Sentences with phrase «from plaintiffs and defendants»

In an unusual development, the judge in the Oakland case asked in early March 2018 for a tutorial from plaintiffs and defendants about predominantly science points.

Not exact matches

«To place defendants» argument in a real world context,» she wrote, «they assert that for the payment of approximately $ 100 a year to the Copyright Office (the payment for a Section 111 compulsory license) and without compliance with the strictures of the Communications Act or plaintiffs» consent, that they are entitled to use and profit from the plaintiffs» copyrighted works.»

To quote a legal friend: «defendants with documentation, records and client acknowledgements are the best protection from the plaintiff's bar.»

Thus it was in the celebrated case of Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) in the law of tort, in which water from the defendant's reservoir had flooded the mines of the plaintiff and put them out of use.

It appears from defendant's own statement, that the McIlhenny bottle and carton were used as a guide in the manufacture of his own, and the inference must follow that his intention then was to make it appear to the casual observer that his sauce and that of plaintiff were one and the same, and thus secure the advantage of the extensive advertisement and wide demand for plaintiff's product, which the stipulation shows is sold in every State of the Union and many foreign countries and is handled by a large maj ority of the jobbers in the United States.

The fact that defendant has not only dressed his product in imitation of that of the plaintiff, but has, in addition, likewise used plaintiff's trade - mark, gives added reason why the Court should require that hereafter defendant not only discontinue the use of the name «Tabasco,» but that he adopt a new and distinctive bottle and carton, such as will clearly and unmistakably differentiate his sauce from the «Tabasco Pepper Sauce» manufactured by plaintiff.

A copy of the suit said: «This honourable court will be moved by Gary Nimako Marfo ESQ., counsel for and on behalf of plaintiff / applicants herein praying for an order of interlocutory injunction to restrain defendants / respondents, whether by themselves, agents, servants, workmen, hirelings, privies or any person claiming under or through them or howsoever described, from holding out the second defendant / respondent, [as] the parliamentary candidate - elect for Klottey Korle constituency.»

The Supreme Court upheld the Plaintiffs case and held that the Defendant was disqualified from standing for election for the office of the President under Article 94 (2)(c)(i) of the 1992 Constitution.

An order that the contents of relief (i) above be subject to the prior approval of plaintiff, and for defendants to personally and separately read out same on all media networks mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 15 above and doing so within 14 days from the day of judgment.

A copy of the suit, which is available to ClassFMonline.com said: «This honourable court will be moved by Gary Nimako Marfo ESQ., counsel for and on behalf of plaintiff / applicants herein praying for an order of interlocutory injunction to restrain defendants / respondents, whether by themselves, agents, servants, workmen, hirelings, privies or any person claiming under or through them or howsoever described, from holding out the second defendant / respondent, [as] the parliamentary candidate - elect for Klottey Korle constituency.»

(ii) an order that the content of relief (i) above be subject to the prior approval of plaintiff and for defendants to personally and separately read out same on all media networks mentioned in paragraphs 12 above and doing so within 14 days from the day of judgement

He also sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from interfering with his rights and or privileges as a senator and preventing him from entering «or remaining within the precinct or chamber of the Senate or National Assembly or attempting to forcibly remove him from the chamber or precinct of the National Assembly or in any way impeding or undermining the plaintiff's ability to function as a senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.»

The plaintiffs, however, denied the assertion that the relocation of 2nd and 3rd defendants from the USA to Ghana was for them to look after their son and further denied that their son was physically challenged, for him to be taken care of.

By article 46, the first defendant is endowed with independence in the performance of its functions including the initiation, regulation and conduct of elections in the country... In our opinion and as part of our function to declare what the law is, the above words which are unambiguous insulate the Electoral Commission from any external direction and or control in the performance of the functions conferred on it under article 45... A fair consideration of the functions of the first defendant reveals that the demand which was made on it by the plaintiffs regarding the presence of ineligible and deceased persons and the latter's refusal to acquiesce in the said demands which provoked the action herein relates to its mandate under article 45 (a) «to compile the register of voters and revise it at such periods as may be determined by law».

