Sentences with phrase «actions alleging injuries»

Lightfoot has represented a number of manufacturers in mass tort actions alleging injuries from exposure to various chemicals, including isocyanates, formaldehyde, creosote, dixoin, and metalworking fluids.

Not exact matches

Adding insult to injury, shares of GE briefly fell below $ 14 each on Monday after news late Friday that the Justice Department could take action in connection with alleged subprime mortgage violations.

We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any claim, action, petition, demand for arbitration or lawsuit alleging injury or damage resulting from any use of TWIST, whether arising in tort or contract, law or equity;

Retired players Dave Christian, Reed Larson and William Bennett filed a class action lawsuit in federal court on Tuesday alleging that the league has promoted fighting and downplayed the risk of head injuries that come from it.

«Because of the alleged actions of this officer, the victim was treated at ECMC for a head injury,» says Flynn.

Insurance protection against claims alleging negligence or an action which resulted in bodily injury or property damage to another party.

To add insult to injury, multiple class - action lawsuits have been filed alleging that EA misled investors about the game's revenue prospects.

Photographer hereby releases, indemnifies, and agrees to hold harmless the Museum, its trustees, officers, employees, and agents from any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, settlements and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising out of injuries to persons, damages to property, claims based on alleged defamation or infringement of rights to copyright, trademark, service mark or other intellectual property, or rights to privacy and / or any and all other damages in connection with Photographer's activities and use of the Museum's facilities or equipment, whether from an occurrence at the Museum facility during such use, or at any other time and place, AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANY NEGLIGENCE THAT MIGHT BE ALLEGED AGAINST, OR ATTRIBUTED TO THE MUSEUM OR ANY PERSON INDEMNIFIED HERalleged defamation or infringement of rights to copyright, trademark, service mark or other intellectual property, or rights to privacy and / or any and all other damages in connection with Photographer's activities and use of the Museum's facilities or equipment, whether from an occurrence at the Museum facility during such use, or at any other time and place, AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANY NEGLIGENCE THAT MIGHT BE ALLEGED AGAINST, OR ATTRIBUTED TO THE MUSEUM OR ANY PERSON INDEMNIFIED HERALLEGED AGAINST, OR ATTRIBUTED TO THE MUSEUM OR ANY PERSON INDEMNIFIED HEREUNDER.

[39] The strongest reason for bringing the action in the Supreme Court related to the plaintiff's alleged injuries, but that must be closely examined in light of her pre-existing condition.

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.

The policy at issue in this case, was crafted in such a way that in order to engage the insurer's duty to defend, it required the communication, during the policy period, by a third party, of an intention to hold the Jesuits responsible for damages.36 In this case, it was accepted by the parties, that if the claims were made within the temporal limits of the Policy, the duty to defend would have been engaged as the claims allege injuries that would fall within the policy.37 In fact the Court found one of the claims was made within the policy period and therefore did trigger the insurer's duty to defend.38 The rest of the claims however were found not to have been communicated during the policy period and, as a result, the insurer did not have a duty to defend the actions.39 The determination of whether a policy will be «claims - made» or «occurrence based» will depend on many factors.

In a pharmaceutical class action case, you are alleging that an FDA - approved medication or medical device made by a well - funded and perhaps well - established company caused you a serious injury.

Defended a market - leading insurer in a Massachusetts direct action in which the injured plaintiffs sought more than $ 40 million in punitive damages against our client (primary insurer on business auto policy) for its alleged failure to promptly settle a catastrophic personal injury claim.

The first step to recouping compensation from a careless truck driver or trucking company is to file a negligence action alleging that the driver or trucking company failed to use due care and that this failure was the direct cause of the injuries sustained.

In the event an alleged drunk driving accident results in injury to a person, a suspected drunk driver can be held liable for the consequences of their actions, regardless of whether criminal charges have been filed.

§ 1983 complaint Actions under § 1983 are personal injury claims and are governed by the personal injury statute of limitations in the state in which the alleged injury occurred.

Section 13 - 215 sets forth the statute of repose in a medical negligence case as being not more than four years after the date on which occurred the act or omission or occurrence alleged in such action to have been the cause of such injury or death.

