Sentences with phrase «lawsuits against citizens»

Citizens» chief financial officer, Jennifer Montero, on April 11 acknowledged that the majority of lawsuits against Citizens has «shifted» to Hurricane Irma, but company spokesman Michael Peltier said it's too early to know whether AOB suits would increase again after the Irma suits recede.

On April 11th Scott + Scott, Attorneys At Law, LLP announced filing of a securities class action lawsuit against Citizens, Inc., claiming the company's statements about its business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and / or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

Not exact matches

The dispute involves a lawsuit filed against Royal Dutch Petroleum over claims that the oil company was complicit in abuses committed by the Nigerian government against its citizens in the oil - rich Niger Delta.

he is not in Ireland and is not a US citizen so that will definitely work against him.plus he sent 5 people to the hospital and could face at least 5 multi-million dollar lawsuits and 5 order of protections meaning he can in no way try to contact the 5 named or else violate his bond... his career is over and they will have his jail cell waiting for him...

«In his prior political offices, Eliot Spitzer brought junk lawsuits which seldom held up in court against New York's leading industries for his own political gain, to the detriment of the citizens of New York; he misused the powers of his offices to «steamroll» legitimate political opposition, and acted with calculated hypocrisy, signing tougher penalties into law for the very crimes he was committing.

It is certainly not an illustration of courage or leadership on the part of the council members, legislators, mayor or county executive, who have joined in the chorus of racist and incompetent Board of Ed members seeking my removal, so as to push back on me to not disclose their culpability in rigging the recent teacher's contract, or their complicity in trying to unfairly settling the Board's $ 450 million lawsuit against Lou Ciminelli, for fleecing the citizens and children of Buffalo.

East Hampton Town has joined a lawsuit brought by a citizens group in 2014 against the Long Island Power Authority and PSEG - Long Island over the installation of high - voltage transmission lines and poles along a six - mile route from East Hampton Village to an Amagansett substation.

«It is certainly not an illustration of courage or leadership on the part of the council members, legislators, mayor or county executive, who have joined in the chorus of racist and incompetent Board of Ed members seeking my removal, so as to push back on me to not disclose their culpability in rigging the recent teacher's contract, or their complicity in trying to unfairly settling the board's $ 450 million lawsuit against (developer) Lou Ciminelli for fleecing the citizens and children of Buffalo.

«If I reviewed the health care bill and thought it was bad for our citizens, I would file my own lawsuit against it.

ALBANY — Citizens Union has filed a lawsuit against Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the Joint Commission on Public Ethics and Attorney General Eric Schneiderman over a provision in a June reform bill, the group announced Tuesday.

Additionally, he is involved in a lawsuit against a private citizen who asked for an explanation in a public meeting of Highway Department expenditures that were brought forward in a public meeting to the Town Board by the Fleet Manager as warranting examination.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Black Mesa Water Coalition, Center for Biological Diversity, Dine Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment (Dine CARE), Sierra Club and TO» Nizhoni Ani.

In another lawsuit, he challenges the constitutionality of the federal Violence Against Women Act, alleging that the law «was created by feminist organizations to provide alien wives alleging abuse a fast track to permanent residency by violating the U.S. Constitutional rights of citizen husbands.»

A qui tam claim is one form of a whistleblower case where a lawsuit is filed by a private citizen on behalf of the state or federal government against a person or business that is allegedly defrauding an arm of the state or federal government.

The South Carolina Civil Justice Coalition has been working since 2003 to improve the legal climate in our state and reduce the number and types of frivolous lawsuits brought against our small, medium and large businesses who provide jobs and the many goods and services for our citizens.

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.

A project of Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, Sick of Lawsuits is an online network of people who are interested in restoring integrity to our justice system by addressing issues surrounding legal reform.

For civil lawsuit, if the civil lawsuit brought against a citizen shall be under the jurisdictionof the people's court located in the place where the defendant has hisdomicile, if the defendant's domicile is different from his habitual residence, the lawsuit shall be under the jurisdiction of the people's court located inthe place of his habitual residence.

In their brief, the amici, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, the Southeastern Legal Foundation, and the Cato Institute, contend that the Seventh Amendment Guarantee of a jury trial applies in lawsuits against the United States seeking vindication of a citizen's constitutional rights.

The most common question we're asked at Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) is «How do these trial lawyers get away with the abuse?»

A federal civil rights law, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, allows United States citizens to file a lawsuit against police officers who violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against the use of excessive force.

42 U.S.C. Section 1983 allows United States citizens to file a federal civil rights lawsuit against police officers who violate the Fourth Amendment's protection against the use of excessive force.

However, in Hans v. Louisiana [2], the amendment was interpreted to prohibit lawsuits against states by both their own citizens and citizens of other states.

Although he said in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that independent spending does «not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,» Justice Kennedy authored a ruling in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. that mining company executive Don Blankenship's $ 3 million in independent spending for a West Virginia justice gave rise to an unconstitutional «risk of actual bias» in a lawsuit against the company.

First, earlier this year Canadian citizen Benamar Benatta quietly settled his lawsuit against the government for turning him over to U.S. officials without any due process in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

Now, say B, someone in country Y (whether customer of A or not), files a lawsuit against A in a court of Y — grounded by the statement that A is providing services «in Y to the citizens of Y», and hence must obey all relevant laws of Y. Let's also say that A is indeed violating some laws of Y, or at least, would be doing so if A was from Y, although A is legally crystal clean it its home country X.

While lawsuits stemming from NV's Health Insurance Exchange have captured headlines in recent months, the hundreds of suits filed against private citizens each year receive less attention.

While lawsuits against the oil and gas companies make major headlines in ND, hundreds more lawsuits filed against private citizens each year go unmentioned by the media.

This means that if a senior citizen were to come into your home and they were injured due to your negligence and filed a lawsuit against you, you are covered.

The lawfulness of government targeting of individuals based in the US with spyware, however, is in question; for example, a lawsuit brought by a US citizen against the government of Ethiopia in February 2014 claims that such actions violated the US Wiretap Act [18 U.S. Code § 2511 (1)(a)-RSB-.58