Sentences with phrase «claims court cases»

Unlike most small claims court cases heard throughout the country, there is certainly no meaningful way to appeal what any of these TV judges decree.

Almost 90 % of Small Claims Court cases settle before going to trial.

But what they all share in common is a knowledge of and profound interest in the same legal subject area — pharmaceutical class actions, say, or business process patents, or asset securitization, or child custody proceedings in Oregon, or small - claims court cases in Nova Scotia, or wealth management in New South Wales, or any of the law's thousands upon thousands of sub-specialties.

I want to check up on a second hand car dealer in the UK to see if they've had any small claims court cases against them (and preferably the result of these cases).

Wyoming does have an exception to the general rule for small claims court cases at Wyoming Statutes § 1-21-202 (b), which states:

Some areas of law, like landlord / tenant law, lend themselves to small claims court cases.

Aaron Hall, a Minneapolis attorney, worked on small claims court cases regularly when he first started out as an attorney «working out of [his] basement.»

Note that the following information does not apply to eviction proceedings or small claims court cases.

Small claims court cases are much cheaper than superior court cases for both the plaintiff (the person doing the suing) and the defendant (the person being sued) because the parties are not allowed to have any attorneys represent them and other rules that simplify the lawsuit process, making the whole thing much cheaper, faster, and easier.

While district reform collapsed, and claimed the court case on the never - implemented voucher program as collateral, charter parents will ensure that school choice carries on in this Colorado suburban county.

She believed that if she lost a small claims court case where she was the plaintiff, she would end up in jail.

Is it suitable that counsel should have to seek directions of whether the dislcosure Rule every time they act in a Small Claims Court case?

I'm not so sure that many people will want to contribute to garden variety civil litigation, e.g. funding someone else's child custody litigation or small claims court case.

A Small Claims Court case is started with a Statement of Plaintiff's Claim that outlines the reasons you are suing and what remedy, like payment of a certain amount of money, you are requesting.

Can I file a small claims court case in the state I reside against him (Texas)?

In the decision of an Ontario Small Claims Court case (Leech v. Dietrich, 2012 CanLII 98284), the potential buyers agreed in 2010 to purchase what the judge called «a beautiful country home» for $ 655,000.

The written decision of Judge State is unusually lengthy for a Small Claims Court case.

The SCCJ said the following in his decision of this case: «The written decision of Judge State is unusually lengthy for a Small Claims Court case.

Not exact matches

The «fib» to which Journal was clearly referring was the government's claim, made repeatedly in those same court filings, that it was only interested in cracking the San Bernardino case, not in setting a precedent.

In December, the Yukon appeal court sided with the Ross River Dena Council that existing free - entry staking rules conflicted with the constitutional duty to consult aboriginal groups with outstanding land claims, in this case to an area known as the Kaska.

«Many of these types of claims are designed to simply get a payout from an employer who did not want to get bound up in the expense of a court case».

«This case has already been dismissed with prejudice by the court that heard it, which ruled in Yelp's favor and also found the claims not to be supported by credible evidence,» Vince Sollitto, Yelp's vice president of communications said.

Another difference between a sole proprietor and a C corporation that imposes a bureaucratic burden arises if and when a corporation wishes to bring a case in small claims court.

Farrow also claims that the only reason why the molestation case against Allen didn't go to court, though the prosecutor had «probable cause» to prosecute Allen, was due to «the fragility of the child victim.»

She also claims that Walter's book was inaccurate, and she says she's asking the Supreme Court to hear her case.

And, if a case goes to court, we have complete records of our activities to support our claim.

He said their attempts to move the case from the state court in Los Angeles where Daniels filed her claim to a federal court is because it would increase the chances that the matter will be decided in private arbitration, «thus hiding the truth from the public.»

Contrary to what the plaintiffs in the case were claiming, there was no «flooding» of any sort, according to the solar industry association in response to the court ruling.

She said that while arbitration bars customers from pursuing class - action cases, it doesn't block them from other legal venues like small claims court.

In 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada had created a sophisticated legal test on workplace anti — discrimination claims, but, as the Court acknowledged in Tawney Meiorin's case, this test had proven to be complicated and challenging to use.

Mr. Trump formally joined his legal team's response to Ms. Clifford's suit in a motion, filed Friday, to move the case from state court in Los Angeles, where Ms. Clifford filed her claim, to federal court.