Section 13 - 212 (a) sets out a two - year statute of limitations for medical - malpractice claims and ends by declaring: «But in no event shall such action be brought more than 4 years after the date on which the act or omission or occurrence alleged in such action to have been the cause of such injury or death.»

Eric has defended clients in actions involving personal injury to and deaths of seamen, longshoremen and harbor workers (slips, falls, back, shoulder and neck injuries, post-traumatic stress disorder claims, and alleged toxic exposures to asbestos).

Representation of a major international insurer in a Massachusetts statutory bad faith action in which the injured plaintiffs sought more than $ 40 million in compensatory and punitive damages against our client (primary insurer on business auto policy) for its alleged failure to promptly settle a catastrophic personal injury claim.

Defended a domestic automobile manufacturer in dozens of actions in Ohio against personal injury and fire damage claims involving allegations of airbag non-deployment, seatbelt failure, brake failure, wheel - off, transmission explosion, car jack collapse, wiring failures, and other alleged design, manufacturing, and warning defects.

Defense of Deseret Medical in Massachusetts federal court product liability action alleging physical injuries and severe emotional distress when portion of intravenous catheter separated and became lodged in plaintiff's body

In medical malpractice actions, a defendant sometimes argues that the plaintiff's pre-existing or underlying conditions were the primary reason why they suffered injuries — rather than the alleged lack of appropriate care.

(3) In a motion or proceeding for an injunction to restrain a person from an act in connection with a labour dispute, the court must be satisfied that reasonable efforts to obtain police assistance, protection and action to prevent or remove any alleged danger of damage to property, injury to persons, obstruction of or interference with lawful entry or exit from the premises in question or breach of the peace have been unsuccessful.

Our attorneys have litigated on behalf of defendants and plaintiffs in a wide variety of entertainment matters, including disputes alleging copyright, trademark, and trade dress infringement; right of publicity violations; idea theft; breaches of licensing and distribution, participation, film financing, and executive employment agreements; trade secret violations; and a variety of fraud, interference, personal injury, and other tort actions.

Defending manufacturer of pharmaceutical product in class action alleging personal injuries and economic losses caused by undisclosed side effects of drug.

The Indiana Tort Claims Act, specifically Title 34 -13-3-6 of the state code, mandates that a tort action for negligence against a government agency or employee is barred unless notice is provided within 270 days of the alleged injury.

Defense of a chemical manufacturer in mass action claims for medical monitoring, property damage and personal injury arising out of alleged environmental contamination in West Virginia.

However, because the WSIA limits employees» right to sue for injuries that are compensated by WSIB benefits, it is possible that employers may be able to defend certain civil actions by employees who allege harassment and chronic mental stress in the workplace on the basis that the employee may not bring a civil action related to those allegations, as the proper venue for compensation related to those claims is the WSIB.

The Applicant and her brother and daughter brought an action in damages against the Respondents, alleging they had failed to assess, monitor and treat her condition properly, resulting in an aggravation of her injury and causing separate injuries that were not a logical and foreseeable consequence of the accident.

The employee had a medical condition affecting her shoulder prior to this event, but she alleges that the executive officer's actions caused a neck injury which was not present before.

He has litigated a broad range of issues, including Federal preemption; electrocution injuries; failure to warn and design defect; the admissibility of economic testimony; price - fixing and essential facilities; groundwater contamination; primary and exclusive administrative jurisdiction; alleged asbestos exposure; the extraterritorial application of Federal and state law, and the certification and decertification of consumer class actions.

The Plaintiff, Mr. Ghanim, brought an action against the Defendant, Mr. Ali, for damages arising from a traumatic brain injury and other injuries he alleged were sustained in the motor vehicle accident.

The plaintiffs brought a civil action in damages against Tahoe, alleging that it was ultimately liable for their injuries.

Apart from the conjectural nature of the asserted injury, the line of causation between [an accused's alleged] actions and such injury [in the abstract, as it relates to a state] is not apparent from [its] complaint.»

It alleges that the motion judge reversed the onus of proof by requiring the appellant to establish that an action would have been appropriate when the allergic symptoms first appeared in 2010 and also that she applied a subjective rather than objective standard to the determination of when a proceeding would be an appropriate means to seek to remedy the injury, loss or damage.