Sentences with phrase «claims against a defendant from»

Not exact matches

The defendants, claims Fagan's suit, «conspired with slave traders, with each other and other entities and institutions... to commit and / or knowingly facilitate crimes against humanity, and to further illicitly profit from slave labor.»

One of my favorites in this area, which I still remember doing a double - take over when I saw it for the first time when I was practicing law, is the release form that releases all claims against a potential defendant «from the beginning of time» until the date of the agreement.

Nevertheless, the arguments are frequently crunched through, probably because of an important Illinois Supreme Court ruling from 1990 which is still good law, Rollins v. Ellwood, involving claims brought against a Baltimore police officer, among others, sounding in intentional tort for his role in the apprehension of a misidentified criminal defendant and Illinois resident in Illinois, for which the Court found the officer was not subject to Illinois jurisdiction.

We advise business clients and insurers on pollution and other environmental claims, and have extensive experience litigating claims under federal and state statutes in clean - up cases, either defending against liability and allocation among defendants, or seeking reimbursement for recovery costs from responsible parties.

Here, your injury lawyer would collect $ 20,000 from the defendant's insurance company, and then your lawyer could set up a claim against your own insurance company and collect the full $ 100,000 on the claim.

While the rationale has been described in some quarters as «equitable subrogation,» analogous to an excess insurer's claim against a primary insurer for improvident failure to settle, that principle historically emerged from cases involving underinsured defendants and not the other way around.

Her voluntary retirement worked to the benefit of the defendant in that any potential ongoing wage loss from these flare - ups would not be claimed against him.

Foley Hoag partner Michael Keating led a team that won a defendants» verdict from a Boston jury, which found that law firm Ropes & Gray LLP did not retaliate against former associate John Ray III for claiming he was a victim of racial discrimination.

The legislation creates a new type of motion where the person being sued (the defendant) can have the claim against them dismissed, as long as the lawsuit arose from «an expression made by the person that relates to a matter of public interest.»

2008)-- Denial of manufacturer defendant's motion for summary judgment in cases arising from explosion at facility in Groton, Connecticut on grounds that there existed genuine issues of fact as to product liability and recklessness counts of case against manufacturer based on its claimed failure to account for and disclose relevant safety and storage information of risks involved in the transport and storage of chemical reagent at ambient temperatures.

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.

If, instead of bringing counterclaims in the original lawsuit, the defendant brings a separate lawsuit against the plaintiff, the plaintiff could seek to either (1) consolidate the cases if they are filed in the same court system (i.e. a federal case and a federal case, or a New York State case and a New York State case), or (2) move to dismiss the new lawsuit because the claims were required to be brought in the original lawsuit as mandatory counterclaims, or (3) move to stay proceedings in the second lawsuit pending resolution of the first lawsuit, or (4) move to dismiss the claims in the second lawsuit on the merits if it is apparent from the face of the countersuit that it does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted or was filed in the wrong court.

Carriage of goods by air — Carrier claiming air freight from defendant — Defendant seeking to set off counterclaim for breach of contract of carriage — Whether common - law rule precluding set - off against freight extended to carriagdefendant — Defendant seeking to set off counterclaim for breach of contract of carriage — Whether common - law rule precluding set - off against freight extended to carriagDefendant seeking to set off counterclaim for breach of contract of carriage — Whether common - law rule precluding set - off against freight extended to carriage by air.

The judge had been entitled to make orders debarring a defendant from defending the claims brought against him unless he surrendered himself and made proper disclosure of his assets.

In a lawsuit, any pre-existing injuries or prior injury claims from the victim's past may be used against them by the defendant.

The plaintiff also alleges that before abandoning the lease, Dynasty transferred funds and assets to various corporations and individuals and claims a declaration that Dynasty's alleged transfer of monies, assets, business and opportunities from itself to the co-defendants Polar Spas Ontario Inc. and 732311 Alberta Ltd., and its transfer of monies or assets to the defendant Williams and to the co-defendants Marsall Brent and Ken Nikel are void as against Dynasty's creditors as fraudulent conveyances.

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.

The IIGA argued before the appellate court that the defendant driver wasn't uninsured, and therefore the plaintiff had no actionable claim against Affirmative (and therefore no claim against IIGA) from which he could recover damages.

120 (1) If a defendant makes a payment to a plaintiff who is or alleges to be entitled to recover from the defendant, the payment constitutes, to the extent of the payment, a release by the plaintiff or the plaintiff's personal representative of any claim that the plaintiff or the plaintiff's personal representative or any person claiming through or under the plaintiff or by virtue of Part V of the Family Law Act may have against the defendant.

The Court of Appeal determined that the effect of the order under appeal was to «permanently foreclose» the Appellant from obtaining a determination of its claims against the personal defendants on their merits — a result that amounted to an injustice.

This should help to preserve evidence, as well as immediately get a jump start on a claim against a defendant likely to ultimately face numerous claims for injuries and wrongful death stemming from the same incident.

In a recent Texas auto accident decision, a woman appealed from a take nothing judgment after a jury trial in her personal injury lawsuit against a defendant, claiming injuries when the defendant's vehicle hit hers from behind.

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...»

Plaintiff «brownfield developer» who alleges claims arising from a business deal to bid for, buy and redevelop a brownfield site from WMATA, may only pursue fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims against a single defendant who allegedly failed to...

A plaintiff is a person who has suffered some type of loss and is seeking compensation from the responsible party, who is referred to as the defendant, by filing a claim against them in court.

In light of the nature of asbestos litigation, which often involves a limited number of plaintiffs» law firms repeatedly asserting the same or similar claims against defendants, clients facing extensive asbestos litigation are positioned to benefit from Thompson Hine's SmartPaTH ®, a service delivery approach that leverages legal project management, process efficiency, flexible staffing and value - based pricing to better align our services with clients» needs.

Kathy has also defended an international dialysis services provider against RICO claims in federal court based on allegedly fraudulent billing activity, represented a pharmaceutical services provider in a billing dispute with a chain of nursing homes, defended home health agencies in suits brought by employees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, and represented other providers and associations of providers as plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of matters in federal and state court involving issues ranging from contract interpretation to cash receipts assessments to the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

A statement from the TSX in the court file says: «The TSX defendants intend to bring motions to strike the statements of claim as they disclose no reasonable cause of action against them.»

Gardner's personal injury claim arose from an automobile accident and was filed against his employer, Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRC), and eight other defendants, six of whom were not related to UPRC.

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

Healey J. dismissed Ms. Brown's appeal from an order of the Small Claims Court granting judgment in favour of Peel Mutual on its Defendant's Claim against her in the amount of $ 14,833.77.

The respondent was the plaintiff in the underlying action who subsequently entered into two agreements with the defendant, H&M Combustion Services Ltd. («H&M») in 2011 and 2016, to indemnify H&M from any exposure in the litigation in exchange for the assignment of its rights to the plaintiff in pursuing a third party claim that H&M commenced against the appellant.

Schuckman Realty v. Marine Midland Bank (244 A.D. 2d 400)- broker not entitled to recover a commission from defendant under contract theory where broker entered into brokerage agreements with parties other than the defendant; broker's claim against defendant in quantum meruit fails due to the existence of a valid and enforceable agreement governing the particular subject matter (i.e., commission agreement between broker and other parties).