For more than a year, a court - appointed trustee has been unraveling the case in federal bankruptcy court, working to gather assets and figure out claims that can be paid to investors.

He said their attempts to move the case from the state court in Los Angeles where Daniels filed her claim to a federal court is because that would increase the chances the matter be decided in private arbitration, «thus hiding the truth from the public.»

While predatory pricing technically remains illegal, it is extremely difficult to win predatory pricing claims because courts now require proof that the alleged predator would be able to raise prices and recoup its losses.405 Revising predatory pricing doctrine to reflect the economics of platform markets, where firms can sink money for years given unlimited investor backing, would require abandoning the recoupment requirement in cases of below - cost pricing by dominant platforms.

In Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 98 the Supreme Court formalized this premise into a doctrinal test.The case involved cigarette manufacturing, an industry dominated by six firms.99 Liggett, one of the six, introduced a line of generic cigarettes, which it sold for about 30 % less than the price of branded cigarettes.100 Liggett alleged that when it became clear that its generics were diverting business from branded cigarettes, Brown & Williamson, a competing manufacturer, began selling its own generics at a loss.101 Liggett sued, claiming that Brown & Williamson's tactic was designed to pressure Liggett to raise prices on its generics, thus enabling Brown & Williamson to maintain high profits on branded cigarettes.

At issue in the case is whether SLUSA divests state courts of jurisdiction over class actions asserting claims arising under the Securities Act of 1933 (e.g., claims alleging a material misstatement in a registration statement).

The company was hauled into Canadian court because of hyped - up claims, like «bottled water is the most environmentally responsible consumer product in the world» - a classic and transparent case of greenwashing.

A Boca Raton attorney handling the case, Audra Simovitch, now is claiming in court documents that Deschamps is blocking discovery of the true assets in the estate.

Stormy Daniels» suit claiming a «hush» agreement from Donald Trump may help case about election violations, but she still could lose her court fight.

And given that Mr. Hogan has had financial ups and downs, the cost of the hundreds of motions his lawyers made is significant, and the chances the award is significantly reduced based on previous cases he lost making the same claims in federal court, it's hard to completely understand the motivations at play.

Close students of the Supreme Court will tell you that they could see this coming: Compassion in Dying is only the first of many cases based on claims of autonomous individualism that the Court invited with its loose and grandiose Casey language.

Following the review's publication, Bishop Peter Hancock, the Church of England's lead safeguarding bishop, said: «At the heart of this case was a judgment, on the balance of probabilities, as to whether, in the event that her claim for compensation reached trial, a court would have concluded that Carol was abused by Bishop Bell.

In Reynolds v. United States (1878), a case rejecting a claim that it was unconstitutional to prosecute Mormons for polygamy, the Supreme Court accepted Jefferson's «wall of separation» letter as the «authoritative» interpretation of the First Amendment.

In those cases the court deferred to the judgment of the Air Force that the free - exercise claim of a Jewish officer who wore his yarmulke on duty could not be accommodated; it deferred to the judgment of correctional authorities that the free - exercise claim of a Black Muslim to attend Friday afternoon religious services could not be accommodated; it deferred to the judgment of the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service that building a logging road through a national forest was necessary despite the damage to religious practices of Native American tribes in that area; it deferred to the Internal Revenue Service's ruling that Bob Jones University was not entitled to tax exemption because of its religiously motivated rule against interracial dating and marriage on campus; it deferred to the judgment of the secretary of labor that a religious community must pay its members the minimum wage for work they performed in the group's business although the members said they had religious objections to being paid for their work.

Religious litigants claimed victories in all four cases involving religious freedom to reach the Supreme Court this past term.

Rules of court are dictated by what is expedient on the whole and in the long run; but they run the risk of being unjust to the claims of particular cases.

The opinion [Scalia continues] in these cases is the furthest extension in fact — and the furthest extension one can even imagine — of the Court's claimed power to create «liberties» that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention.

The question might seem a befuddling one for a ballot in the heartland, but it stems from a New Jersey legal case in which a Muslim woman went to a family court asking for a restraining order against her spouse claiming he had raped her repeatedly.

Birks, 39, took his case to the High Court, claiming that the decision was unfair.

While the case was decided 5 — 4, the opinions that accompanied the court's decision also signal that seven of the nine justices agree that businesses can make religious liberty claims in court — an important ruling, said Joshua Hawley, senior counsel for The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.