Sentences with phrase «judgment action included»

Declaratory judgment action included claims against insurer for alleged violation of consumer protection law, in addition to dispute over the insurer's reasons for denying coverage for the stock option backdating claims under applicable policy definitions and exclusions.

Not exact matches

This group includes wafflers who either don't have a lot of confidence in their decision making and hope by putting off choosing others might decide for them, or those who enjoy the feeling of being able to stand in judgment of others without committing to any course of action themselves.

That element of judgment in weighing financial stability considerations, including the implications of our own actions, is central to our risk - management approach to monetary policy.

Finally, right and wrong include the thoughts we think and the actions we take under God's judgment.

You agree to indemnify, defend and hold the USTA Family of Companies, the USTA» Family of Companies» subsidiaries and other affiliated companies / organizations and sponsors and their respective officers, directors, employees and agents harmless from and against any third - party claims, demands, actions, suits, proceedings, liabilities, damages, losses, judgments and expenses (including, but not limited to, the costs of collection, reasonable attorney's fees and other reasonable costs of defense or enforcing your obligations hereunder) resulting from or arising out of any breach of any of your representations or misuse of this or any other USTA Family of Companies site or of any site linking to this or any other USTA Family of Companies site.

The change that Buhari champions should include justice for the victims of oil pollution in the Niger Delta, and that's why the ECOWAS judgment is so significant because it provides the framework for action.»

Only when we know more about the crash, including details on the actions of the pedestrian as well as data logs from the car, can we make judgments, he says.

You shall indemnify The Endocrine Society and its directors, officers, employees, agents, contractors and licensors («The Endocrine Society Indemnitees») against all claims, actions, suits, and other proceedings («Claims») arising out of or incurred in connection with the Site and your use of the Site, your fraud, violation of law, negligence, willful misconduct, or any other use of the Site, the User Materials, the Site Materials, the services, products, information and other materials on and in and made available through the Site, (except to the extent attributable to The Endocrine Society), or any breach by you of these Terms and Conditions and shall indemnify and hold the Endocrine Society Indemnitees harmless from and against all judgments, losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including without limitation reasonable attorneys» fees and attorneys» disbursements) arising out of or incurred in connection with such Claims.

23.1 You agree to, and you hereby, defend, indemnify, and hold the Related Parties harmless from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, costs, investigations, liabilities, judgments, fines, penalties, settlements, interest, and expenses (including attorneys» fees) that directly or indirectly arise from or are related to any claim, suit, action, demand, or proceeding made or brought against any Related Party, or on account of the investigation, defense, or settlement thereof, arising out of or in connection with, whether occurring heretofore or hereafter:

When you file bankruptcy, federal law imposes an «automatic stay» which prohibits your creditors from taking any action (including phone calls) to collect debts from you including court judgments and tax debts during the pendency of the bankruptcy.

This could include judgments against in civil actions, state or federal tax liens and bankruptcies.

This could include judgments in civil actions, state or federal tax liens and bankruptcies.

This includes denial of credit, insurance or employment as well as reports from collection agencies or judgments, but consumers must request the report within 60 days from the date the adverse action occurred.

These public records may include judgments in civil actions, state federal or local tax liens, and / or bankruptcies.

to make such a judgment include the following: (a) only a bid price or an asked price is available; (b) the spread between bid and asked prices is substantial; (c) the liquidity of the securities; (d) the frequency of sales; (e) the thinness of the market; (f) the size of reported trades; and (g) actions of the securities markets, such as the suspension or limitation of trading.

Factors which may cause the adviser to make such a judgment include, but are not limited to, the following: only a bid price or an asked price is available; the spread between bid and asked prices is substantial; the frequency of sales; the thinness of the market; the size of reported trades; and actions of the securities markets, such as the suspension or limitation of trading; (iii) securities determined to be illiquid; (iv) securities with respect to which an event that will affect the value thereof has occurred (a «significant event») since the closing prices were established on the principal exchange on which they are traded, but prior to the Fund's calculation of its net asset value.

Article VIII of Registrant's Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust (Exhibit (a) hereto, which is incorporated by reference) provides in effect that Registrant will indemnify its officers and trustees against all liabilities and expenses, including but not limited to amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments, in compromise, or as fines and penalties, and counsel fees reasonably incurred by any such officer or trustee in connection with the defense or disposition of any action, suit, or other proceeding.

For the latter, we support the judgment of law enforcement to hold the owner accountable for their actions, including through imposition of criminal charges.

The report also includes any legal actions, court judgments or tax liens relating to that person's finances.

