Sentences with phrase «defendant acted»

Requires a plaintiff to show by «clear and convincing» evidence that a defendant acted with «reckless indifference» or was engaged in «outrageous» conduct.

July 1, 2015), Illinois Magistrate Judge Mary M. Rowland denied the plaintiff's request for spoliation sanctions for the defendant's admitted destruction of computer files belonging to two departed employees, finding that the plaintiff did not provide any evidence that the defendant acted in bad faith...

Requires a plaintiff to show that the defendant acted «willfully and wantonly.»

Requires a plaintiff to show by «clear and convincing» evidence that a defendant acted with «wanton» conduct for the recovery of punitive damages.

In Mainstream Properties v Young the Court of Appeal followed Douglas and held that the necessary intention had not been established because the judge had held the defendant acted in good faith — he had made an honest mistake.

In such a case, although the test of reasonableness is objective, the justices must consider any explanation offered by the defendant, for example, why veterinary attention was not sought, when considering whether the defendant acted reasonably or unreasonably (see R (on the application of RSPCA) v C [2006] EWHC 1069 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 299 (Mar)-RRB-.

Requires a plaintiff to show that a defendant acted with «deliberate disregard» for the award of punitive damages.

Requires a plaintiff to prove by clear and convincing evidence that a defendant acted with intentional misconduct or gross negligence for the award of punitive damages.

However, in some jurisdictions, a judge can declare a truth defamatory if the defendant acted with actual malice.

In order to recover, the victim must prove that the defendant acted negligently or recklessly and that the victim suffered an injury as a result of the defendant's actions.

A judge or jury will typically award punitive damages if the defendant acted with fraud, malice, or willful or wanton misconduct.

Negligence lawyers can help you understand the case and prove that the defendant acted negligently.

In such cases, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant acted in a negligent or careless manner in connection with an accident or injury that caused harm.

Winning a third - party injury lawsuit requires a plaintiff to prove that the defendant acted negligently.

In order for damages to be awarded, the family of the victim will have to prove that the defendant acted negligently or intentionally, and that these actions were the direct cause of death for the deceased.

That defence provides that, even if the statements made or comments published defame the Plaintiff, if the matter communicated about is of public interest and the defendant acted responsibly with proper diligence, defamatory statements will not attract liability.

To demonstrate to the judge or jury that a defendant acted negligently, each of the following four elements must be proven:

The plaintiff's attorney argued the defendant acted negligently by improperly securing the plastic runner at the top of the stairwell where the plaintiff fell.

Circumstantial evidence, if based on reasonable inferences, will likely be sufficient to effectively demonstrate that the defendant acted negligently and thus, allow successful recovery of damages in a civil action.

Specifically, in Rafferty v. Merck & Co., Inc., [4] the SJC held that plaintiffs who ingest the generic form of a drug may bring failure to warn claims against the brand - name manufacturer of the drug if the brand - name defendant acted recklessly by «intentionally fail [ing] to update the label on its drug while knowing or having reason to know of an unreasonable risk of death or grave bodily injury associated with its use.»

In some instances, a jury may award punitive damages if they believe the defendant acted in a particularly reckless or malicious manner.

This page contains general information about proving that a defendant acted negligently and may not apply to you.

It's left up to the injured party to prove the defendant acted in an irresponsible and reckless manner.

In addition, no caps exist for punitive damages or non-economic damages when the defendant acted with intent to inflict serious injury; falsified or destroyed material evidence; or was intoxicated and / or impaired at the time of wrongdoing.

Plaintiffs must show a defendant acted maliciously, intentionally, fraudulently or recklessly to be awarded punitive damages.

That is, defendant acted in a way that fell below the standard of reasonable conduct.

In a lawsuit alleging negligence by another person, plaintiffs typically must prove that the defendant acted in a way that violated a duty owed to the plaintiff.

In civil medical negligence cases, the jury must determine whether the defendant acted as a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances would act.

The court took into account factors such as the degree of specificity of the request and the importance of the documents to the litigation, weighed each country's privacy interest in the sought - after documents, each defendant's hardship in complying with plaintiffs» requests and whether the defendant acted in good faith.

The defendant acted with premeditation if (he / she) decided to kill before committing the act that caused death.

The substantial success of the plaintiff is clearly demonstrated by the large amount of damages awarded, the finding by the jury that the defendant acted maliciously and the total injunctive relief being granted.»

The defendant acted or failed to act in such a manner as to constitute negligence, wrongdoing or any type of substandard care;

In most Connecticut personal injury claims, the plaintiff is required to present direct evidence that the defendant acted negligently by doi...

In order to be found guilty, however, the state must demonstrate that the defendant acted with the required mental state, such as intent, recklessness, or negligence.

Existing Wisconsin law allows a plaintiff to recover punitive damages if it is shown that the defendant acted maliciously, with intentional disregard for the plaintiff's rights.

Massachusetts law allows plaintiffs to offer any indication of a traffic law or regulation violation as evidence, indicating that the defendant acted negligently at the time of the crash.

In other words, you must show that you would not have been injured had the defendant acted appropriately.

Other doctors will need to testify to prove that the defendant acted in an unreasonable manner.

If the defendant acted recklessly (drinking and driving) or intentionally, you may be entitled to an award for Punitive Damages.

Cases involving product liability revolve around the concept of strict liability, which means that the plaintiff does not have to prove that the defendant acted negligently.

Extortion can include the threat of a legal act, as long as the prosecutor can show that the defendant acted maliciously.

However, you may be entitled to an award of punitive damages if the defendant acted with malice, fraud, or oppression.

Success in many claims based on negligence depends on whether or not the defendant acted reasonably.

From there, your attorney can build a case that demonstrates that the defendant acted negligently by failing to warn of the risks of asbestos, failing to take precautions to protect you (and others from asbestos exposure), or for even using / manufacturing asbestos - containing products in the first place.

Ordinarily, it is the jury's task to decide the ultimate issue of whether the defendant acted negligently.

In a case in which the jury had to determine if a defendant acted «prudently» when he fatally shot a neighbor, the jury foreman used his phone to look up that word and shared the definition with other jurors.

This testimony would beg the question, asking the Court to assume that Defendant acted reasonably.

Of course, the United States» position is that Defendant acted unreasonably — indeed, criminally — by attempting to poison cats.»

A declaration that the conduct of the 1st Defendant acting through its Chief Executive Officer and Acting Editor of the Crusading Guide newspaper, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in releasing the contents of the petition, through publications in the Crusading Guide newspaper, his personal facebook page, public screening of the audio — visual recordings in support of the petition at the Accra International Conference Centre on the 22nd September, 2015, containing the evidence in support of the petition, is in violation of Article 146 (8) of the 1992 Constitution and therefore unconstitutional...»

The prosecution said the defendants acted contrary to sections 18 (a) and15 (2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 and are liable to punishment under Section 15 (3) of the same Act.