We exolore this issue in a post — «Reasons Why Going to Small
Claims Court on Your Own Is Not the Best Way to Collect on Outstanding Debts»
If you go to a random small
claims court on any given day, you will witness at least a few cases where one person says, «it was a gift!»
In a suit filed in a US Federal
Claims court on July 15, Bitmanagement alleges that the US Navy installed its 3D virtual reality software «BS Contact Geo» onto «hundreds of thousands» of computers without permission from the company and without obtaining the appropriate licenses.
Not exact matches
Google also has a high - stakes courtroom battle
on its docket, following an appeals
court decision last month reviving Oracle's copyright
claim against Google's use of the Java language in Android's operating system.
U.S. Supreme
Court justices expressed support
on Tuesday for Microsoft's bid to fend off class action
claims by Xbox 360 owners who say the video game console gouges discs because of a design defect.
A California Supreme
Court ruling
on Monday will make it easier for workers in the gig economy, like Uber drivers or TaskRabbit gofers, to
claim they are employees as opposed to independent contractors.
The
claim was made in a Delaware
court filing unsealed
on Tuesday.
According to
court documents, Jones
claims to have lost millions
on its investment in the Rachel Roy IP Co., which then consisted of the designer label, RR, and RACHEL Rachel Roy, a lower - priced line, exclusively available at Macy's.
Collector Steven Tananbaum sued in New York state
court on Thursday over the non-delivery of three Koons sculptures,
claiming a «well - oiled machine» that exploits collectors» desire to own the artists» works by using incoming money to pay debts.
The U.S. Supreme
Court on Monday refused to hear a bid by major record labels to revive copyright infringement
claims against video - sharing website Vimeo for hosting content that included songs by famed bands such as the Beatles, the Jackson 5, and the Beach Boys without permission.
The following year, Monaco filed suit against the State of Mississippi in the U.S. Supreme
Court, but the high court refused to hear Monaco's claim on the grounds that the «Court has no jurisdiction of a suit brought by a foreign state against a state of the Union without her consent.&r
Court, but the high
court refused to hear Monaco's claim on the grounds that the «Court has no jurisdiction of a suit brought by a foreign state against a state of the Union without her consent.&r
court refused to hear Monaco's
claim on the grounds that the «
Court has no jurisdiction of a suit brought by a foreign state against a state of the Union without her consent.&r
Court has no jurisdiction of a suit brought by a foreign state against a state of the Union without her consent.»
A U.S. appeals
court ruled
on Tuesday that record companies and music publishers that once formed part of EMI Group could pursue additional copyright infringement
claims in a long - running lawsuit over defunct online music storage firm MP3tunes.
Investors in Puerto Rico's bonds argued in
court Tuesday over which group has a
claim on sales - tax revenue that could be used to recoup their money.
The memo also confirms news reports which said earlier this month that despite the Nunes memo's
claims, the DOJ made the FISA
court aware
on multiple occasions of Steele's background and credibility, and the political motivations behind the dossier's funding.
WASHINGTON, April 24 - Foreign corporations can not be sued in American
courts for human rights abuses committed overseas, the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled
on Tuesday, refusing to revive a lawsuit
claiming Jordan - based Arab Bank Plc helped finance militant attacks in Israel and the Palestinian territories.
China suffered a major defeat Tuesday as an international
court rebuked its
claims on distant waters that contain the world's busiest shipping lanes and declared some of its expansionary tactics illegal.
«Requiring the banks to pay treble damages to every plaintiff who ended up
on the wrong side of an independent Libor ‐ denominated derivative swap would, if appellants» allegations were proved at trial, not only bankrupt 16 of the world's most important financial institutions, but also vastly extend the potential scope of antitrust liability in myriad markets where derivative instruments have proliferated,» the U.S.
