Sentences with phrase «claims against defendants for»

Plaintiffs brought claims against the defendants for copyright infringement.

¶ 11, and instead purport to bring these «claims against defendants for having put fossil fuels into the flow of international commerce.»

Technomed brought a claim against the Defendants for infringement of several rights including (i) the sui generis database right in the Database; (ii) copyright in the Database; and (iii) copyright in the diagrams and explanatory materials.

In Combs v. Bergen, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision, and brought an ICBC claim against the Defendant for damages for pain and suffering, wage loss, diminished earning capacity, and cost of future.

The children claimed against the defendant for bereavement damages under s. 8 of the Fatal Accidents Act.

Less than a week after moving in, the plaintiffs noticed water in the basement and brought a claim against the defendants for failing to disclose the defect.

Not exact matches

Mann â $ «who had twice successfully defeated anti-SLAPP motions filed by the defendants â $ «then filed his own anti-SLAPP motion against Steyn's counterclaim, alleging that it failed to state a claim for abuse of process or malicious prosecution.

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.

My summary of the case is: A trial judge — he wasn't named in the Court of Appeal but his name can easily be discovered — had dismissed plaintiff's claim against the defendant bank and a solicitor for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence.

A civil claim against the defendant can be brought by the estate of the deceased and / or by those who depended upon the deceased for either financial assistance or services.

In order for a civil claim to succeed, with payments made, fault in full or part must be established against the defendant.

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.

The Plaintiff claims as against the Defendant, Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP («Cassels Brock»), for conspiracy, defamation, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty of good faith, breach of confidence, and negligence...

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.

Acting (with Thomas Grant QC) for the defendant in a claim brought by an international car hire company against an English automotive repair company under long - term service contracts, where it is alleged that the repair company dishonestly carried out millions of pounds of unnecessary work.

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.

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.

For better or for worse, our system is set up as an adversarial one where persons claiming damages for harm suffered (called «plaintiffs») assert these claims against the persons who caused the harm (called «defendants»For better or for worse, our system is set up as an adversarial one where persons claiming damages for harm suffered (called «plaintiffs») assert these claims against the persons who caused the harm (called «defendants»for worse, our system is set up as an adversarial one where persons claiming damages for harm suffered (called «plaintiffs») assert these claims against the persons who caused the harm (called «defendants»for harm suffered (called «plaintiffs») assert these claims against the persons who caused the harm (called «defendants»).

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;

Plaintiff claims to have suffered injuries in said accident and seeks to recover a judgment against Defendant for the same.

Small claims court allows you to file a case against a defendant for monetary losses.

For example, if some of the claims against some of the parties will proceed to trial in any event, it may not be in the interest of justice to use the new fact - finding powers to grant summary judgment against a single defendant.

The claimant claimed damages against the defendant on the grounds that but for the brain damage caused in the accident and the resulting personality change, he would not have committed the rapes.

She made various claims against the defendant, including: breach of privacy or intrusion upon seclusion; pecuniary damages for appropriation of personality; and punitive damages.

[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.

«I've been involved as a lawyer for plaintiffs and for defendants in claims against lawyers, particularly in franchising.

[99] I reject the Defendants» argument that by abandoning their defence to the Counterclaim, the Edwards Plaintiffs are thereby disentitled to argue against the Defendants» claim for indemnification for costs based on the terms of the VIA.

The Attorney General, 2017 ONSC 1333, the Court allowed an employee's claim against his employer and two superiors for the «tort of harassment» and awarded significant damages against the defendants as a consequence.

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.

Corbiere Limited v Mean Trading Systems: Acted for defendants in a claim brought against a start - up algorithmic trading hedge fund alleging misuse of confidential information in the software of the claimants.

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.

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).

Motion to be heard 12 (1) If a defendant against whom a proceeding is brought or maintained considers the whole of the proceeding or any claim within the proceeding has been brought in response to their expression or public participation, the defendant may, subject to subsection (2), bring an application for one or more of the following orders: a) To dismiss the proceeding or claim, as the case may be; b) For costs and expenses; c) For punitive or exemplary damages against the plaintifor one or more of the following orders: a) To dismiss the proceeding or claim, as the case may be; b) For costs and expenses; c) For punitive or exemplary damages against the plaintiFor costs and expenses; c) For punitive or exemplary damages against the plaintiFor punitive or exemplary damages against the plaintiff.

HARTFORD, CT --(November 29, 2010)- In a federal § 1983 claim alleging violations of the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, Catherine S. Nietzel recently obtained a defendants» verdict for two Fairfield County policeman accused of excessive force and malicious prosecution.

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.

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.

The fervor with which they pursue their claim (often their life's sole focus, often misconceived, and often containing vexatious and extreme allegations against your client), and their lack of objectivity, significantly increase the costs of litigation for the defendant...» (Layperson vs. Lawyer: Dealing with Unrepresented Litigants http://www.cle.bc.ca/onlinestore/productdetails.aspx?cid=1039) Hmmm... sound familiar?

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.

As stated by Justice Robert Sharpe in the Court of Appeal for Ontario's 2002 decision, Gajraj v. DeBernardo,» [j] urisdiction over claims against extra-provincial defendants should not be bootstrapped by such a secondary and contingent claim against a provincial defendant.»

A lawsuit technically begins when a complaint — a legal document setting out the facts and legal basis for your claim against the defendant — is filed in court.

The plaintiffs were ordered to pay the attorney's fees for the defendant's appellate attorney, who had been hired to defend against the punitive damages claim.

Acted for the liquidator of a large insurance company in a Supreme Court claim in Australia against Executive Directors and Corporate defendants in relation to misleading auditors, the publication of misleading financial accounts and breaches of statutory duties and approximately worth AUD $ 500 million.

It is intended to provide a simple way to resolve claims for fixed amounts of money less than # 100,000 and against no more than two defendants.

[6] The plaintiff claims against the defendant under all heads of damages for his personal injuries, in the total sum of $ 739,664.

[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.

The claimant commenced proceedings in the county court against the defendants, claiming damages for battery.

Three witnesses, who identified the defendant as the gunman, claimed to be in fear for their lives if it became known that they had given evidence against the defendant.

When a defendant is sued, the defendant is required by law to bring any claims that the defendant has against the plaintiff as a mandatory counterclaim if they are related to the case and is permitted to bring any claims the defendant has against the plaintiff for any reason as a permissive counterclaim.

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.