Sentences with phrase «corporate defendants»

The analysis focuses on the case of a hypothetical corporate defendant in a typical commercial dispute.

Some of their earliest experiences focused on cases involving allegations of federal antitrust violations on behalf of corporate defendants.

Our lawyers practice on both sides of the «v,» giving them deep insights into how to successfully prosecute cases against corporate defendants.

The answer to corporations may just be tough, but it's definitely a big concern for corporate defendants.

Several of the most closely watched tort reform measures would make it more costly for plaintiffs to bring cases against large corporate defendants.

And much of this money is flowing from corporate defendants.

We have taken on the powerful corporate defendants and won.

Some additional rules apply to corporate defendants who conduct business anywhere in the jurisdiction and for cases where there are multiple defendants.

The offer from the big corporate defendant was $ 10,000.

A mass tort is a civil action involving numerous plaintiffs against one or a few corporate defendants.

For example, we recently represented a major defense contractor in a civil suit brought by a foreign sovereign against numerous corporate defendants.

At the same time, the stakes for corporate defendants have grown to «bet the company» magnitude in many instances.

When these actions are brought against a large corporate defendant, punitive damages are often substantial, in order to make a noticeable impact on the defendant's financial situation.

We've secured $ 850 million dollars from corporate defendants and insurance companies for our clients in cases like yours.

Plaintiff has not demonstrated that no genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether [individual defendant] was an officer or director of [corporate defendant at the time of default judgment].»

Additionally, we are experienced in representing corporate defendants in nuisance and trespass suits brought by water purveyors alleging that our client's activities resulted in groundwater contamination.

It is also undisputed that a default judgment exists against [corporate defendant].

In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that patent owners can sue corporate defendants only in districts where the defendant is incorporated or has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.

For instance, many corporate defendants in pending Eastern District of Texas patent cases do not meet either «TC Heartland» criteria, making it an improper venue for such defendants.

Alito said in his partial concurrence he would go beyond Kennedy's opinion and hold that the ban on corporate defendants under the law is mandated by separation of powers.

Since it did not distinguish between them, Macintosh J. stayed the claim against the other corporate defendants to avoid multiple proceedings or inconsistent decisions.

Corruption is «at the top end of serious corporate offending» and for a recalcitrant corporate defendant fines are likely to be measured in tens of millions.

In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, the court ruled that patent owners can sue corporate defendants only in districts where the defendant is incorporated or has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.

Trademark Engine declined to comment, and the other three corporate defendants did not respond to requests for comment.

The reason that they nonetheless face a collective action problem in the context of small, traditional tort suits featuring individual fact patterns (slip - and - fall cases are good examples) is that they are being sued by many different trial lawyers (each of whom may only have one case pending against a particular defendant at one time) who are themselves each suing many different corporate defendants.

Nor are we aware of informal negotiation and co-operation to afford corporate defendants relief in the face of enforcement actions in multiple jurisdictions.

In a part of his opinion joined by the five justices, Kennedy said it is generally up to Congress to decide whether corporate defendants are subject to suit.

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.

[17] The plaintiff alleges that the 10 corporate defendants named in the statement of claim are common employers by virtue of the fact that the operating and holding companies are intermingled from the perspective of finances, human resources, accounting records, and that the accounting records list all of the companies as «Tony Graham Automotive Group».

Prior to the scheduled May trial date, two of the major corporate defendants — Regal and Cinemark — essentially surrendered, and agreed to equip all of their King County theaters to show closed - captioned movies.

DPAs are, by virtue of being filed with a court, publicly available and therefore subject corporate defendants to adverse public relations and scrutiny.

Whether your accident involved a car crash, medical malpractice or an injury at work, our lawyers have the experience and commitment necessary to even the playing field with the insurance companies or corporate defendants contesting your claim.

In the late twentieth and early twenty - first centuries, however, courts have struggled to find a consistent approach to adjudicating claims brought against multinational corporate defendants.

Chris Paliare, Megan Shortreed and Jean Claude Killey acted for the successful corporate defendant in a complex trial that dealt with the appropriate remedy for breach of fiduciary duty and oppression by its principal shareholder.

«Yet some lower courts have continually sought to invent new ways around this body of precedent intended to keep plaintiffs» lawyers from dragging corporate defendants across the country and forcing them to defend themselves in what ATRA calls «Judicial Hellholes.

The court denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment that individual defendant was liable for the default judgment awarded plaintiff against corporate defendant because plaintiff failed to pierce the corporate veil.

With liability against the individual and corporate defendants established, the Court turned its attention to plaintiff's damages.

Many of those patents ultimately ended up in the hands of patent - licensing firms, which used them to file thousands of infringement suits, typically against well - heeled corporate defendants.

The court first rejected plaintiffs argument that the Mexican corporate defendant had been «doing business» in New York sufficient to justify general personal jurisdiction over it, noting that «mere sales of a manufacturer's product, through a wholesale distributor in New York, do not make a foreign corporation amenable to suit in this jurisdiction as to claims which do not arise directly from the sale of the product.»

I agree with John that many nuisance suits feature repeat - player corporate defendants who are pursuing maximizing strategies over their entire case portfolios.

The New York Times reported that the Court's decision has been hailed as «a major victory in the long - running effort to shield corporate defendants from unconstrained jury awards.»

Both contain a warning that the SFO should be more vigilant about the risk of being seduced into an alliance with corporate defendants whereby public life is distorted to suit corporate interests.

In relation to a prospective corporate defendant, a company may be held criminally responsible for the criminal acts of an officer, manager and / or agent and that person's criminal state of mind — be it knowledge, belief or recklessness — where the relevant human being is a «directing mind and will of the company».

The Federal Circuit rejected the move to transfer venue, but later the Supreme Court agreed and the meaning of certain provisions, namely 28 U.S.C. § 1400 (b): «a domestic corporate defendant may only be sued in its state of incorporation or in a state in which it has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.»

Corruption is «at the top end of serious corporate offending» and for a recalcitrant corporate defendant fines are likely to be measured in tens of millions.

«Our Judicial Hellholes program has documented the steady growth of «litigation tourism,»» began ATRA president Tiger Joyce, «typically comprising out - of - state personal injury lawyers filing their clients» lawsuits against out - of - state corporate defendants in notoriously plaintiff - favoring jurisdictions that have little or no connection to the facts of a given case.

«In states without safeguards, attorneys general or other state officials have granted potentially lucrative contingency - fee contacts to their friends or political patrons among the personal injury bar and effectively deputized them with the power of the state to sue presumably deep - pocketed corporate defendants.

The case focuses on the test for jurisdiction of a Canadian court to enforce a foreign judgment when the only connection to the province is the presence of a wholly - owned subsidiary of the foreign parent corporate defendant.