Court of Appeals in New York said in the ruling.A U.S. appeals court on Monday revived private antitrust litigation accusing major banks of conspiring to manipulate the Libor benchmark interest rate, in a big setback for their defense against investors» claims of market - rig
Court of Appeals in New York said in the ruling.A U.S. appeals
court on Monday revived private antitrust litigation accusing major banks of conspiring to manipulate the Libor benchmark interest rate, in a big setback for their defense against investors» claims of market - rig
court on Monday revived private antitrust litigation accusing major banks of conspiring to manipulate the Libor benchmark interest rate, in a big setback for their defense against investors»
claims of market - rigging.
Yum, which will spin off its China restaurants
on Oct. 31, said the last quarter started well there — but its stores were hit by protests after an international
court rejected China's
claim to historic rights in the South China Sea.
Intelius focuses
on criminal checks, bankruptcies, small
claims activity, tax liens, address history, and
court judgments.
WASHINGTON, April 24 - The U.S. Supreme
Court on Tuesday ruled that foreign corporations can not be sued in American
courts for human rights abuses overseas, refusing to revive a lawsuit
claiming Jordan - based Arab Bank Plc helped finance militant attacks in Israel and the Palestinian territories.
Dauman and George Abrams, another trustee who was removed last week, filed a complaint in state
court in Canton, Massachusetts,
on Monday challenging changes made to the trust by a lawyer
claiming to represent Redstone.
For sure, Mr. Moore would be
on surer footing here if the Conservative Party of Canada hadn't pleaded guilty to violating election spending limits in 2008 and if the Harper government wasn't the only government in this country's history to have been found in contempt of Parliament and if the RCMP wasn't said to be presently investigating Mr. Harper's former chief of staff and and if two Conservative MPs weren't presently in
court with Elections Canada and if the Prime Minister hadn't left for Peru without facing the House
on the first day that Parliament was in session after the deal between Mr. Wright and Mr. Duffy was revealed and if the Prime Minister hadn't fail to show up in the House
on the following Monday and if Mr. Duffy hadn't remained a Conservative senator for awhile despite having apparently
claimed a housing allowance he shouldn't have.
President Trump's lawyers
claimed in
court on Friday that Stephanie Clifford violated a confidentially agreement at least 20 times, exposing her to damages of at least $ 20 million.
To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, you agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Daily Harvest, and our respective past, present and future employees, officers, directors, contractors, consultants, equityholders, suppliers, vendors, service providers, parent companies, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, representatives, predecessors, successors and assigns (individually and collectively, the «Daily Harvest Parties»), from and against all actual or alleged Daily Harvest Party or third party
claims, damages, awards, judgments, losses, liabilities, obligations, penalties, interest, fees, expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys» fees and expenses) and costs (including, without limitation, court costs, costs of settlement and costs of pursuing indemnification and insurance), of every kind and nature whatsoever, whether known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, matured or unmatured, or suspected or unsuspected, in law or equity, whether in tort, contract or otherwise (collectively, «Claims»), including, but not limited to, damages to property or personal injury, that are caused by, arise out of or are related to (a) your use or misuse of the Sites, Content or Products, (b) any User Content you create, post, share or store on or through the Sites or our pages or feeds on third party social media platforms, (c) any Feedback you provide, (d) your violation of these Terms, (e) your violation of the rights of another, and (f) any third party's use or misuse of the Sites or Products provided t
claims, damages, awards, judgments, losses, liabilities, obligations, penalties, interest, fees, expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys» fees and expenses) and costs (including, without limitation,
court costs, costs of settlement and costs of pursuing indemnification and insurance), of every kind and nature whatsoever, whether known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, matured or unmatured, or suspected or unsuspected, in law or equity, whether in tort, contract or otherwise (collectively, «
Claims»), including, but not limited to, damages to property or personal injury, that are caused by, arise out of or are related to (a) your use or misuse of the Sites, Content or Products, (b) any User Content you create, post, share or store on or through the Sites or our pages or feeds on third party social media platforms, (c) any Feedback you provide, (d) your violation of these Terms, (e) your violation of the rights of another, and (f) any third party's use or misuse of the Sites or Products provided t
Claims»), including, but not limited to, damages to property or personal injury, that are caused by, arise out of or are related to (a) your use or misuse of the Sites, Content or Products, (b) any User Content you create, post, share or store
on or through the Sites or our pages or feeds
on third party social media platforms, (c) any Feedback you provide, (d) your violation of these Terms, (e) your violation of the rights of another, and (f) any third party's use or misuse of the Sites or Products provided to you.
