In August 2014, Justice Ajet - Nassam ruled in favour of Nana Oteng Korankye, chief of Brekusu and Comet Properties as
plaintiffs in a suit against the Presbyterian Church of Ghana in respect of a 3,984 acres of land arguably belonging to Abokobi.
Chong Park, a partner at Ropes & Gray law firm, is representing the ABA and the individual
plaintiffs in this suit against the USDE.
We do have one of the lawyer -
plaintiffs in the suit against Avvo, John Henry Browne, as a guest, along with two well - known bloggers, Carolyn Elefant and Denise Howell.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth awarded damages to about 80
plaintiffs in the suit against the Iranian government, Law360 reports.
Mr. Chavez was survived by his wife and multiple children,
the plaintiffs in a suit against the doctor and clinic for medical malpractice.
A Richmond Circuit Court sets aside a $ 250,000 jury award for
plaintiff in her suit against defendant Chesterfield County police officer on a claim of malicious prosecution; applying a 2011 Virginia Supreme Court case, the court says defendant officer investigated...
Not exact matches
David Sanford, chairman of Sanford Heisler Sharp, the law firm that argued the largest - ever employment gender discrimination case to go to trial — a class action
suit against Novartis Pharmaceuticals that resulted
in a $ 253 million jury award for
plaintiffs in 2010, reduced post-trial to $ 175 million — noted that
in that case, the company had just three investigators for a workforce of thousands.
Henry was named the lead
plaintiff among 61 retirees
in a
suit against Structured Investments
in 2005.
The Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project (NEDAP), which brought the
suit against Chase on
plaintiffs» behalf, says banks shouldn't be willing to let online payday lenders take money out of customer accounts
in states where such loans are illegal.
When news broke
in 2015 of Volkswagen's massive diesel emissions - cheating scandal, Hagens Berman was the first firm
in the nation to file
suit against the automaker for its egregious fraud, going on to represent thousands of owners
in litigation and take a leading role on the
Plaintiffs» Steering Committee that would finalize a $ 14.7 billion, record - breaking settlement for owners.
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans became the sixth
plaintiff to lob a complaint
against the Department of Labor's fiduciary rule when the insurer filed a
suit in late September challenging the class - action waiver requirement under the rule's best interest contract exemption, or BICE.
In that case Gaidry, a manufacturer of a sauce labelled «Tabasco Pepper Sauce,» brought suit against McIlhenny Company for damages for alleged wrongful conduct in interfering with the plaintiff's business by falsely and in bad faith representing to dealers throughout the country that it had an exclusive trade - mark in the name «Tabasco,» and threatening injunction and other legal proceedings against those who handled any sauce called «Tabasco» not made by the said McIlhenny Compan
In that case Gaidry, a manufacturer of a sauce labelled «Tabasco Pepper Sauce,» brought
suit against McIlhenny Company for damages for alleged wrongful conduct
in interfering with the plaintiff's business by falsely and in bad faith representing to dealers throughout the country that it had an exclusive trade - mark in the name «Tabasco,» and threatening injunction and other legal proceedings against those who handled any sauce called «Tabasco» not made by the said McIlhenny Compan
in interfering with the
plaintiff's business by falsely and
in bad faith representing to dealers throughout the country that it had an exclusive trade - mark in the name «Tabasco,» and threatening injunction and other legal proceedings against those who handled any sauce called «Tabasco» not made by the said McIlhenny Compan
in bad faith representing to dealers throughout the country that it had an exclusive trade - mark
in the name «Tabasco,» and threatening injunction and other legal proceedings against those who handled any sauce called «Tabasco» not made by the said McIlhenny Compan
in the name «Tabasco,» and threatening injunction and other legal proceedings
against those who handled any sauce called «Tabasco» not made by the said McIlhenny Company.
As a result, two gay couples and two straight couples have filed
suit against her
in Kentucky, and a judge has sided with the
plaintiffs.
Brockovich's work on behalf of
plaintiffs who brought
suit against Pacific Gas & Electric
in the 1990s was dramatized
in a 2000 film starring Julia Roberts.
In a July 3 decision, the judge described the lawsuit as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation — or SLAPP suit — noting that the plaintiff did not offer enough evidence that the statements were said in a fraudulent manne
In a July 3 decision, the judge described the lawsuit as a Strategic Lawsuit
Against Public Participation — or SLAPP
suit — noting that the
plaintiff did not offer enough evidence that the statements were said
in a fraudulent manne
in a fraudulent manner.
