Sentences with phrase «legal judgments against»

If you are sued, those policies will pay up to your policy limits for legal judgments against you, as well as the related attorney's fees.

In addition, public records are also listed on your credit report, i.e. bankruptcies, liens, foreclosures, repos, and / or legal judgments against you (including child support or tax cases).

According to Credit Sesame's data, users with a bankruptcy on their credit report actually have slightly higher credit scores, on average, than users with negative marks like tax liens or legal judgments against them.

Even more disturbing, DOJ's motion, as explained in the November 2013 hearing, essentially foretells its attempt — through pre-award «back and forth» with the state on every single voucher — to regulate the program without any legal judgment against the state.

The Court said DOJ attempted «to regulate the program without any legal judgment against the state.»

It may also be protected in the event of a legal judgment against you.

A formal letter (written by you) stating that you intend to seek a legal judgment against him / her in the amount owed might be sufficient...

It will also cover you in the event someone is injured while on your property and wins a legal judgment against you.

Not exact matches

Gawker Media Group has put itself up for sale (bids are due Monday afternoon) in part to satisfy the legal judgment of a unanimous jury that ruled against Gawker and assessed damages of $ 140 million, proving that there are consequences for violating privacy.

The court judgment followed the legal action entered against the Federal Government of Nigeria and Dr. Ngozi Okonjo - Iweala by the Socio - Economic Rights Agenda (SERAP) pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.

«I am personally very troubled by these allegations against the Speaker, but I will refrain from passing judgment on his current legal situation until the judicial process is complete.»

«Our legal department has asked us to go ahead and obey the Court of Appeal order against the Federal High court judgment.

Speaking with our correspondent on Thursday, the Anambra REC said its legal department had studied the judgments and asked it to go ahead with the election as ordered by the court of appeal as against the Tsoho Federal High Court judgment.

Handing down a judgment on a judicial review brought against education secretary Nicky Morgan by six parents, Mr Justice Warby has ruled that an assertion made when the new GCSE was released in February was likely to lead schools to rely exclusively on the qualification to meet their legal obligations.

(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.

This perspective was recently given legal validation with the judgment in the case of Re-Digi vs. Capitol Records, where the judge ruled against the idea that digital products qualified for First Sale protection under the law and reinforced the perspective of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that digital products constitute a completely different category of products from hard copy products.

If the debt is deemed valid, the court can issue a judgment against you, ordering you to pay it — and legal fees.

A public record of a judgment notes that you owe money to another party that you failed to pay — forcing that business or individual to seek legal recourse against you.

With a judgment against you in hand, whether it is the original creditor or a collection agency, they can potentially garnish your wages, place liens on your property, or take other legal steps to obtain the money you own to them.

In reality, by the time most people file for bankruptcy they have already fallen behind on their payments, gone into default or foreclosure, or had legal judgments entered against them.

They can not seize your property or garnish your wages unless win a judgment against you in a legal proceeding.

Furthermore, many creditors take legal action against people trying to settle with these types of companies, so they are also left with expensive and damaging judgments.

In addition to covering the cost of a judgment against you, your umbrella liability may also help to cover the costs of your legal defense.

a) Disputes filed - 18 months b) Inquiries - 2 years c) Payment profile -5 years d) Information related to a consumers payment behavior such as slow payer, defaulted or absconded - 1 year e) Information relating to the action that a credit provider has taken against a consumer to enforce a debt such as handed over, legal action or write - off - 2 years f) Debt restructuring - Until a clearance certificate is given g) Civil court judgments - 5 years or until the court removes it h) Administration orders (orders to put a consumer under administration)- 10 years or until the court removes it i) Sequestrations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- 10 years or until the court removes it j) Liquidations (order given by the court where the consumer is insolvent)- no time limit k) Court order removing a liquidation or sequestrations after all the debt was paid - 5 years l) Other information (information not covered above)- 2 years Other Useful Topics Learn how to dispute information on your credit report in South Africa.

Judgments are especially difficult simply because the creditor has a legal monetary claim against you.

For example, if there was never a legal judgment made against you, the courts may still entertain a default claim.

A judgment is a legal term used when a plaintiff files and wins a civil lawsuit against a defendant.

A judgment on a credit report is the result of a legal action which has been taken against you of which you are found responsible.

«Taking legal action» means that a creditor sues you in court to obtain a judgment against you.

A credit report is made up of a number of different aspects including payment history, available credit lines and a section for legal judgments or liens placed against you.

The cardholder agrees that s / he will defend and indemnify the Priority Pass group of companies, its directors, officers, employees and agents (collectively «the indemnified parties») against and hold each indemnified party harmless from all liabilities, damages, losses, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses (including reasonable legal fees) for injury to or death of any person or damage to, or destruction of, any property arising from the use of any lounge by the cardholder or any other person accompanying the cardholder, except that such indemnification shall not extend to acts of gross negligence or wilful misconduct by the indemnified parties.

