Sentences with phrase «liable in a court of law»

Our brachial plexus palsy attorneys are well versed in the myriad causes of these injuries and will do everything in their power to see that those who have caused your child's brachial plexus palsy injuries are held liable in a court of law.

For US auto insurance this is the most common kind of tort — it's clear that an accident is most likely to involve some form of contributory negligence for which a party (or parties) to that accident will most likely be held liable in a court of law.

Not exact matches

In Bray v. Alexandria Women's Clinic (1993), the Court examined whether anti-abortion demonstrators could be held liable — under the Ku Klux Klan act of 1871 (amended in 1985)-- of conspiring to deprive women of the equal protection of the laws by depriving women seeking abortions of their right to interstate traveIn Bray v. Alexandria Women's Clinic (1993), the Court examined whether anti-abortion demonstrators could be held liable — under the Ku Klux Klan act of 1871 (amended in 1985)-- of conspiring to deprive women of the equal protection of the laws by depriving women seeking abortions of their right to interstate travein 1985)-- of conspiring to deprive women of the equal protection of the laws by depriving women seeking abortions of their right to interstate travel.

«A restaurant or similar retail food establishment shall not be liable in any civil action in Federal or State court (other than an action brought by the United States or a State) for any claims arising out of an alleged violation of this clause or any State law permitted under section 403A (a)(4).»

In India, the Contempt of Court Act of 1971 makes a person who violates a law prescribing proceedings in camera liable in contempt of court punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or both.In India, the Contempt of Court Act of 1971 makes a person who violates a law prescribing proceedings in camera liable in contempt of court punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or boCourt Act of 1971 makes a person who violates a law prescribing proceedings in camera liable in contempt of court punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or both.in camera liable in contempt of court punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or both.in contempt of court punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or bocourt punishable by a jail term of six months or a fine of 2, 000 rupees or both...

Yet a majority on the court ruled that the administrators who conducted the search could not be held personally liable because of the uncertainty of the law in this area.

To the extent permitted by law, we shall not be liable for any Losses by or with respect to the Account, except to the extent that such Losses are actual Losses proven with reasonable certainty, are not speculative, are proven to have been fairly within the contemplation of the parties as of the date hereof, and are determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or an arbitration panel in a final non-appealable judgment or order to have resulted solely from our gross negligence or willful misconduct and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, we will not be liable for any indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages or other losses (regardless of whether such damages or other losses were reasonably foreseeable).

Moreover, the Directive's scope is limited to natural persons: the EU legislator does not seem to be willing to consider to grant protection to legal persons, regardless of the fact that they can be held criminally liable in most MS.. In sum, the real added value of the Directive will depend on its implementation in national law and the willingness of the national courts, as well as of the Court of Justice, to ensure that the Directive contributes to the enhancing of defence rights in the Ein most MS.. In sum, the real added value of the Directive will depend on its implementation in national law and the willingness of the national courts, as well as of the Court of Justice, to ensure that the Directive contributes to the enhancing of defence rights in the EIn sum, the real added value of the Directive will depend on its implementation in national law and the willingness of the national courts, as well as of the Court of Justice, to ensure that the Directive contributes to the enhancing of defence rights in the Ein national law and the willingness of the national courts, as well as of the Court of Justice, to ensure that the Directive contributes to the enhancing of defence rights in the Ein the EU.

The big issue before the court is «whether Canada can be found liable in law for the class members» loss of Aboriginal identity after they were placed in non-Aboriginal foster and adoptive homes.»

The Layfield Law Firm, LLC has deep knowledge of the different expenses that may be assessed as a result of a personal injury, and can help prove in court that should be held liable for your medical costs, as well as how much the negligent party should be held liable for.

The opinion by the San Francisco - based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Arpaio was acting as a final policymaker for Maricopa County, and the district court was correct in finding the county liable, the National Law Journal repCourt of Appeals said Arpaio was acting as a final policymaker for Maricopa County, and the district court was correct in finding the county liable, the National Law Journal repcourt was correct in finding the county liable, the National Law Journal reports.

The Federal Court of Canada has just issued a decision in Girao v. Zarek Taylor Grossman Hanrahan LLP, 2011 FC 1070 (CanLII), in which it found a law firm liable for having posted on its website a previous report of findings from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada along with a cover letter that identified the complainant.

Noting contrary rulings in several jurisdictions, it ruled that North Dakota law would not impose such a heightened duty: as a Tennessee court observed in 2008, «[t] o hold a driver liable for the irresponsible actions of an intoxicated passenger would cut against this important social policy of encouraging the use of designated drivers.»