However, on 10th July, the Commission received an order given by the Federal High Court, Abuja and dated 6th July, 2017, directing the «parties to maintain the status quo till the determination of the
Plaintiff's motion on notice,
in respect of the
suit filed by the concerned senator, seeking orders of injunction
against the Commission to stop it from acting on the petition by the Kogi West Senatorial District Registered Voters.
But on the same 10th July, the Commission received an order given by the Federal High Court, Abuja and dated 6th July, directing the «parties to maintain the status quo till the determination of the
plaintiff's motion on notice»
in respect of the
suit filed by the concerned senator, seeking orders of injunction
against the Commission to stop it from acting on the petition by the registered voters of Kogi West Senatorial District.
Earlier this year, the city's major police unions called for Emery's dismissal over his private law firm's role
in a
suit against the city on behalf of a former CCRB
plaintiff.
Taking audience questions about American Violet at the Telluride film festival, she alleged that even after district attorney John Paschall settled out of court with her and the other
plaintiffs in an ACLU
suit, he enforced an informal employment blacklist
against her
in her hometown of Hearne, Texas.
But on the same day that the Florida
suit was filed, the New Hampshire supreme court ruled that
plaintiffs in that state did not have standing to file
suit against their education tax credit program.
In the end, the NEA and the nine school districts that have taken this legal plunge face a difficult task to show that they are the right
plaintiffs to bring this
suit, at this time,
against this agency.
Veteran teacher Rich Nixon, one of the six
plaintiffs in the
suit, said the drumbeat
against due process was started by lawmakers who are more determined to silence teacher voices than improve public education.
Plaintiff attorneys previously used this tactic
in a handful of class - action law
suits against some lenders.
While there is precedent for filing the
suit against all of the defendants together, other similar cases have resulted
in a judge ordering that there be separate trials for each defendant, making the
plaintiff much less likely to sue each offender.
Apples iBookstore wields enough power to change how electronic books are sold and priced, according to
plaintiffs in class - action
suits against the Cupertino, Calif., company and several traditional publishers.
With the help of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the
plaintiffs filed
suit against Barbour County
in 2016 for its failure to maintain a county shelter or employ an impounding officer.
But just yesterday it seems that the
plaintiff's attorney agreed to dismiss Gearbox with prejudice (meaning they can't file another
suit against them concerning Aliens: Colonial Marines) and
in return Gearbox won't be seeking legal fees.
The Declaration of Arjun Makhijani,
in support of the Atmospheric Trust Litigation
Plaintiff's Climate Change
Suit Against Federal Agencies (September 26, 2011; Filed November 21, 2011)
In what may be an unprecedented move, 23 Texans who host wind turbines on their property have filed
suit against two different wind farm developers, claiming that companies «carelessly and negligently failed to adequately disclose the true nature and effects that the wind turbines would have on the community, including the
plaintiffs» homes.»
But that certainly wasn't the case
in the Chevron
suit, where a U.S. judge upheld a racketeering case
against the
plaintiffs» lawyer, stating the Ecuador judgment was obtained by corrupt means.
Although the
plaintiffs in this particular lawsuit were the railroad companies, the article notes that several of the families of the passengers and conductor who were killed
in the crash have filed civil
suits against the trucking company, the driver's estate, and his insurance company.
Acted for Laroe Estates before the US Supreme Court
in a dispute over when intervenors as of right must independently demonstrate Article III standing, following Laroe's attempt to intervene
in a
suit brought by an individual
plaintiff against the Town of Chester.
Lisa Arrowood and Jeffrey Catalano represented the
plaintiffs in this case which was a
suit against a doctor for negligence
in the death of a basketball player.
Lead trial counsel for
plaintiffs in both the preliminary and final injunction hearings of Evans v. Romer, a successful
suit challenging the constitutionality of a widely - publicized amendment to Colorado's constitution that would have prohibited any legislation protecting
against discrimination based on sexual orientation; case received nationwide press coverage
in broadcast and print media, including live coverage on Court TV, and was ultimately decided
in plaintiffs» favor
in the U. S. Supreme Court.
He tried a
suit against Fayette County Long Term Care which resulted
in a $ 1.5 million judgment for the
plaintiff.
Like Niro, Grossman has had a string of victories representing
plaintiffs in patent and trademark
suits, most recently
in November when he won a $ 21 million verdict
against Sears, Roebuck and Co. after a jury found that the retail giant misappropriated the trade secrets of a Wisconsin carpenter and the family business he started
in his basement three decades ago.