You agree not to engage in any of the following prohibited activities: (i) copying, distributing, or disclosing any part of the Service in any medium, including without limitation by any automated or non-automated «scraping»; (ii) using any automated system, including without limitation «robots,» «spiders,» «offline readers,» etc., to access the Service in a manner that sends more request messages to the Company servers than a human can reasonably produce in the same period of time by using a conventional on - line web browser (except that Humble Bundle grants the operators of public search engines revocable permission to use spiders to copy materials from Humble Bundle for the sole purpose of and solely to the extent necessary for creating publicly available searchable indices of the materials, but not caches or archives of such materials); (iii) transmitting spam, chain letters, or other unsolicited email; (iv) attempting to interfere with, compromise the system integrity or security or decipher any transmissions to or from the servers running the Service; (v) taking any action that imposes, or may impose in our sole judgment an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on our infrastructure; (vi) uploading invalid data, viruses, worms, or other software agents through the Service; (vii) collecting or harvesting any personally identifiable information, including account names, from the Service; (viii) using the Service for any commercial solicitation purposes; (ix) impersonating another person or otherwise misrepresenting your affiliation with a person or entity, conducting fraud, hiding or attempting to hide your identity; (x) interfering with the proper working of the Service; (xi) accessing any content on the Service through any technology or means other than those provided or authorized by the Service; (xii) bypassing the measures we may use to prevent or restrict access to the Service, including without limitation features that prevent or restrict use or copying of any content or enforce limitations on use of the Service or the content therein; (xiii) sell, assign, rent, lease, act as a service bureau, or grant rights in the Products, including, without limitation, through sublicense, to any other entity without the prior written consent of such Products» (defined below) licensors; (xiv) circumventing Service limitations on the number of Products you may purchase, including, without limitation, creating multiple accounts and purchasing a total number of Products through such multiple accounts which exceed the per - user limitations; or (xv) except as otherwise specifically set forth in a licensor's end user license agreement, as otherwise agreed upon by a licensor in writing or as otherwise allowed under applicable law, distributing, transmitting, copying (other than re-installing software or files previously purchased by you through the Service on computers, mobile or tablet devices owned by you, or creating backup copies of such software or files for your own personal use) or otherwise exploiting the Products (defined below) in any manner other than for your own private, non-commercial, personal use.

In King County Superior Court, a case had to be stayed while a party sought new counsel after their attorney acknowledged that he falsified a memo and emails before turning them over to plaintiffs in a nationwide class - action lawsuit.7 Similarly, this spring, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan, in a 500 - page opinion, blasted a legal team (who previously had «won» a $ 19 billion judgment in an Ecuadorean court) for their «egregious fraud» which included ghostwriting «independent reports.»

Other matters the project has handled include a 2013 state court action that resulted in a $ 1.1 billion judgment against three lead - paint manufacturers, and Hollingsworth v. Perry, which argued that California's same - sex marriage ban was unconstitutional.

Judgments reported in 2017 include actions dismissed as statute barred, administrative dismissals by registrars, dismissals for failing to «show cause» at status hearings, dismissals under Rule 24, and decisions refusing to restore actions to the trial list.

Following the filing of a motion for summary judgment on numerous issues, including application of the policy's pollution exclusion in Connecticut, the plaintiff insured withdrew the action.

Numerous issues in dispute during in AIA proceedings parallel issues likely to arise is subsequent district court infringement and declaratory judgment actions, including claim construction, novelty, and obviousness.

He has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in cases involving a wide variety of claims, including breach of contract, professional malpractice, personal injury, insurance bad faith, and debt and judgment collection actions.

Section 1338 (a) requires federal courts to hear cases involving claims for relief under the Patent Act, including infringement and declaratory judgment actions.

Successfully defended a large insurance company in a multi-million dollar bad faith action, including obtaining judgment at bench trial and affirmance on appeal.

His other case experience includes the trial and appeal of dissolution and shareholder derivative actions which established the scope of the business judgment rule in the state of Connecticut and a murder case that was a case study on the issue of time of death in Dr. Henry Lee's book Cracking Cases: The Science of Solving Crime.

A passionate advocate for individuals who have been harmed by the actions of others, Steve has won numerous top 10 verdicts in Georgia, including a $ 43.5 million jury verdict for Terhune v. Forum Group Corp et al., the state's largest judgment on record against a nursing home facility; a $ 40 million jury verdict for Jenkins v. Lambert, the # 1 largest jury verdict in Georgia for 2016; and a $ 11.5 million verdict for Bilbrey v. United States of America, one of the largest verdicts ever secured against the United States government.

Steven V. Buckman practices in the field of insurance law litigating a variety of first - party and third - party actions including, but not limited to, bad faith, coverage questions, declaratory judgments, products liability, trucking insurance, fire and casualty, wrongful death, and catastrophic injury matters.

After years - long discovery in a defense of a False Claims Act action brought against a large healthcare company, including personally taking and defending more than twenty depositions of fact and expert witnesses, successfully excluded testimony of plaintiff / relator's experts and obtained complete summary judgment on all False Claims Act claims.

Commercial Litigation — Lead attorney in international fraud and breach of contract action resolved in client's favor on summary judgment including recovery of all attorneys» fees; Served as first - chair defending a loan servicer in complex civil litigation involving declaratory judgment action and cross-claims for commercial torts; Second chair for seven day jury trial involving claims for indemnification and statutory business conspiracy; Won summary judgment as the lead counsel on behalf of a charitable trust in litigation over a commercial lease termination; Represented financial institutions in commercial tort actions; Represented finance company in AAA Arbitration.

