Sentences with phrase «further court action against»

I was on the verge of launching an appeal when Trans Mountain unilaterally issued a notice of discontinuance that protected the company from further court action against the civil suit.

They will no longer be able to take further court action against you, nor will you be bombarded with threatening letters or phone calls from those to whom you owe money.

Not exact matches

Sheriff who accused Makarfi of using the victory at the Supreme Court as a licence to victimize party members, however appealed to members and supporters of his deposed leadership faction to remain calm and refrain from further legal action of any sort against the party.

(a) Whenever the Attorney General receives a complaint in writing signed by an individual to the effect that he is being deprived of or threatened with the loss of his right to the equal protection of the laws, on account of his race, color, religion, or national origin, by being denied equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof, other than a public school or public college as defined in section 401 of title IV hereof, and the Attorney General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution of an action will materially further the orderly progress of desegregation in public facilities, the Attorney General is authorized to institute for or in the name of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district court of the United States against such parties and for such relief as may be appropriate, and such court shall have and shall exercise jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section.

(2) signed by an individual, or his parent, to the effect that he has been denied admission to or not permitted to continue in attendance at a public college by reason of race, color, religion, or national origin, and the Attorney General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution of an action will materially further the orderly achievement of desegregation in public education, the Attorney General is authorized, after giving notice of such complaint to the appropriate school board or college authority and after certifying that he is satisfied that such board or authority has had a reasonable time to adjust the conditions alleged in such complaint, to institute for or in the name of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district court of the United States against such parties and for such relief as may be appropriate, and such court shall have and shall exercise jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section, provided that nothing herein shall empower any official or court of the United States to issue any order seeking to achieve a racial balance in any school by requiring the transportation of pupils or students from one school to another or one school district to another in order to achieve such racial balance, or otherwise enlarge the existing power of the court to insure compliance with constitutional standards.

The court provides legal protection against further action by creditors.

None of the creditors listed on the AO application can take further action against you without the court's permission.

In Court Over Clothianidin Taking it one step further, German organization Coalition Against Bayer Dangers has brought legal action against the chairman of Bayer AG's Board of Management, Werner Wenning, accusing Bayer CropScience of «marketing dangerous pesticides and thereby accepting the mass death of bees all over the world.Against Bayer Dangers has brought legal action against the chairman of Bayer AG's Board of Management, Werner Wenning, accusing Bayer CropScience of «marketing dangerous pesticides and thereby accepting the mass death of bees all over the world.against the chairman of Bayer AG's Board of Management, Werner Wenning, accusing Bayer CropScience of «marketing dangerous pesticides and thereby accepting the mass death of bees all over the world.»

The Kentucky Supreme Court recently handed down a far - reaching decision that allows employees in Kentucky the option to certify class - action lawsuits against employers over unpaid wages and overtime disputes.

penalizes the defendant for engaging in public participation «plaintiff» means a person who initiates or maintains a proceeding against a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pagainst a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pAgainst Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper pagainst whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper purpose.

She is now precluded from instituting any new action of any nature or court proceeding of any nature in any court in Ontario, including small claims court, and she is precluded from bringing any further or fresh step in any existing action without the consent of a Superior Court judge, which consent will only be granted after the plaintiff makes an application for it, and provides proof that she has paid $ 40,000 of the more than $ 50,000 in cost orders that have been made against her to court proceeding of any nature in any court in Ontario, including small claims court, and she is precluded from bringing any further or fresh step in any existing action without the consent of a Superior Court judge, which consent will only be granted after the plaintiff makes an application for it, and provides proof that she has paid $ 40,000 of the more than $ 50,000 in cost orders that have been made against her to court in Ontario, including small claims court, and she is precluded from bringing any further or fresh step in any existing action without the consent of a Superior Court judge, which consent will only be granted after the plaintiff makes an application for it, and provides proof that she has paid $ 40,000 of the more than $ 50,000 in cost orders that have been made against her to court, and she is precluded from bringing any further or fresh step in any existing action without the consent of a Superior Court judge, which consent will only be granted after the plaintiff makes an application for it, and provides proof that she has paid $ 40,000 of the more than $ 50,000 in cost orders that have been made against her to Court judge, which consent will only be granted after the plaintiff makes an application for it, and provides proof that she has paid $ 40,000 of the more than $ 50,000 in cost orders that have been made against her to date.

... How far Rule 23 (b)(2) can be stretched is the issue in the gigantic class action against Wal - Mart, Dukes v. Wal - Mart Stores, Inc.... now before the Supreme Court.

Other drivers take the course because they were ordered by the court to do so to avoid points and / or to prevent further action against their license.

Once the summons and petition or praecipe is served, or once the respondent files her appearance, a dissolution action stay is in effect against both parties and their agents until a judgment is entered, the case is dismissed, or further order of court.

One has to wonder what information Dale is privy to that leads him to expect... «to see further action against organized real estate pursued by the commissioner» that would not pass the smell test in court.

In fact in past postings that I made on this forum, I strongly disagreed with TREB's out of court settlement it made with RealtySellers and more recently I suggested that TREB should commence a multi-billion dollar law suit against the same people that are now bombarding them with a series of further unjustified multi-million dollar legal actions.