Instead of analyzing whether California has jurisdiction over the product liability situation,
in general, the high court decides that the determination regarding whether California has jurisdiction over a
suit against a particular defendant must be made on a
plaintiff by
plaintiff basis when «specific jurisdiction» rather than «general jurisdiction» is involved.
In this groundbreaking case, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court correctly dismissed a legal malpractice
suit against the attorney and his law firm because the underlying product liability claim
plaintiffs» asserted should have been pursued was statutorily preempted under the federal Medical Device Act («MDA»).
penalizes the defendant for engaging
in public participation «
plaintiff» means a person who initiates or maintains a proceeding
against a defendant; «proceeding» means any action, suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body, in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper p
against a defendant; «proceeding» means any action,
suit, matter, cause, counterclaim, appeal, or originating application that is brought
in the Supreme Court or the Provincial Court, but does not include a prosecution for an offence or a crime; «public interest» means the whole of the subject matter invites public attention, or a matter
in which the public has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached; «public participation» means communication or conduct aimed at influencing public opinion, or promoting further lawful action by the public or any government body,
in relation to an issue of public interest; «Strategic Lawsuit
Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper p
Against Public Participation (SLAPP)» means a claim that arises from a form of expression or public participation, by the person
against whom the claim is asserted that was made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper p
against whom the claim is asserted that was made
in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public interest; Purposes of this Act: 2 The purposes of this Act are to a) Establish a statutory right to public participation for every individual; b) Encourage individuals to express themselves on matters of public interest; c) Promote broad participation
in debates on matters of public interest; d) Discourage the use of litigation as a means of unduly limiting expression on matters of public interest; and, e) Preserve the right of access to the courts for all proceedings and claims that are not brought or maintained for an improper purpose.
The
plaintiffs, representing 30,000 indigenous Eduadorian villagers, filed
suit in the U.S.
in 1993
against the oil companies, before a 2001 judgement directed them to initiate their claims
in Eduador instead.
In some cases, a defendant in a civil law suit will retaliate against the plaintiff by filing a counter law suit, often of a dubious or spurious natur
In some cases, a defendant
in a civil law suit will retaliate against the plaintiff by filing a counter law suit, often of a dubious or spurious natur
in a civil law
suit will retaliate
against the
plaintiff by filing a counter law
suit, often of a dubious or spurious nature.
The majority expressed concern that pre-
suit mechanisms could be used
in Texas to identify information about defendants that the court would not have jurisdiction for the
suit proper, and the
plaintiffs would then pursue litigation
against these defendants elsewhere.
Won summary judgment dismissing a Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act
suit filed
against a Texas - based, public accounting and advisory services company
in which the
plaintiff alleged our client was the wrongful recipient of over $ 1.8 million worth of client information and company goodwill.
If Paul
Plaintiff is suing Dan Defendant
in a civil
suit, Paul might have records
in his possession upon which he's based his complaint
against Dan.
The Court of Appeal found
in Harris v. Levine that the
plaintiff's
suit against his former criminal defence counsel was an abuse of process because
in order to succeed, the
plaintiff would have had to prove that but for the solicitor's negligence, he would not have been convicted.
Plaintiff, a dissatisfied attorney, has brought
suit against the entire legal tech industry, alleging that the claims and promises it made
in 2016 amount to fraud and false advertising.»
In plaintiff customer's suit alleging that tainted seafood he consumed at Frankie Rowland's Steakhouse in Roanoke triggered his Guillain - Barré syndrome, the Roanoke U.S. District Court grants summary judgment against Sam Rust Seafood Inc. on motions filed by Performance Food Group.
In plaintiff customer's
suit alleging that tainted seafood he consumed at Frankie Rowland's Steakhouse
in Roanoke triggered his Guillain - Barré syndrome, the Roanoke U.S. District Court grants summary judgment against Sam Rust Seafood Inc. on motions filed by Performance Food Group.
in Roanoke triggered his Guillain - Barré syndrome, the Roanoke U.S. District Court grants summary judgment
against Sam Rust Seafood Inc. on motions filed by Performance Food Group...
However,
in Gillis v. Eagleson, the stay of the civil
suit was ordered on terms designed to safeguard the
plaintiff's rights — i.e., that
in exchange for a deferral of the civil case
against him, Eagleson would have to pay into court $ 40,000 (
in 1995, U.S. dollars).
Plaintiff, decedent's husband, brought
suit against a number of defendants and claimed that the products of each of those defendants were a substantial factor
in causing his wife's mesothelioma.
Despite alleging physical impairment and disfigurement, the
plaintiff in this case only filed
suit against the semi-truck driver.