Legal research company Fastcase yesterday filed a motion asking for summary judgment in its lawsuit against rival Casemaker over copyright in Georgia state regulations.

After an Odyssey of nearly 10 years, the legal proceedings of Switzerland against German restrictions on flights to and from Zurich airport have come to an end: The CJEU, in its judgement delivered on 7 March 2013 (Case C ‑ 547 / 10 P), has rejected Switzerland's appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2010 (Case T ‑ 319 / 05), by which the General Court had rejected Switzerland «s action for annulment against Commission Decision 2004 / 12 / EC of 5 December 2003 (OJ 2004 L 4, p. 13), thus allowing Germany to continue to apply unilateral restrictions on flights to and from Zurich airport over German territory.

On Oct. 5, 2015, Superior Court Judge Raymond M. Cadei in Sacramento, Calif., entered the stipulated judgment against Bluford in favor of the married plaintiffs who turned to Bluford and another company of his, California Legal Pros, for help evicting a tenant from a home they owned in Discovery Bay, Calif., only to be defrauded out of more than half a million dollars.

Most notably, Bluford had, at the time, recently agreed to have a $ 559,330 judgment entered against him to settle a lawsuit charging him with impersonating a lawyer, forging legal documents and fraudulently swindling two clients who had sought legal help from another company he ran, California Legal Pros, which provided non-lawyer legal legal documents and fraudulently swindling two clients who had sought legal help from another company he ran, California Legal Pros, which provided non-lawyer legal legal help from another company he ran, California Legal Pros, which provided non-lawyer legal Legal Pros, which provided non-lawyer legal legal help.

As I first reported in a post here two weeks ago, the CEO of this California - based startup — who was slated to be featured during a lightning round on legal innovation at Legaltech West Coast — recently agreed to have a $ 559,330 judgment entered against him to settle a lawsuit charging him with impersonating a lawyer, forging legal documents and fraudulently swindling two clients.

As I first reported on May 26, 2016, in a lawsuit filed against him by two former clients, Bluford stipulated to a judgment against him in the amount of $ 559,330 to settle a lawsuit charging him with impersonating a lawyer, forging legal documents and swindling two clients.

One topic not likely to come up during the panel is Bluford's recent agreement to have a $ 559,330 judgment entered against him to settle a lawsuit charging him with impersonating a lawyer, forging legal documents and fraudulently swindling two clients.

The sharing principle was established in the judgment of White v White, when Lord Nicholls stated that tentative views must be checked «against the yardstick of equality», but cautioned that introducing a 50 - 50 division of assets as a starting point would be «impermissible judicial gloss»; introducing a legal provision was a «matter for parliament».

Another law firm obtained, by summary judgment, an order for payment of its legal fees in the amount of $ 182,569.63 and an order dismissing a former client's counterclaim alleging negligence against it (2017 ONSC 3391, under appeal).

Residence test: the Supreme Court this month granted permission to Public Law Project to appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which in November 2015 found in favour of the government that the proposed residence test for civil legal aid is not unlawful.

Basically, the undertaking must rely in good faith on the legal advice: «if the facts justify the assumption that the undertaking relied on a legal opinion against its better judgment or that the report was tailored to the interests of the undertaking, the legal advice given is irrelevant from the very outset in assessing fault for an infringement of the rules of European competition law» (para. 62).

Unless the company either pays what it owes before the case (including your legal costs) or offers a convincing defence at trial, you will then have a judgment against it, which you can enforce against the company's assets or bank account.

The news comes as the LSC confirms plans to appeal the judgment in the judicial review brought against the unified contract by the Law Society, R (on the application of the Law Society) v Legal Services Commission.

Genuine issues of fact precluded summary judgment on a consumer's claims against a seafood producer for allegedly making unlawful, false, and misleading advertising regarding the omega - 3 nutrient content of certain of its products in violation of California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), the federal district court in San Jose has ruled (Ogden v. Bumble Bee Food, LLC, January 2, 2014, Koh, L.).

@Acccumulation They countersue for the money you owe and the net judgment is against you and you end up paying court costs and quite possibly legal fees.

Yesterday's judgment by the Court of Appeal in Coulson v News Group Newspapers (NGN) is good news for those who have a legal expenses insurance policy which they wish to use to defend themselves against an allegation that they have committed a criminal offence.

Even though the defendant based in Taiwan is served with all the legal documents, like the court notice and summons, in compliance with the foreign laws, the Taiwan court will accept the defendant's argument against the default foreign judgment that the legal documents are not served as per Taiwanese laws.

The only fee, ever, is based on our success in the fight against the injustice you have suffered — success by a settlement you approve or a legal judgment on your behalf.