Sentences with phrase «losing party in a case»

Not exact matches

In the other 8 cases, the incumbent party lost, including at least 3 of the biggest political turning points in US history (1860, 1932, 1980In the other 8 cases, the incumbent party lost, including at least 3 of the biggest political turning points in US history (1860, 1932, 1980in US history (1860, 1932, 1980).

In this case, the Progressive Conservatives were reduced to two seats and lost official party status, permanently changing the political landscape in this countrIn this case, the Progressive Conservatives were reduced to two seats and lost official party status, permanently changing the political landscape in this countrin this country.

After the June 1953 uprising in East Germany, the secretary of the communist party's writers union distributed leaflets declaring that the people had lost the confidence of the government and it would take redoubled efforts to win it back ¯ to which Brecht responded, «Would it not be easier in that case for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?»

According to Covenant Eyes, 56 per cent of divorce cases involved one party having an obsessive interest in porn, and in my survey of those struggling with sex and porn addiction, 46 per cent had lost a relationship and 71 per cent knew they were at risk of doing so.

Granted, there's been a deluge of corruption cases involving state lawmakers in both parties with more legislators leaving office under an ethical cloud than losing re-election.

I noted that both Sens. Steve Saland and Roy McDonald have the option of running in the general election on the Independence Party line even if they lose to Neil Di Carlo and Kathy Marchione, respectively, and asked Libous who the Republicans would support in the case of a three - way general election contest.

«I have lost confidence in his objectivity and judgment, and feel obligated to request a special prosecutor for criminal cases that would typically be sent by my office to Spota's for prosecution,» DeMarco, a Conservative Party member, wrote.

Nick Clegg, meanwhile, will be hoping that his party can avoid losing its deposit, as was the case in Glasgow East.

August 9, 2011: Arkansas Green Party Loses Lawsuit Against the 3 % Vote Test to Remain on the Ballot July 20, 2011: Arkansas Green Party gets Ready to Petition to Get Back on Ballot May 11, 2011: Eighth Circuit Hears Arkansas Green Party Case May 2, 2011: Hearing Set in Arkansas Green Party Ballot Access Lawsuit

In the case of NY - 23, Long argued, the Republicans «clearly endorsed a liberal» by going with then - Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava, who had lost the Conservative Party endorsement four years prior to her 2009 congressional bid.

Murkowski has shown herself to be resilient, as was the case when she lost the Republican Senate Primary in 2010 to a tea party challenger and embarked on a successful write - in campaign.

So the Lib Dems might, in fact, lose most if the Woolas case significantly makes parties clean up their acts.

Alleged N400million Fraud: Metuh Loses Bid to Quash Charges... Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Wednesday, March 9, 2016 dismissed the «no - case» submission brought by the embattled National Publicity Secretary of the People's Democratic Party, PDP, Olisa Metuh, who is standing trial on a 7 - count charge bordering on illegal -LSB-...]

After losing the appeal of her residency case, Regina Calcaterra is giving up her bid to try to oust GOP Sen. Ken LaValle and has asked Suffolk County Democratic and Working Families Party leaders to tap her friend and donor, Jennifer Maertz, to run in her place.

«While the standard rule is that each party to litigation bears its own fees and costs, patent law shifts attorney's fees and costs to the losing party in exceptional cases,» Shubha explained.

In no case shall Desjardins Online Brokerage, Desjardins Securities Inc. and their directors, officers, employees or agents and its information suppliers be held liable for any special, direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues, lost profits or loss of prospective economic advantage, resulting from the use or misuse of the Internet Services, of the information, documents, software or content thereof, even if advised of the possibility of such damages, or for any claim by another party.

Certain stats and items acquired by a party transition to their successors in case when the party is lost.

Atari relied heavily on old, established IPs (arcade games in its case) and gimmickry too, while at the same time falling behind in terms of its consoles» raw performance and capabilities, and losing nearly all 3rd party developer support.

I'm not disabled and have no pre-existing conditions (that I know of in both cases) but hard working Americans (no party affiliation) have lost their lives work because they are.

In the second case, the EPA did not lose as Willis asserts because the EPA was not a party to that litigation, nor was the consent agreement an action taken by the Obama administration.

I know of at least one court case in which the offending party was liable to lose of income due to compromising employment test questions.

Losing party hit with a $ 19,125 contractual fee award appealed in White v. Taylor, Case No.