While New Mexico product liability law differs from that which was applied by the court in this case, the case is still illustrative of how manufacturers can be held liable for products that are defectively designed or manufactured.

And this is what I understand to be the meaning of our lawyers, when they say that these civil corporations are liable to no visitation; that is, that the law having by immemorial usage appointed them to be visited and inspected by the king their founder, in his majesty's court of king's bench, according to the rules of the common law, they ought not to be visited elsewhere, or by any other authority.53 And this is so strictly true, that though the king by his letters patent had subjected the college of physicians to the visitation of four very respectable persons, the lord chancellor, the two chief justices, and the chief baron; though the college had accepted this carter with all possible marks of acquiescence, and had acted under it for near a century; yet, in 1753, the authority of this provision coming in dispute, on an appeal preferred to these supposed visitors, they directed the legality of their own appointment to be argued: and, as this college was a mere civil, and not an eleemosynary foundation, they at length determined, upon several days solemn debate, that they had no jurisdiction as visitors; and remitted the appellant (if aggrieved) to his regular remedy in his majesty's court of king's bench.

In addition to relying on Hong Kong authority, importantly, Justice Ng also relied on the Australian authority of Trkulja v Google Inc. (No. 5)(hereinafter referred to as Trkulja), in which Justice David Beach of the Supreme Court of Victoria held that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury, if properly directed, could return a verdict for the plaintiff and hold Google to be liable for defamation for its search results under orthodox common law principleIn addition to relying on Hong Kong authority, importantly, Justice Ng also relied on the Australian authority of Trkulja v Google Inc. (No. 5)(hereinafter referred to as Trkulja), in which Justice David Beach of the Supreme Court of Victoria held that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury, if properly directed, could return a verdict for the plaintiff and hold Google to be liable for defamation for its search results under orthodox common law principlein which Justice David Beach of the Supreme Court of Victoria held that there was sufficient evidence upon which a reasonable jury, if properly directed, could return a verdict for the plaintiff and hold Google to be liable for defamation for its search results under orthodox common law principles.

In Wallbridge v. Brunning, the Court of Appeal held that whether a law firm can be vicariously liable for defamatory statements made by a lawyer who practices «in association» with it (as opposed to being an associate employed by the law firm or a partner of the law firm), is an issue of general importance that should be determined at a trial and not on a motion for summary judgmenIn Wallbridge v. Brunning, the Court of Appeal held that whether a law firm can be vicariously liable for defamatory statements made by a lawyer who practices «in association» with it (as opposed to being an associate employed by the law firm or a partner of the law firm), is an issue of general importance that should be determined at a trial and not on a motion for summary judgmenin association» with it (as opposed to being an associate employed by the law firm or a partner of the law firm), is an issue of general importance that should be determined at a trial and not on a motion for summary judgment.

Where a recipient of Deserted Wife's Benefit, Deserted Wife's Allowance, Lone Parent's Allowance or One - Parent Family Payment is receiving maintenance payments by way of a Family Law Court Order, (either a Family Law Maintenance Order or a Separation Agreement which has gone through the court and has a Maintenance clause in it) and those maintenance payments have not been assessed in deciding his / her rate of payment, then s / he is liable to transfer any payments received to the Minister for Employment Affairs and Employment Affairs and Social Protection, including any payments made in respect of chilCourt Order, (either a Family Law Maintenance Order or a Separation Agreement which has gone through the court and has a Maintenance clause in it) and those maintenance payments have not been assessed in deciding his / her rate of payment, then s / he is liable to transfer any payments received to the Minister for Employment Affairs and Employment Affairs and Social Protection, including any payments made in respect of chilcourt and has a Maintenance clause in it) and those maintenance payments have not been assessed in deciding his / her rate of payment, then s / he is liable to transfer any payments received to the Minister for Employment Affairs and Employment Affairs and Social Protection, including any payments made in respect of children.

The law at that time centered around a 2012 case, Benningfield v. Zinsmeister, in which the Kentucky Supreme Court interpreted the state's dog - bite statutes in such a way as to hold landlords liable for injuries caused by certain dogs on their rental property if the dog causes damage on the property or within immediate physical reach of the property.

Neither party will be liable for any failure or delay in performance under these Agent Terms due to fire, explosion, earthquake, storm, flood or other weather, unavailability of necessary utilities or raw materials, war, terrorism, insurrection, riot, act of God or the public enemy, law, act, order, export control regulation, proclamation, decree, regulation, ordinance, or instructions of Government or other public authorities, or judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction (not arising out of breach by such party of these Agent Terms).