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.
In the event that we are not able to resolve a dispute, we each agree that any and all disputes, controversies, or
claims arising under, arising out of, or relating in any way to this agreement, or the contractual relationship established by this agreement (whether in contract, tort, or under any statute, regulation, ordinance, or any other source of law) shall be resolved
on an individual basis through binding arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association, in accordance with the American Arbitration Association's rules for arbitration of consumer - related disputes (accessible at https://www.adr.org/aaa/faces/rules)(except that you may assert individual
claims in small
claims court, if your
claims qualify).
«The DOL has created a new private right of action,» said Fleckner, who led Goodwin's successful defense of an excessive fee
claim against John Hancock in the 3rd Circuit
Court of Appeals in 2014, and was a signatory to an amicus brief filed with the Supreme
Court on behalf of the Securities Industry Financial Markets Association in Tibble v. Edison.
In a federal
court filing, Waymo, Google's autonomous vehicle unit, said it was scaling back some of its
claims over Uber violating its patents
on LiDAR, a remote - sensing system powering Waymo's driverless car technology.
Under the pleadings standard set forth by the Supreme
Court in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, which if accepted as true, states a «
claim to relief that is plausible
on its face.»
«Without live primary
claims, the
Court also grants summary judgment
on Sulyma's derivative duty to monitor and co-fiduciary liability
claims (
claims V and VI).»
«Because there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Sulyma had actual knowledge of the facts comprising
claims I and III, as well as knowledge of the disclosures he alleges were unlawfully inadequate in
claims II and IV, the
Court grants defendants» motion for summary judgment
on those
claims, finding them time - barred,» Cousins wrote in his opinion.
I officially filed that a
claim for disclosure with High
Court in the UK
on March 16, 2018.
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.
But as with past Supreme
Court ATS decisions, the justices once again failed to shut the door entirely
on human rights activists: the ruling said nothing about the many ATS
claims pending against American corporations.
His lawyers
claimed in
court papers
on Friday that the adult film actress — who allegedly had an affair with him beginning in 2006 — has violated a confidentiality agreement at least 20 times, opening her up to damages of $ 20 million.
On November 26, 2013, the court granted in part and denied in part Parent's motion to dismiss, allowing claims to proceed against Parent and Margaret C. Whitman based on alleged statements and / or omissions made on or after May 23, 201
On November 26, 2013, the
court granted in part and denied in part Parent's motion to dismiss, allowing
claims to proceed against Parent and Margaret C. Whitman based
on alleged statements and / or omissions made on or after May 23, 201
on alleged statements and / or omissions made
on or after May 23, 201
on or after May 23, 2012.
On March 14, 2016 the
Court issued an order, amending and extending the Notice of Objection Bar Date (as set out in the
Claims Procedure Order dated June 11, 2015) to 28 days following April 15, 2016, or such later date as the
Court may Order.
Please be advised that in accordance with the Order Amending the
Claims Procedure Order granted October 30, 2015, if the Monitor intends to revise or reject a
Claim, the Monitor shall notify the Claimant who has delivered such Proof of
Claim or D&O Proof of
Claim, as applicable, that such
Claim has been revised or rejected and the reasons therefor, by sending a Notice of Revision or Disallowance by no later than December 15, 2015, unless otherwise ordered by the
Court on application by the Monitor.
Cunningham and Cunningham, et al. v. Electronic Data Systems Corporation is a purported collective action filed
on May 10, 2006 in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York
claiming that current and former EDS employees allegedly involved in installing and / or maintaining computer software and hardware were misclassified as exempt employees.
