Sentences with phrase «action alleging misrepresentations»
Representation of defendant in a CFTC action alleging misrepresentations in the operation of a futures fund
https://www.sheppardmullin.com/ Not exact matches
July 14, 2017 — / PR NEWSWIRE / - Ruby Corp. and Ruby Life Inc. (ruby), and a proposed class of plaintiffs, co-led by Dowd & Dowd, P.C., The Driscoll Firm, P.C., and Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC, have reached a proposed settlement agreement resolving the class action lawsuits that were filed beginning July 2015 following a data breach of ruby's computer network and subsequent release of certain personal information of customers of Ashley Madison, an online dating website owned and operated by Ruby Life Inc. (formerly Avid Dating Life Inc.) The lawsuits, alleging inadequate data security practices and misrepresentations regarding Ashley Madison, have been consolidated in a multi-district litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
We shall have no liability for and you agree to reimburse, indemnify and hold us, our affiliates and our and their partners, directors, officers and employees and any person controlled by or controlling us harmless from all Losses that result from: (a) your or your agent's misrepresentation, act or omission or alleged misrepresentation, act or omission, (b) Capital One Investing following your or your agent's directions or failing to follow your or their unlawful or unreasonable directions, (c) any of your actions or the actions of your previous advisers or custodian, (d) the failure by any person not controlled by Capital One Investing to perform any obligations to you, and (e) your failure to provide accurate information on your Account Application or to update that information.
The Court considered the claims of the groups of creditors that had assigned their actions to the Appellant, and found that to the extent those claims were personal — alleging misrepresentations to themselves personally, investments they made in reliance on those misrepresentations, and resulting personal loss — the Appellant could not pursue the claims on their behalf.
Our lawyers have defended class actions and individual cases alleging personal injury and property damage from environmental contamination or exposure to chemical products based on all types of legal theories, including negligence, fraud, failure to warn, negligent misrepresentation, trespass, private and public nuisance and damage claims such as «fear of cancer» and medical monitoring.
Successfully opposed attempt to certify proposed nationwide class action brought by franchisees against franchisor alleging claims for, among other things, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract.
The action alleges, among other things, that during the Class Period, the defendants made misrepresentations and omissions with respect to the costs overruns of the Kaunisvaara Project.
Edison Subs, LLC — a transferee of a Edison, New Jersey Subway restaurant — brought an action in New Jersey state court against the franchisor (Doctor's Associates, Inc.), the former franchisee (Aliya Patel), and the franchisor's affiliate (Subway Real Estate Corp.), alleging breach of contract, fraud, violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, negligent misrepresentation, and violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
representing the syndicate of underwriters of IntraLinks Holdings, Inc.'s April 2011 secondary offering in a federal securities class action relating to alleged misrepresentations concerning IntraLinks» enterprise business; and
Defended computer manufacturer in nationwide class action for alleged misrepresentations to consumers about computer microprocessor
In Silveira v. FY International Auditing & Consulting Corp., the Plaintiff commenced an action in Ontario alleging breach of an agreement and misrepresentation.
These matters run the gamut of securities and commodities claims, including suitability, churning, misrepresentation and sales practices claims, cases alleging research and investment banking conflicts of interest, margin liquidations, incentive stock option exercises, shareholder derivative class action claims, customer solicitation claims, unfair business practices litigation, and audit and compliance advisory work.
In August 2016, the franchisee commenced an action in the Superior Court in Toronto, alleging misrepresentation contrary to section 7 of the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000.
An action with respect to this statutory claim may be commenced only with leave of the court as prescribed by s. 138.8 and within the limitation period specified in s. 138.14, that is, three years after the date of the alleged misrepresentations in the instant cases.
Section 138.14 of the OSA provides that an action under s. 138.3 must be commenced within three years of the date of the alleged misrepresentation (or within six months following the issuance of a news release disclosed that leave has been obtained, whichever occurs first).
In certifying the action as a class proceeding, Belobaba J. addressed Manulife's argument that the pleadings did not disclose a cause of action claim in respect of the s. 138 claim because the action was not commenced within three years of the alleged misrepresentations (as required by s. 138.14 of the Act and the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Sharma v. Timminco Ltd., 2012 ONCA 107).
In Dugai, the plaintiff investors proposed a class action alleging inadequacies in the defendant corporation's Risk Management Policies and Practices, including a cause of action for secondary market misrepresentation under Part XXIII.1 of the Act (for which they require leave under s. 138.8 (1)-RRB-.
Co-lead counsel on behalf of a national accounting firm in consumer and competitor class actions seeking hundreds of millions of dollars based on alleged misrepresentations relating to the provision of services.