«It is my belief that the arranged marriage was all part of the grand design by 3rd defendant (Catherine Afeku) to defraud plaintiffs by moving David Thomas from Kumasi to Axim and also milking plaintiffs family».

He is also seeking an order «that the contents of the relief (i) above be subject to the prior approval of plaintiff, and for defendants to personally and separately read out same on all media networks mentioned in paragraph 12 above, and doing so within 14 days from the Day of Judgment.»

He also sought an order of interim injunction restraining the second and third defendants, whether by themselves, servants, agents, privies or howsoever called from forwarding a fresh name or governorship aspirant to the first defendant, when the plaintiff was still alive and had not withdrawn his candidacy for the governorship election of Bayelsa State, pending the determination of the substantive suit.

The Bayelsa State governor wanted an order of interim injunction restraining the first defendant, whether by itself, servant, agents, privies or howsoever called from accepting from the second and third defendants any fresh submission of names of governorship aspirant from Bayelsa State, to change / substitute the name of the plaintiff which had already been submitted to the first defendant after the primary election of January 2011, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

The state education commissioner acknowledges the achievement gap, as does the attorney general and even Gov. Dannel Malloy, who went from plaintiff in the CCJEF lawsuit when he was mayor of Stamford to defendant in the case when he became governor in 2011.

Appeal from judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Mark D. Fox, Magistrate Judge), which held that defendant Board of Education of the Newburgh Enlarged City School District intentionally discriminated against plaintiff Santina Polera in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and awarded damages to plaintiff.

Plaintiffs are environmental protection groups with a common goal to prevent defendant City of Los Angeles (the City) from implementing a program to trap, neuter and release feral cats to the outdoors without conducting an adequate environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq. (CEQA).

So everyone is starting afresh with a new judge, a new complaint from the plaintiff, and new motions to dismiss from the defendants.

«In spite of these efforts, and in light of the hazards that are here and worsening, Plaintiffs are spending, and must continue to spend, millions of dollars to protect their property and residents from the impacts of climate change... Despite receiving the warning that «fossil fuel use should not be encouraged,» Defendants spent decades selling and promoting fossil fuels without disclosing the dangers that continued fossil fuel over-use posed.»

The plaintiffs also employ wild leaps of logic divorced from reality: «By hiding what they knew about, and affirmatively misrepresenting the dangers of unabated fossil fuel use, the Defendants protected fossil fuel demand, and obstructed the changes needed to prevent or at least minimize the impacts of climate change.»

The National Petrochemical Plaintiffs explain that there is no dispute that application of the «two factors» identified by Defendants results in the following: (1) California's HCICO is assigned a CI [carbon intensity] value with less than half of the GHG emissions associated with its production and transport; (2) California's HCICO is the only HCICO to qualify for this favorable treatment; and (3) All HCICOs from outside of California are required to account for all of the GHG emissions associated with their production and transportation.

Evidence revealed from profile searches has been used to prove that a defendant had no remorse after committing a crime, to prove a defendant's motive, as evidence of the crime itself or of an individual's participation in a crime, and to show the extent of plaintiffs» injuries after an accident.

This is a legal blawg of interest to lawyers who occasionally or regularly deal with clients, plaintiffs, defendants, and witnesses from other cultures or who encounter foreign - language evidence requiring foreign - language document translation in the course of litigation.

Defendants are producing Facebook images that depict a healthy, happy, hearty plaintiff quite different from the very same plaintiff claiming pain and suffering ruined their life.

Plaintiffs and defendant all filed motions for summary judgment, and on Feb. 2, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a memorandum ruling in favor of plaintiffs and an order permanently barring Public.Resource.Org from posting any of the plaintiffs» Plaintiffs and defendant all filed motions for summary judgment, and on Feb. 2, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a memorandum ruling in favor of plaintiffs and an order permanently barring Public.Resource.Org from posting any of the plaintiffs» plaintiffs and an order permanently barring Public.Resource.Org from posting any of the plaintiffs» plaintiffs» standards.