On June 11, 2015, the Court issued an order (the «Claims Procedure Order») approving the claims process whereby persons who assert a Claim against the Target Canada Entities must file a Proof of Claim or D&O Proof of Claim with the Monitor on or before 5:00 p.m. (Toronto time) on August 31, 201
On June 11, 2015, the
Court issued an order (the «
Claims Procedure Order») approving the claims process whereby persons who assert a Claim against the Target Canada Entities must file a Proof of Claim or D&O Proof of Claim with the Monitor on or before 5:00 p.m. (Toronto time) on August 31,
Claims Procedure Order») approving the
claims process whereby persons who assert a Claim against the Target Canada Entities must file a Proof of Claim or D&O Proof of Claim with the Monitor on or before 5:00 p.m. (Toronto time) on August 31,
claims process whereby persons who assert a
Claim against the Target Canada Entities must file a Proof of
Claim or D&O Proof of
Claim with the Monitor
on or before 5:00 p.m. (Toronto time) on August 31, 201
on or before 5:00 p.m. (Toronto time)
on August 31, 201
on August 31, 2015.
The
court dismissed all of the plaintiff's
claims that were based
on alleged statements and / or omissions made between August 19, 2011 and May 22, 2012.
«The IRS offers no explanation as to how the IRS can legitimately use most of these millions of records
on hundreds of thousands of users; instead, it
claims that as long as it has submitted a declaration from an IRS agent that the IRS «is conducting an investigation to determine the identity and correct federal income tax liabilities of United States persons who conducted transactions in a virtual currency during 2013 - 2015» the
Court must find that the Summons does not involve an abuse of process.
The
claim was filed in a Dutch
court by Mr. J.W. de Vries
on 2 February 2018 against Koinz Trading BV, a non-public company, which was previously ordered by a lower
court of Midden - Nederland to pay mining proceeds in the amount of 0.591 BTC owed to the petitioner, or a penalty payment up to a $ 10,000 maximum.
The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board can no longer review only some of the patent
claims challenged by petitioners in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Supreme
Court said
on Tuesday in a 5 - 4 decision.
He successfully argued against forum non conveniens dismissal, obtaining the first ruling after the Supreme
Court's decision in Morrison v. Nat» l Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010) to permit foreign investors pursuing foreign law claims to seek recovery for losses on a foreign stock exchange in a U.S. c
Court's decision in Morrison v. Nat» l Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010) to permit foreign investors pursuing foreign law
claims to seek recovery for losses
on a foreign stock exchange in a U.S.
courtcourt.
There, the High
Court held that those who purchase securities
on exchanges outside of U.S. borders can not pursue fraud
claims under U.S. federal securities laws.
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.
The Enrollment Program also authorizes a superior
court to have jurisdiction over enrollees by allowing it to «appoint a receiver, monitor, conservator, or other designated fiduciary or officer of the
court for a defendant or the defendant's assets,» as well as authorizes the Commissioner of Business Oversight to «include in civil actions
claims for ancillary relief, including restitution and disgorgement,
on behalf of a person injured, as well as attorney's fees and costs, and civil penalties of up to $ 25,000» for up to four years after the purported violation occurred and «refer evidence regarding violations of the bill's provisions to the Attorney General, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the United States Department of the Treasury, or the district attorney of the county in which the violation occurred, who would be authorized, with or without this type of a reference, to institute appropriate proceedings.»
Nunes's memo
claims that this surveillance was not properly vetted by the
court; specifically, that it relied
on the now - infamous Steele dossier, the document prepared by former British spy Christopher Steele alleging widespread collusion between Trump and the Russian government.
In October 2014, Pomerantz once again secured crucial victories in this ground - breaking litigation, establishing the right of individual foreign investors who purchased shares
on a non-U.S. exchange to pursue
claims for securities fraud in a U.S.
court, thereby overcoming obstacles created by Morrison.