Sentences with phrase «plaintiffs in the suit against»

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 CompanIn 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 Companin 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 Companin 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 Companin 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 manneIn 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 mannein 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 pagainst 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 pAgainst 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 pagainst 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 naturIn 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 naturin 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.