I'd like to think the public would wait for any such legal action before passing judgment, but there has been more information on this subject by The Star since this post went up, including a complaint which appeared to arise from the workplace.

Stephen E. Goldman, the firm's managing partner, has served as counsel for insurers in many significant property insurance and class action cases, including Standard Fire v. Knowles, 133 S. Ct. 1345 (2013)(holding that the plaintiff's stipulation can not defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act) and Travco v. Ward, 736 S.E. 2d 321 (Va. 2012)(affirming the trial court's judgment that property insurance policies do not cover losses caused by the presence of Chinese dryaction cases, including Standard Fire v. Knowles, 133 S. Ct. 1345 (2013)(holding that the plaintiff's stipulation can not defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act) and Travco v. Ward, 736 S.E. 2d 321 (Va. 2012)(affirming the trial court's judgment that property insurance policies do not cover losses caused by the presence of Chinese dryAction Fairness Act) and Travco v. Ward, 736 S.E. 2d 321 (Va. 2012)(affirming the trial court's judgment that property insurance policies do not cover losses caused by the presence of Chinese drywall).

We are experienced in handling and trying a wide range of cases, including wrongful death, automobile accidents, premises liability, business torts, complex coverage questions, subornation issues and declaratory judgment actions.

We next reviewed each of the 65 cases we found in 2014, and removed each case that included either a formal declaration that the SRL was a «vexatious litigant», or any indicia in the judgment hinting at vexatiousness or «process abuse» (for example, multiple filings in this case, or previous actions on similar points)[5].

These include orders for contested dismissal or summary judgment, declaratory judgment, class action, multi-district litigation, jury trial, bench trial and appeal.

d) the judgment was obtained by fraud in connection with a matter of procedure; e) recognition or enforcement would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the requested State, including situations where the specific proceedings leading to the judgment were incompatible with fundamental principles of procedural fairness of that State; f) the judgment is inconsistent with a judgment given in the requested State in a dispute between the same parties; or g) the judgment is inconsistent with an earlier judgment given in another State between the same parties on the same cause of action, provided that the earlier judgment fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the requested State.

Lex Machina's trademark data lets you analyze federal cases with one or more claims involving Lanham Act violations, including claims of trademark infringement, trademark dilution, unfair competition, or cybersquatting, including declaratory judgment actions.

Mark Cahill, a partner since 1992, focuses on bringing creativity and practical business judgment to his litigation practice, which includes disputes arising from mergers and acquisitions, sophisticated insurance coverage claims and analysis, corporate finance and governance matters, class actions and other complex business litigation.

The Supreme Court's judgment last week in Kennedy v The Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 is the latest in a series of decisions — including, most notably, R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport [2014] UKSC 3 (see this post) and Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61 (see this post)-- in which the Court has placed very specific emphasis on the common law, as opposed to the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights, as a source of fundamental rights and values.

As an attorney in the Supreme Court Division of this major New York City real estate litigation firm, Suzanne handled a wide variety of complex state and federal court cases, including declaratory judgment and injunctive actions, commercial foreclosures, workouts, representation of cooperative and condominium boards of directors and representation of real estate owners in all phases of bankruptcy litigation, we well as real estate transactions.

Notable mandates: lead counsel in $ 2 - billion diesel settlement with Volkswagen and the $ 69 - million settlement in Dugal v. Manulife Financial; lead counsel in SNC - Lavalin investor class action; currently lead counsel in transvaginal mesh settlement cases and the only firm to get this type of case certified in a contested motion; recovered more than $ 100 million for clients in market currency in FX price - fixing case; obtained a $ 3.5 - million judgment from a jury following a five - week personal injury trial; acted as counsel in numerous cross-border transactions including the acquisition of the largest golf course in Canada; successfully defended clients in numerous high - profile environmental cases

This point is not drawn out much in the judgment in Sandwell, which focuses more on resolving apparent ambiguity in the phrase «actions founded on simple contract» by reference to extraneous sources, such as the Law Revision Committee report of 1936 preceding LA 1939, which noted that a «simple contract» would include a «quasi-contract» (this in accordance with the then prevailing «implied contract» theory of restitution).

If the tenant disappeared before trial, a default judgment would enter in the second case and the landlord could collect that from the tenant through garnishment, etc. just like any other judgment and including not just rent but attorneys» fees in the second action.

The factors to be considered by the court include: first, to what extent a judgment rendered in the person's absence might be prejudicial to the person or those already parties; second, the extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided; third, whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence will be adequate; fourth, whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder.

However, when situations arise that call for enforcement actions at or near a sensitive location within the immediate vicinity of the international border, including its functional equivalent, agents and officers are expected to exercise sound judgment and common sense while taking appropriate action, consistent with the goals of this policy.

Other topics covered this week included seeking intervener status in an environmental contamination case, automobile insurance, MVA jury trials, motions for summary judgment in the class action context, breach of confidence, family law, bankruptcy and insolvency and solicitors» liens and charging orders.

These successes include obtaining dismissals of class action complaints, defeating class certification, winning summary judgment motions, prevailing at trial or on appeal, and obtaining highly favorable settlements.