In two recent high profile US cases, one jury found for the plaintiff where the two songs had almost nothing in common (Got ta Give it Up and Blurred Lines) whereas in the other case, the jury found for the defendant even though there was significant borrowing from the plaintiff's composition (Taurus and Stairway to Heaven).

They include the notion that the method to stop such lawsuits should be cheap and fast; put the onus on plaintiffs to prove the litigation wasn't improper; balance the financial inequality between plaintiffs and defendants; and deter people from launching them in the first place.

The defendant took off a stencil of the phrase from the computer and showed the plaintiff the stencil.

The plaintiff subsequently refiled the case and the defendant asked to enforce the prior discovery and evidentiary court orders from the initial litigation.

Handling all aspects of the litigation process for plaintiffs and defendants, from pre-litigation advice through to the filing of a complaint, trial and appeal.

Plaintiffs in this case are major food manufacturers (including Kraft, Kellogg's, and General Mills) who purchased egg products from egg supplier defendants.

Trade Secret Litigation: advise and represent plaintiffs across various industries seeking to protect proprietary information from competitors and former employees; represent defendants accused of trade secret misappropriation.

ICBC represented the defendants (Funk and Virk) and were seeking direct production of the plaintiff's records from a third party.

Although indemnity exposure to a nonsettling defendant is certainly a factor to be gauged in the good faith determination calculus, PacifiCare could not recover fees under Health and Safety Code section 1371.25 given that the statutory provision's first sentence prevented plaintiffs from holding PacifiCare vicariously liable for Bright's conduct or for recovering the attorney's fees PacificCare incurred in its defense of plaintiffs» claims.

Plaintiff parents sued social hosts and social companions for negligence, alleging they were responsible for injuries sustained by plaintiffs» son Robert when, after drinking at defendant's home, he jumped from a fence and was rendered a quadriplegic.

After receiving the defendants» productions, the plaintiffs» allegedly discovered that their signatures were forged on a number of leasing documents, and commenced a fresh action claiming damages arising from the alleged fraud.

[23] In my view, the defendant and third party have not shown any meritorious reason for abrogating the plaintiff's litigation privilege related to the information obtained by Dr. Coen from the plaintiff as a result of the referral to Dr. Coen by the plaintiff's solicitor.

A jury found defendant insurance broker liable to plaintiff art gallery owner for damages resulting from an insurance carrier's denial of a dealer fine art policy claim after plaintiff sued insurer and incurred fees in pursuing insurance coverage.

Acknowledging the issues were novel, the motions judge in SC v. NS concluded that the defendant / accused had breached the deemed undertaking of confidentiality when he used for his criminal defence the plaintiff's documentary productions from the civil case without first seeking directions from the court as to whether and how he could do so.

on November 30, 2015 the plaintiff received a termination letter («Termination Letter») from the defendant, offering twelve (12) months» and contributions of benefits for two (2) months; and

The case led to a nine - day trial, at which the defendant hospital denied that the plaintiff suffered from CRPS, and it claimed that if he did it was not a result of their negligence but instead caused by the procedures he later underwent to deal with his arm pain.

A broad range of experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation - from small, closely held companies to Fortune 500 companies - in every kind of case - from commercial real estate disputes to alleged securities fraud to fights among business partners.

Earlier this month, an appellate court in Georgia issued a written opinion in a premises liability lawsuit brought by a number of people who were injured when the rear deck of a home owned by the defendant and rented to several of the plaintiffs disconnected from the home and fell to the ground.

This ruling upheld the award that the jury granted to the plaintiff at trial, and prevented the defendant from avoiding responsibility for the plaintiff's injuries.

[2] The defendant already knows that the plaintiff was abused as a child; that this event caused him emotional pain; that he attempted suicide; that he sought help from the Elizabeth Fry Society; that he missed work prior to the motor vehicle accident; and that he suffers from borderline personality disorder and depression.

Moving the chart control button (just below the chart) from left to right alters the cost of capital differential between the defendant and plaintiff from -30 % to +30 %.