Sentences with phrase «got plaintiff and defendant»

Not exact matches

If both sides, through their eyes and their people's eyes, have concluded that the plaintiff is absolutely going to win this case, and the plaintiff is going to get a lot of money because they're totally on board with everything that has been presented, then that might be a good reason for the defendant to agree to a settlement with the plaintiff for less money than the potential exposure if the jury comes back and finds willful infringement.

As I also testified, one of my goals (and I believe this to also be a goal of the plaintiffs» writ large) is to (a) get the state of New Mexico to release the data to an external evaluator to evaluate the models» functionality (this person certainly does not have to be me) or (2) release the data to the «expert witnesses» on both the plaintiffs» side (i.e., me) and the defendants» side (i.e., Thomas Kane of Harvard), so that we can both examine these data independently, and then come back to the court with our findings and overall assessments regarding the model's overall strengths and weakness, as per the actual data.

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).

Paragraph 5.2 presents the defendant's defences that i) the proceedings constitute an undesirable breach of the political negotiation process on Brexit and ii) the plaintiffs have set up a notional dispute exclusively intended to get the case put forward to the ECJ.

1 Feb. 19, 2016)(unpublished), parties got into a hotel management imbroglio where plaintiff sued defendants, and one defendant brought a cross-complaint in a back - and - forth matter, even in two prior appellate decisions, resulting «kinda» in a mixed decision.

The Parrot on the other side will argue to The Wise One that the plaintiff didn't get everything right, and the defendant will win.

Plaintiff gets what their case is worth and Defendant feels like their lawyer saved them from catastrophe.

The court ruled that the plaintiff waited too long to get a lien, but they claimed that the defendant was very demanding and it required more work than anticipated.

The Plaintiff must prevail and get in excess of 60k or the Plaintiff will not only lose the ability to be compensated for costs, but will have to pay the Defendant's costs from the date of the offer forward.

Come to think of it, maybe there should be a law that says the plaintiff gets to choose the size of law firm both the plaintiff and the defendant must retain, and that both firms must be the same size within a range.

There is a big difference between representing the plaintiffs in product liability cases in Missouri to representing the defendants, or in other words, the big manufacturers and distributors and companies that got you into this position of having to make a claim.

The defendant, however, takes the stand and argues that even though the written contract says «September 20,» the plaintiff told him at the signing, «you know, if you can't get that money together until the 30th, I totally understand.»

Taking over a Clayton Act Anti-Trust case from a large law firm who recommended my client pay $ 200,000 in damages evolving from «Unfair Competition», and getting a directed verdict after the Plaintiff failed to make his case, and then collecting $ 80,000 from the Plaintiff in settlement of the Defendant's Counter Claim.

The plaintiff claimed that the defendant negligently injured her bowel during the initial surgery, did not detect the injury, and failed to get the proper surgical consultation.

The trial then gets underway with opening statements by attorneys for the plaintiffs (Ted Olson & Therese Stewart) challenging Proposition 8 on federal constitutional grounds and by the attorney for the official proponents of Proposition 8 (Charles Cooper), who intervened to defend its contitutionality (as Defendant - Intervenors).

Applying New Mexico law, the Court determined that this case was not an «exceptional circumstance» where medical causation is within common experience or the knowledge of the average person, and they granted the defendants» motion, preventing the plaintiff from getting her case to a jury.

By entering the name of the plaintiff and the plaintiff's law firm, users immediately get an overview of the plaintiff's litigation history including recently filed cases against other, similar defendants; where the plaintiff typically files suit; how much experience its law firm has; and the kinds of clients they typically represent.

And the defendant would receive its costs and attorneys fees from the date of the offer, if it had offered $ 42,000, but the plaintiff got only $ 40,0And the defendant would receive its costs and attorneys fees from the date of the offer, if it had offered $ 42,000, but the plaintiff got only $ 40,0and attorneys fees from the date of the offer, if it had offered $ 42,000, but the plaintiff got only $ 40,000.

If a defendant has pleaded that a clam is statute barred and the plaintiff intends to try to get around the limitation period by relying on discoverability, the plaintiff needs to plead the facts that support the discoverability argument in a Reply or otherwise (Collins v. Cortez, 2014 ONCA 685).

Here are some highlights on the predictions offered by the panelists: 1) class actions are not going away; 2) the continued growth of mass commerce will continue to spawn class action litigation; 3) Justice Scalia's death will have a significant impact on class action jurisprudence going forward and the judiciary is likely to get less friendly to defendants in the short - term; 4) technology will make a big difference for the better in managing class action litigation; 5) defendants will continue to come up with creative, far - reaching ways of limiting class actions; 6) plaintiffs» attorneys will continue to bring class actions when a) they think they can make money and / or b) they think they will advance the public good; 7) there will be some good class actions and some horrible ones; 8) look out for states to pass new consumer protection laws similar to the New Jersey New Jersey Truth - in - Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA); 9) the TCPA and all - natural litigation booms will continue in the near future; 10) The CFPB will broadly define consumer finance services; 11) more class actions will go to trial; 12) what happens with the enforceability of arbitration clauses will have a big impact on the viability of many categories of class actions in the future; 13) look for more class actions in the federal courts in New York state.

Judge Posner's remarks were filled with unique insights and a few zingers including his comment that class action settlements are «an invitation to shenanigans» where, in his view, the class is at the mercy of the plaintiffs» attorneys, and the Defendants interested in getting off as lightly as they can, so the judiciary has an important role in scrutinizing the terms.