Sentences with phrase «plaintiffs $»

Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment that awarded plaintiffs $ 409,846 in damages for defendants» failure to notify the buyer of competing offer.

After the second trial in 2009, a jury awarded the plaintiffs $ 1,920,000, which was later reduced to $ 54,000.

Brief but briliant expert testimony on the nature of pocket parts was provided by a local law librarian to enlightened jurors, who awarded the plaintiffs $ 2.5 million in damages.

Subsequently, the lower court awarded the defense the entirety of her requested fees based on a fee - shifting provision in the San Francisco ordinance, and awarded plaintiffs $ 3,750 in fees each (much reduced from the almost $ 142,000 lodestar request plus a 1.35 positive multiplier) based on the settlement stipulation fee reservation clause.

July 8, 2015: A jury awarded the injured plaintiffs $ 1 million in a truck driver negligence case.

Representation of city in post-judgment motions and appeal of whistle blower case where the jury awarded Plaintiffs $ 27 million in actual and punitive damages against three Defendants who allegedly retaliated against Plaintiffs for exercising their First Amendment rights and whistle blowing.

December 2017: A New Jersey jury awarded plaintiffs $ 15 million in a transvaginal mesh action.

To date, reports Bloomberg, Roche has lost 10 out of the 13 drug defect lawsuits brought over this medication since 2007, including a case in 2012 in which the manufacturer was ordered to pay two plaintiffs $ 18 million and $ 25 million verdict to another plaintiff in 2010.

A jury had awarded the injured plaintiffs $ 1 million in the personal injury case.

After a nine - year legal battle, the Superior Court of Québec's Justice Daniel H. Tingley has ordered Dunkin' Brands Canada Ltd. to pay plaintiffs $ 16.4 million in damages and costs — exactly what was claimed by the franchisees.

The Town and its insurance company have agreed to pay the plaintiffs $ 7,500 each (an amount which only partially covers their out of pocket expenses) as well as $ 20,000 to their attorneys in order to save the town further litigation costs.

The state also agreed to pay the plaintiffs $ 500,000.

Spark Networks agreed to pay each plaintiff $ 9K and $ 450K in attorneys» fees to the two men's lawyers.

The defense attorney argued that the jury should award each plaintiff $ 4,500 and that they were not really hurt in this wreck.

On June 1, 2016, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Elihu M. Berle granted plaintiff $ 659,759 in fees for prevailing in a case alleging that California's controller at the time illegally withheld automatic raises from 3,000 active and retired California judges.

[79] After considering the relevant case law referred to by counsel and keeping in mind that the award in each case is very dependent upon the unique facts of the case, I award the plaintiff $ 75,000 in non-pecuniary damages.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $ 15 million in noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, and $ 1.5 million to the plaintiff's husband for loss of society and companionship.

One case involving Risperdal netted a plaintiff a $ 70 million settlement last summer in Philadelphia.

(And one of the product liability jury wins still required Merck to pay a plaintiff $ 15 plus attorneys» fees on a consumer fraud theory.)

«To summarize, plaintiff now has no negligence claim and no medical malpractice claim, all despite the fact that (a) defendant - hospital openly admitted negligence, (b) a jury determined that this negligence constituted the proximate cause of plaintiff's death, and (c) a jury awarded plaintiff a $ 20 million verdict,» wrote Markman in his ruling.

Prior to the second trial ICBC paid the Plaintiff $ 250,000 in exchange for a stay of execution so the Plaintiff would not collect the damages from the Defendants personally.

The Michigan Supreme Court called it a «medical and legal dereliction,» further stating, «To summarize, plaintiff now has no negligence claim and no medical malpractice claim, all despite the fact that (a) defendant - hospital openly admitted negligence, (b) a jury determined that this negligence constituted the plaintiff's cause of death, and (c) a jury awarded plaintiff a $ 20 million verdict.»

