Sentences with phrase «dismissal of plaintiff»

Each of the Rules simply provide a different means that may lead to the dismissal of the plaintiff's action for delay.

Since the plaintiff only alleged the bare conclusion that the property owners were responsible for the management company's contract, the First District affirmed dismissal of plaintiff's breach of contract claims.

Dismissal of plaintiff's motion to confirm an arbitration award was reversed as defendants» motion to dismiss was improperly treated as if it implicated the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction.

If none exist, information to this effect from vessel personnel will be useful in seeking dismissal of plaintiff's claim.

Here, the court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's lawsuit, finding that the plaintiff did not provide sufficient notice of the location of her injury.

Drafted motion for summary judgment on behalf of grocery store that resulted in voluntary dismissal of the plaintiff's claims against the store.

78 In support of its argument that a complete failure to mitigate should lead to a dismissal of a plaintiff's claim, Yellow Pages cites our Court of Appeal's decision in Deputat v Edmonton School District No 7, 2008 ABCA 13 («Deputat «-RRB-.

Drafted motion for summary judgment on behalf of a product manufacturer involving the economic loss doctrine and statute of limitations issues that resulted in voluntary dismissal of the plaintiff's claims against the manufacturer.

Drafted motion for summary judgment on behalf of component part manufacturer in a products liability case that resulted in voluntary dismissal of the plaintiff's claims against the manufacturer.

On final appeal to the state supreme court, the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim was ultimately upheld, although the high court made a concerted effort to reject one of the standards used in the other rulings.

Based upon the plaintiff's improper service using Federal Express, the Appellate Practice Group secured the dismissal of the plaintiff's claim based on the statute of limitations defense.

Here's a blurb on the case from the Legal Ethics Forum, and here's a link to the 3rd Circuit's (non-precedential) opinion, affirming the district court's dismissal of the plaintiffs» constitutional claims.

Drafted motion for summary judgment for manufacturer in asbestos litigation that resulted in voluntary dismissal of the plaintiffs» claims against the manufacturer.

The Court of Appeal declined to set aside the dismissal of the plaintiffs» action by the local Registrar pursuant to Rule 48.14.

Not exact matches

A lawyer for BPI, Erik Connolly of the law firm Winston & Strawn, said the plaintiffs would oppose the dismissal motion.

Apart from the party and its General Secretary, the Plaintiff is also suing Vida Addae, the Deputy Treasurer, Samuel Ofosu Ampofo, Dr Karl Mark - Arhin, Mahdi Gibril, Emmanuel S. Zumakpe, the Director of Administration, and six others for the wrongful dismissal.

Earlier this year, the city's major police unions called for Emery's dismissal over his private law firm's role in a suit against the city on behalf of a former CCRB plaintiff.

All of the plaintiffs claim that teachers are subject to dismissals and employment actions based on seriously flawed evaluation methods.

View key facts and statistics from the Vergara v. California trial, including information about Plaintiffs» witnesses, the long - term impact of ineffective teachers and the harm caused by California's permanent employment, dismissal and «last - in, first - out» layoff laws.

As defendants, the state and its two biggest teachers unions tried to persuade the judge that in four weeks of testimony, the plaintiffs — nine students — did not present enough evidence to prove that the five contested statutes governing teacher dismissal, tenure and layoffs deny students right to an effective education.

Represented by Los Angeles law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, the plaintiffs allege teacher protections such as tenure, seniority rules in layoffs and other teacher dismissal statutes disparately keep ineffective teachers in the classroom in violation of the state constitution's equal protection clause.

Last month, my organization, Students Matter, issued its support of California's AB 934 — a state bill that, though imperfect, honestly attempted to address the grave defaults in the state's teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff laws challenged by the student plaintiffs in Vergara v. California.

During the trial, Plaintiffs have presented evidence of the substantial harms imposed on students by California's permanent employment, dismissal, and seniority - based layoff laws.

Judge Treu ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on every issue, removing five statutes concerning tenure, seniority and teacher dismissal rules from the state's constitution, adding, «The evidence is compelling.

The Court is further advised that, in the event that the Plaintiff loans are repurchased and in the IBR, no trial in this adversary proceeding will be required as to ECMC or DOE, and being further advised that both the Plaintiff and ECMC and DOE have agreed to the dismissal of this adversary proceeding as to ECMC and DOE only so that Plaintiff may proceed with the application process, good cause appearing, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby

a. Following the approval of this Stipulated Judgment by the Bankruptcy Court and the dismissal of this adversarial proceeding against DOE, DOE will provide a copy of this Stipulated Judgment to Plaintiff s loan processor with instruction to adjust Plaintiff's monthly payment to $ 75 / month;

Update Aug. 9: On August 7, 2009 U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell, sitting in the Arizona federal district court, dismissed without prejudice the plaintiffs» Complaint against Petland and Hunte Corporation. The judge did not allow oral argument. (A copy of the judge's dismissal is attached and can be downloaded at the end of this article.)