By contrast, placing special attention on litigation of «close cases» that «meaningfully clarify» copyright law could potentially discourage parties from litigating the kinds of cases that «clarify» copyright law: Fee awards in «close cases» potentially «enhance the penalty for a defeat,» in cases which, by nature «no party can be confident... he will win or lose.»

This suggests that cases examining applications for attorney's fees in patent cases may also follow the Court's decision in Kirtsaeng and place special importance on the objective reasonableness of a losing party's litigation position.

The importer appealed to the Supreme Court, which held that in copyright cases the «objective reasonableness» of the losing party's legal position carries «substantial weight» in deciding whether to grant attorneys» fees to the winning party — but that factor alone is not dispositive: a party's litigation misconduct or «repeated» infringement or «overaggressive» enforcement of claims could also justify a fee award even if a party's legal argument was reasonable.

The attorneys at Cates Mahoney know how to gather evidence to prove the other party's fault and win you the recovery you deserve, including medical expenses, lost wages, disability, disfigurement, loss of quality of life, emotional distress, pain and suffering, and in some cases, punitive damages.

Earlier this month, a federal court of appeals issued a written opinion in a workplace injury case involving claims made by an employee that the allegedly negligent party intentionally destroyed or lost evidence necessary to his case.

In the case, Schaefer v. Universal Scaffolding, the court held that a party claiming an opposing party intentionally lost or destroyed evidence must show that they would have had a «reasonable probability» of success if the evidence had been preserved.

When Aurora, Ont., mayor Phyllis Morris won a conflict of interest case in March, the losing party was ordered to pay costs of $ 50,850.

If you have been injured as the result of the negligence of another individual or party, or have lost a loved one in a fatal accident, please call 877 - FL - INJURY to schedule a free, no - obligation appointment to review your case.

For example, in a hypothetical case where each party is equally responsible for an accident (50/50) and the damages (lost wages / medical bills) are $ 100,000, the recovery would be $ 50,000.

Its other recommendations include: greater judicial case management, with specialist judges and early intervention; agreement on circumstances in which parties might lose costs protection; drawing up realistic budgets; and allowing the courts to continue to exercise cost - capping powers.

For those parties in the group litigation who succeed in their individual claims, the logical conclusion is that they have «won» their case and, by extension, payment of their costs should be covered by the «losing» defendant; but in the event that the winning parties ultimately make up a minority of the larger claimant group, it could be argued that, as a whole, the claimants are the «losing» party, responsible for the defendant's costs.

If an NDA is breached, the party who revealed the confidential information could be sued for damages, be forced to pay back lost profits, and in some cases, be held in contempt of court (which could lead to criminal charges).

The second is when a party is dissuaded from taking part in litigation or arbitration due to the financial risks associated with losing a case.

As many of these injury cases will require ongoing expensive medical care and treatment, and you may have lost abilities or are unable to work, all of these matters will be addressed in a comprehensive claim filed against the negligent party.

While some liability injury insurance companies may attempt to calculate personal injury damages based on factors such as similar case results and the reputation and experience of the injured party's attorney, there is no precise way to put a dollar figure on pain and suffering and lost opportunities in life, among other elements.

This decision made in respect of a failure of lawyers to file a costs» budget — the opportunity to claim costs was effectively lost at the outset of the litigation by the failure to submit the costs» budget — is the touchstone for legal advisers and their clients in understanding the attitude of the courts to failure by a party to adhere strictly and accurately to the requirements of case management set out in the rules, practice directions, and the tailored orders of the court in the individual case.