In the end, the court awarded the plaintiff $ 80,000, an amount at the high - end of the range of general damages, for pain and suffering.

Reid awarded the plaintiff $ 50,000 for general damages and $ 83,473 for economic loss, finding «the effects of the Form 1 application on Dr. X were serious and prolonged.

The jury awarded the plaintiff $ 5,000,000 for pain and suffering and other general damages to the present, and $ 4,000,000 for pain and suffering and other general damages in the future.

In Raptis v. Chalabiani, 2017 BCSC 1548, the Court awarded the Plaintiff $ 584,560 for injuries sustained in a December 2009 motor vehicle accident, which substantially exceeded ICBC's final offer of $ 364,243 before trial.

The jury also found that the infringement was intentional and awarded plaintiff $ 1,750,000 in damages and also its attorney fees.

Ultimately the Jury awarded the Plaintiff $ 528,400 in damages.

Reasons for judgement were released today awarding a Plaintiff $ 12,000 for «pain and suffering and loss of amenities «(non-pecuniary damages) for «a mild soft tissue injury which had essentially cleared within 3 months or so.

The contract they wrote down states that the plaintiff will hand over the title to her car to the defendant by September 15, and the defendant will pay the plaintiff $ 35,000 for the car by September 20.

At trial the Jury awarded the Plaintiff $ 52,700 for damages.

Despite this, the Court still awarded the Plaintiff $ 95,000.00 for past diminished earning capacity.

The Court saw merits in both Plaintiff counsel's and ICBC»S lawyer's arguments, and would eventually award the Plaintiff $ 80,000.00 gross for loss of past earning capacity.

While Bard's settlement efforts come after losing two trials, including one in which a California court ordered the mesh device maker to pay the plaintiff $ 5.5 million over its Avaulta implant.

In Morison v. Ergo - Industrial Seating Systems Inc., 2016 ONSC 6725, for example, the Superior Court awarded the Plaintiff $ 50,000 in punitive damages after finding that the employer's allegation that it terminated the Plaintiff's employment for cause lacked a reasonable basis and was done for purely tactical purposes.

The Court awarded the plaintiff $ 30,000 in human rights general damages for these violations.

The defense suggested $ 30,000 was a reasonable award, but the trial judge awarded plaintiff $ 58,341.50 as a reasonable fee lodestar, denying the request for any multiplier.

Taking into account the Stapley v. Hejslet factors, I award the plaintiff $ 80,000 under this head of damages.

In 2013, the Court in Wilson v. Solis Mexican Foods Inc., 2013 ONSC 5799 awarded the plaintiff $ 20,000 in general damages for an employment - related human rights violation, among other remedies.

Court awarding plaintiff $ 132,601, including non-pecuniary damages of $ 75,000 and loss of future earnings of $ 40,000.

At trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff $ 248,000 in damages.

1 The Jury awarded the Plaintiff $ 15,000 in general damages for sustaining a minor soft - tissue injury.

A jury found both parties equally to blame and after factoring the liability split awarded the Plaintiff $ 10,000 for past wage loss and special damages.

The Defendant claimed that when the parties separated he had paid the Plaintiff $ 2,500 to settle issues between them, which he had thought included payment for Luna.

In awarding the Plaintiff $ 500,000.00, the Court commented:

I award the plaintiff $ 89,108.00 for loss of homemaking capacity in the future.

Reasons for judgement were released today awarding a Plaintiff $ 50,000 for non-pecuniary loss (pain and suffering) as a result of injuries sustained in a 2004 rear - end BC car crash.

Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court (Rattenbury v. Samra) awarding a Plaintiff $ 30,000 in non-pecuniary damages as a result of an ICBC Injury Claim.

The Court, after also factoring in contingencies such as a disruption in the Plaintiff's career due to maternity leave, awarded the Plaintiff $ 290,000.00 in diminished earning capacity.

I award the plaintiff $ 28,000 for past and future loss of housekeeping capacity.