Sentences with phrase «plaintiff made it clear to»

If the plaintiff made it clear to [the defendant employer] that he did not agree to the change made in September, 1954, the proper course for the defendant to pursue was to terminate the contract by proper notice and to offer employment on the new terms.

The licensees claimed that the lawyer for the plaintiff made it clear to them that if they did not provide the affidavits voluntarily, he would either subpoena them as witnesses to give evidence before the judge, or he would obtain a court order pursuant to the Rules of Court compelling them to give their evidence.

Not exact matches

James» submission, Belkin added, «essentially repeats the same legal errors already made by the tenant - plaintiffs in misstating the law, the applicable regulations and the clear legislative history, all of which demonstrate that the owner was lawfully permitted to deregulate apartments, notwithstanding a 421g tax abatement.»

The lawsuit makes clear that the plaintiffs aren't asking for the court to stop fossil fuel production in Colorado, or elsewhere, and they aren't asking for emissions regulations.

While the obligation on the judge isn't new, this statement makes clear the importance of ensuring that litigants without lawyers are able to meaningfully participate in the legal action, whether as plaintiffs or respondents and further that they have the opportunity to present their position and evidence to the best of their individual ability.

The Divisional Court therefore overturned the trial judge, finding that there was an error in failing to enforce the clear terms of the employment contract that the plaintiff had signed that made reference to a probationary period of 6 months.

[38] In my view, the Deputy Judge erred in law in failing to enforce the clear terms of the employment contract that the Plaintiff had signed that made reference to a probationary period of 6 months.

In the circumstances, the judge in an action seeking damages and injunctive relief for wrongful appropriation of a corporate opportunity was warranted in finding that certain statements made by the individual defendants to the plaintiff did not amount to a clear repudiation of the plaintiff's claim and that consequently the action was not barred by the statute of limitations.

There are arbitration cases which make it clear that if the plaintiff has firstly chosen to bring the dispute by way of action in the court, the plaintiff is not then entitled to ask for arbitration.

[W] e wish to make clear that abolition of the actions for alienation of affections and criminal conversation does not preclude a person from maintaining a traditional breach of contract action merely because the breach arose from an improper liaison with the plaintiff's spouse or because the effect of the alleged breach or tortious conduct was a disruption or breakup of his or her marriage....

This decision makes it very clear that counsel must be diligent in reviewing the plaintiff's expert reports and determining what specialty is best suited to respond to the report.

Nevertheless, the position of the defendants was made abundantly clear to the plaintiffs.

But in the event that costs are not being resolved under the terms of a settlement, DeSaulles makes it clear that no matter how nominal the settlement and despite the dismissal, the plaintiff will be entitled to costs.

Applying the purpose of the statute and other factors, the Virginia Supreme Court has made it clear that if a personal injury plaintiff desires to reinstate her case within a one year time period, after a case has been struck after three years of inactivity, a trial court judge has no discretion to deny it.»

The driver's insurance company was in a weak negotiating position because it was clear that the driver would make a bad witness in front of a jury because she expressed no willingness to take responsibility for her actions which increased the likelihood of a large verdict in the plaintiff's favor.

The Court held that the clear non-reliance language prevented plaintiff from establishing justifiable reliance on any oral statements made by Company 1 to induce plaintiff to sign the offer letter or on Company 2 statements before signing the employment agreement.

Plaintiff must be left to his own devices to maintain the strength of his trademark by making the differentiation clear and convincing.