Thus, the 1963 Council of Europe Convention on the Reduction of Cases of Multiple Nationality and Military Obligations in Cases of Multiple Nationality (which has not been signed by the Republic of Lithuania) provides: the Member States of the Council of Europe, signatory hereto, considering that cases of multiple nationality are liable to cause difficulties and that joint action to reduce as far as possible the number of cases of multiple nationality, as between member States, corresponds to the aims of the Council of Europe (Preamble); nationals of the Contracting Parties who are of full age and who acquire of their own free will, by means of naturalisation, option or recovery, the nationality of another Party shall lose their former nationality and they shall not be authorised to retain their former nationality (ArticlCases of Multiple Nationality and Military Obligations in Cases of Multiple Nationality (which has not been signed by the Republic of Lithuania) provides: the Member States of the Council of Europe, signatory hereto, considering that cases of multiple nationality are liable to cause difficulties and that joint action to reduce as far as possible the number of cases of multiple nationality, as between member States, corresponds to the aims of the Council of Europe (Preamble); nationals of the Contracting Parties who are of full age and who acquire of their own free will, by means of naturalisation, option or recovery, the nationality of another Party shall lose their former nationality and they shall not be authorised to retain their former nationality (ArticlCases of Multiple Nationality (which has not been signed by the Republic of Lithuania) provides: the Member States of the Council of Europe, signatory hereto, considering that cases of multiple nationality are liable to cause difficulties and that joint action to reduce as far as possible the number of cases of multiple nationality, as between member States, corresponds to the aims of the Council of Europe (Preamble); nationals of the Contracting Parties who are of full age and who acquire of their own free will, by means of naturalisation, option or recovery, the nationality of another Party shall lose their former nationality and they shall not be authorised to retain their former nationality (Articlcases of multiple nationality are liable to cause difficulties and that joint action to reduce as far as possible the number of cases of multiple nationality, as between member States, corresponds to the aims of the Council of Europe (Preamble); nationals of the Contracting Parties who are of full age and who acquire of their own free will, by means of naturalisation, option or recovery, the nationality of another Party shall lose their former nationality and they shall not be authorised to retain their former nationality (Articlcases of multiple nationality, as between member States, corresponds to the aims of the Council of Europe (Preamble); nationals of the Contracting Parties who are of full age and who acquire of their own free will, by means of naturalisation, option or recovery, the nationality of another Party shall lose their former nationality and they shall not be authorised to retain their former nationality (Article 1).

Generally speaking, in negligence cases, an injured party may be awarded monetary damages for a variety of issues such as lost wages, pain and suffering, medical bills, and other economic and noneconomic damages.

Sadly, it is not uncommon for self - represented parties to lose a case merely because they did not understand the law or failed to present a coherent legal argument despite having very compelling facts in their favour.

Ian Binnie, former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, stated, «You always have to consider in these cases the position of the losing party; are they going to go away from court thinking they got the raw deal because the other side had a former judge?

After the losing party in the decided case took an appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that, because of the consolidation, the judgment appealed from was not a «final decision» under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

A. 20 In effect, this means that whilst decisions of the DSB create an obligation on the part of the losing party to comply with WTO rules, enforcement can be achieved by various means — including amicable settlement, compensation, or the suspension of trade concessions.101 Indeed, it was for this reason that the CJEU found in the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodIn effect, this means that whilst decisions of the DSB create an obligation on the part of the losing party to comply with WTO rules, enforcement can be achieved by various means — including amicable settlement, compensation, or the suspension of trade concessions.101 Indeed, it was for this reason that the CJEU found in the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodin the case of Portugal v Council that a DSB decision did not oblige the losing party to achieve full implementation of its recommendations, where the possibility of temporary compensation or retaliatory measures remained available.102 In other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial bodIn other words, the outcome was prescribed, but not the means.103 This contrasts with the position under EU law, where there is a right to an effective remedy from a judicial body.

The judge commented that from the three often quoted cases of Page v Hewetts Solicitors [2013] EWHC 2845 (Ch), Lewis v Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch), and Bhatti v Asghar [2016] EWHC 1049 (QB), dealing with the question whether a party could lose his rights to bring a claim or to make an application because of an error in the court office, case law had developed a «somewhat hard edged principle».

Only an experienced attorney like those at Burns & Jain can evaluate the pain and suffering and lost earnings of all of the parties involved to assist you in evaluating how to settle a case, or how to approach a jury.

Comparing her predictions to the ultimate results, Shullman concluded that it was possible to predict the result in most cases by a simple measure — the party being asked the most questions generally lost.

To do so gets in the way of writing for the most important reader of all: the party who is about to learn that the case has been lost.

In a lost profit case, a party in litigation will claim that «but for» the breach of contract, the party would have earned a projected amount of moneIn a lost profit case, a party in litigation will claim that «but for» the breach of contract, the party would have earned a projected amount of monein litigation will claim that «but for» the breach of contract, the party would have earned a projected amount of money.

Using the same provision, Cruz City 1 Mauritius Holdings («Cruz City»)(represented by White & Case) recently obtained an order requiring the losing parties in an arbitration to disclose their assets worldwide, to assist Cruz City in enforcing against these parties arbitral awards of US$ 298 million.