The plaintiffs are appealing the court's dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

September 5, 2017 - Groups Supporting Juliana v. U.S. Plaintiffs Urge Dismissal of Trump's Mandamus Petition

Any repayment, under the funding agreement is contingent upon the direction and time frame of the Plaintiffs» personal injury litigation, which may be resolved through a myriad of possible outcomes, such as settlement, dismissal, summary judgment, or trial.»

The Plaintiff's original claim was for wrongful dismissal claiming damages equal to 6 months» salary, the term of her probationary contract.

Mr. Justice Willcock noted that, although this was a borderline case and a remedial costs order was appropriate to emphasise «the Court's concern with respect to the conduct of the Plaintiff» outright dismissal of the claim was too harsh a result in the circumstances.

Having been refused the disclosure of a new expert witness, the plaintiff filed a motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice for which that motion was granted.

In the Boehle opinion, the court answered that Rule 219 (e) does not prevent the plaintiff from «attempting» to use the voluntary dismissal statute as a means to avoid the consequences of an adverse order.

In the second half of 2016, many «show cause» status hearings were requested in order that plaintiffs could avoid the automatic dismissal of their actions by the registrar on January 1, 2017.

With the support of fellow BROKE members Dutton filed his mid-December application for a summary judgment to include dismissal of Kinder Morgan's damage claims and an «Order for special costs payable by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.»

David McBean's dismissal rate is «astronomically different from his colleagues and of the total average,» the plaintiffs had argued.

(i) the plaintiffs had not been properly advised of their potential exposure to costs in the event of the dismissal of the class proceeding;

The plaintiff launched an appeal of the decision seeking to overturn the dismissal as against the driver and owner.

In the case before Myers, one of the defendants had succeeded in having the plaintiff's claim against him dismissed and sought payment of his legal costs on the dismissal motion.

Limit on cross-examinations 7 (1) Subject to subsection (2), cross-examinations on any documentary evidence filed by the parties shall not exceed a total of seven hours for all plaintiffs in the proceeding and seven hours for all defendants (2) A judge may extend the time permitted for cross-examination on documentary evidence if it is necessary to do so in the interest of justice Costs on dismissal 8 (1) If a judge dismisses a proceeding under this section, the moving party is entitled to costs on the motion and in the proceeding on a full indemnity basis, unless the judge determines that such an award is not appropriate in the circumstances.

A recent dismissal by the Court of Appeal for Ontario reaffirms that plaintiffs are required to commence their actions for underinsured, uninsured or unidentified coverage in the jurisdiction in which the contract was made, and for tort actions to be made in a jurisdiction with a presumptive connecting factor.

In a high - exposure personal injury case where Plaintiff asserted that one of the nation's largest residential builders was liable for the defective design of an intersection in the City of Los Angeles, WSHB's senior counsel, Katie J. Brinson, and associate, Diana E. Sfrijan, successfully obtained a dismissal on summary judgment, arguing that the builder did not control the intersection and was not responsible for its design.

While the plaintiff eventually consented to a dismissal of the action against Crystal Clean, the cross claim and third party claim continued.

The plaintiff rejected the notice offered on termination and brought an action for wrongful dismissal, seeking a greater notice period as well as the payment of benefits during that period.

Done from the bench without hearing the respondent's submissions, the dismissal strongly affirms the current conflicts of law analysis, which may require a plaintiff to litigate his or her tort claim in one jurisdiction and his or her contractual insurance claims in another.

After a drawn out process the court gets tired of the plaintiff's ignorance of process, grants a defense motion for dismissal, and refuses a plaintiff's petition for reconsideration.

Class counsel Sam Marr and David Fogel of Landy Marr Kats LLP said that the decision «reflects the economic realities of workers in today's economic climate» and «it would be a loss to all workers if a new representative plaintiff is not found resulting in the dismissal of this action.»

An extreme example of the impact of failing to take reasonable steps to attempt to find new employment is the 2006 decision of the British Columbia Superior Court in Cimpan v. Kolumbia Inn Daycare Society.1 Justice Truscott found that the plaintiff had been wrongfully dismissed and, based on the relevant common law factors, held that the plaintiff was entitled to nine months reasonable notice of dismissal.

The plaintiff alleged in the statement of claim that the Bank displayed the same tactics and approach in his dismissal as in earlier dismissal, which had resulted in court awards of punitive damages against the bank.