Sentences with phrase «decided against the plaintiff»

The Supreme Court decided against the plaintiff Maetta Vance, an African - American kitchen worker.

Not exact matches

Several courts, when deciding new adequacy cases, have either dismissed them based on separation of powers grounds or have ruled against the plaintiffs on the merits following a trial.

Because of this the remaining plaintiff John Locke decided to withdraw his case against the two companies.

In May federal judge Laura Taylor Swain, in deciding against the Warhol Foundation's motion to dismiss Simon - Whelan's case, gave the plaintiffs the all - important right of «discovery» so that the authentication board's long - suppressed methods of reaching its decisions can now be brought to light.

A defendant is entitled to expect that a claim of liability brought against it will be decided by the same rules of evidence and substantive law whether the plaintiff is represented by counsel or self - represented.»

Lead trial counsel for plaintiffs in both the preliminary and final injunction hearings of Evans v. Romer, a successful suit challenging the constitutionality of a widely - publicized amendment to Colorado's constitution that would have prohibited any legislation protecting against discrimination based on sexual orientation; case received nationwide press coverage in broadcast and print media, including live coverage on Court TV, and was ultimately decided in plaintiffs» favor in the U. S. Supreme Court.

Instead of analyzing whether California has jurisdiction over the product liability situation, in general, the high court decides that the determination regarding whether California has jurisdiction over a suit against a particular defendant must be made on a plaintiff by plaintiff basis when «specific jurisdiction» rather than «general jurisdiction» is involved.

One explanation for what happened, of course, is that the trial judge realized that finding fault against the no - longer - a-party alleged wrongdoer would decrease the plaintiffs» recovery, maybe significantly enough to make a difference - in a case where the judge had decided that the plaintiff should recover a substantial amount — and this subconsciously affected the trial judge's analysis of principle.

In a case decided in February 2016, Wolinsky v. Assiniboine Credit Union, Stuart Blake and Andrew Loewen convinced the Manitoba Court of Appeal to overturn a decision granting the plaintiffs leave to commence an action against the defendant which was otherwise commenced out of time, on the basis that the lower court committed several errors.

530, that there will be a decree against the plaintiffs, in order that they may avail themselves of the right secured to them by the constitution and laws, of a revision by the supreme court of the United States; where it is highly proper that this question, depending, as I think it does, mainly upon the constitution of the United States, should be ultimately decided.»

With no settlement ultimately finalized, the plaintiff decided to commence court proceedings against the brothers with new counsel.

In Sprunk v. Prisma LLC (August 23, 2017), the Court of Appeal (Second Appellate District, Division One) considered whether a defendant in a putative class action can waive its right to compel arbitration against absent class members by deciding not to seek arbitration against the named plaintiff.

In deciding that the plaintiff was both foreseeable and proximate to the defendants, Handrigan J. cited two other wills cases: Wilhelm v. Hickson and White v. Jones for the general principle that disappointed beneficiaries, even if unknown personally to a party who drafts a will, are sufficiently proximate to the will drafter to be able to succeed in negligence against the will drafter in certain circumstances (Wilhelm was a case about misidentification of the owner of property; White was about undue delay in execution).

If a jurisdiction decided (against my advice offered below) to allocate the retribu - tive damages awards to the plaintiff and her counsel, then the reprehensibility - based guide - lines approach reduces the problem of diminished incentives in the aftermath of Philip Morris.

Despite finding there would be no prejudice to the defendant if he set aside the dismissal, the judge decided against reinstating the plaintiff's claim.

Supply Corp. v. Petrocelli, decided by the New York Court of Appeals on November 19, 2012, the plaintiff claimed against its insurance broker that it requested bodily injury coverage for its employees at its Bronx facility, in the event an injury occurred, that the broker failed to procure.