog re Hamilton Estate v. Jacinto, the trial judge dismissed the plaintiffs action against the defendant.

The defendant terminated the contract and the plaintiff brought an action against the defendant alleging wrongful dismissal.

[1] The plaintiff, Mahmoud Elfarnawani, has commenced an action against the defendants, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and its internal Ethics Commission (EC), claiming damages for the torts of defamation, breach of a duty of good faith, and abuse of process.

The plaintiff appealed on two grounds: that the motion judge erred in i) interpreting the scope of the forum selection clause and ii) staying the action against the defendants who were not party to the... Read More

They brought this action against the defendants, claiming their full share of the annual rental income from the property.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and stayed the action against the defendants who were parties to the shareholders agreement, and allowed the action to proceed against the defendants who were not parties to that agreement.

The plaintiff company retained lawyer Gregory Govedaris in its action against the defendant companies.