Sentences with phrase «rights of plaintiffs»

To be clear, local rules like those in the Eastern District violate the rights of both plaintiffs and defendants.

In this latest challenge, the plaintiffs argue the prohibition infringes both section 7 and 15 (equality) Charter rights of the plaintiffs, and is not justified in a free and democratic society.

He advocates for the rights of plaintiffs and never represents the insurance company.

While there is not a civil legal remedy for every unlawful or unfair act — especially in light of recent Supreme Court rulings that have curtailed the rights of plaintiffs against corporations — our investigations exhaust every angle to determine whether a legal challenge is appropriate.

Our firm was involved in the landmark case that solidified the rights of plaintiffs in personal injury actions in Canada and we have the experience necessary to make sure that the evidence of virtually any serious injury is properly collected and presented.

Tort reform is an important goal, but limiting the contractual rights of plaintiffs and their lawyers is an unattractive and likely ineffective method of achieving that goal.

In this latest challenge, the plaintiffs argue that the prohibition infringes both section 7 and 15 (equality) Charter rights of the plaintiffs, and is not justified in a free and democratic society.

On Monday, a judge ruled that stop and frisk did violate the rights of the plaintiffs in the case, and ordered a federal independent monitor to oversee changes to the program.

Last week, a federal judge ruled in a civil suit that stop - and - frisk violated the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs, and appointed a monitor to oversee changes to the policy.

However, the defendant proceeded to infringe on theconsent judgment regarding exclusive content rights of the plaintiff by setting up a new television channel on its Champion TV decoder under the trade name, Top TV 2, which was used to broadcast the 2016/17 season of the EPL.

c. General damages against defendant for violating the sexual right of plaintiff by sexually abusing her without her consent.

In some cases, the wording of the claim is such that it can be used as a model to describe exactly what the defendant has done that constitutes an encroachment on the rights of a plaintiff.

It is to be observed that, so far as the issue of this cause is implicated, this argument yields all right of the plaintiff in error to a decision in his favour; for, non constat, from the pleadings, but that this warrant issued for an offence committed in the immediate presence of the House.

As to balancing the rights of the plaintiff with those of the defendant in this case, «Under the circumstances the plaintiff should not be put out of court and the defendant granted a windfall that it could not have known about or relied upon.»

Essentially, an oral hearing allows the judge to consider procedural fairness to and the substantive rights of the plaintiff under disability.

Some recent decisions suggest that on contested motions seeking bifurcation, the court will look critically at contested requests to bifurcate, often recognizing the additional time required for final resolution and the right of the plaintiff to get all issues resolved.

Not exact matches

«The court rejected (the plaintiff's) theory that the newspaper's publication violated her right to privacy because her post to MySpace was made virtually to everyone with an internet connection,» Zaller wrote in a blog post two years ago, asserting the case could apply to situations of employees posting on social media.

«Plaintiff does not have to allege an absolute right to receive every text message in order to allege that Apple's intentional acts have caused an actual breach or disruption of the contractual relationship,» Koh wrote.

But is it right that a civil servant will be left to dole out up to $ 500,000 to each plaintiff without BP having the right of appeal, from a BP escrow that has no ultimate cap.

«Plaintiff bring [s] this action as the public has a right to know about this fraud that is being perpetrated in Dearborn, Michigan, the community with the highest concentrations of Muslims in North America,» the lawsuit read in part, as obtained by CBS Detroit.

Scalia, attorney for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the lead plaintiff, opened with a smooth presentation outlining familiar arguments: the DOL lacks the authority to regulate advisors, acted in an «arbitrary and capricious» manner, and violated plaintiffs» First Amendment rights.

It offers an oppor - tunity to study systematically the interaction of several copyright issues: including the rights (or lack thereof) of exclusive licensees as plaintiffs in parallel import situations, the distinction between exclusive licensees and assignees, the nature of works of authorship, the characteristics of copy - right infringement, the status of copyrightable works when used as trade - marked logos, the limits (if any) of concurrent copyright and trade - mark protection, and even the distinction between trade - mark, copyright, and patent as autonomous yet related legal regimes.

Lively, with representation by Liberty Counsel (an evangelical legal organization), responded that in both the U.S. and Uganda he exercised constitutionally protected speech rights; that he opposes violence and neither committed nor plotted any; that Uganda did not in fact pass a proposed draconian anti-gay law, and that in any case Uganda's political institutions, instead of himself, are responsible for its political decisions; and that the court lacks jurisdiction and the plaintiffs lack standing.

Giving a broad interpretation to a Prohibition - era regulation that calls alcoholism the result of «willful misconduct,» it ruled that the VA was within its rights to refuse the plaintiffs an extension of their educational benefits.

The court found that the plaintiff had a private right of action under Illinois state law and the identical federal law did not apply to preempt the state law claim.

The defendant, in answer, denies that plaintiff or its predecessors now use, or have ever used, the word «Tabasco» as a trade - mark or identifying name for sauce, and specially avers that the word «Tabasco» could not and can not be appropriated as a trade - mark, because it is geographical and descriptive; that plaintiff continually acquiesced in the descriptive use of the word «Tabasco,» and never made a bona fide attempt to establish the trade - mark it now asserts; and that any rights that plaintiff may have had in the name as a trade - mark were lost by the patenting of the process and the expiration of such patent.

The expiration of the patent did not have the effect of conferring on the public, or the plaintiff as a part of it, any right with reference to the name of the thing which was not a subject of the patent.»

Defendant Bulliard, concededly, has a perfect right, so far as plaintiff is concerned, to make sauce in accordance with the patent, but he does not pretend to be doing so, and, in fact, since the adoption of the National Prohibition Amendment to the Constitution and the passage of an enforcement statute by Congress, he may not do so, as the patented process provided for a mixture of alcohol as well as vinegar with the pepper pulp.

The conclusion of the Court is that plaintiff's predecessor originally acquired a valid trade - mark in the word «Tabasco» as applied to pepper sauce, and that, by no action or inaction during the subsequent years, has plaintiff lost the resultant right to its exclusive use.

Such of these other manufacturers, including defendant, whose use of the word «Tabasco» came to the knowledge of plaintiff and its predecessors, have been warned to the effect that they have no right to use the word in connection with the sauce, or to use similar packages, and quite a number of suits for infringement have been filed by plaintiff, most of which have been terminated by consent decrees.

What the defendant desires is not the right to the use of the process, to which plaintiff makes no objection, but the right to the use of the name to designate a sauce not made in accordance with the patented process.

A district court has granted a plaintiff's motion to remand a lawsuit back to a state court after the plaintiff, who was seeking a waiver of ineligibility from the Kentucky High School Athletics Association, withdrew his allegation that his rights under the United States Constitution were violated.

«Mr. Walker's voluntary assumption of the risk should bar the plaintiff's recovery or, in the alternative, should reduce the plaintiff's right to recovery from the PCNA in an amount equivalent to Mr.Walker's fault.»

The federal lawsuit claims the ordinance — which bans the sale and possession of assault weapons, bump stocks and high - capacity magazines — violates the plaintiffs» Constitutional rights.

While Kurkoski would not reveal their identities, he says the plaintiffs are New Yorkers who own the subsurface drilling rights on the parcels of property, but not the surface rights.

Their first meeting, and interactions with Edie Windsor, the plaintiff in the landmark 2013 civil rights case in which the Supreme Court held that restricting U.S. federal interpretation of «marriage» and «spouse» can apply only to opposite - sex unions was unconstitutional.

Standing with plaintiffs, Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and incoming Corporation Counsel Zach Carter in Brownsville, Brooklyn, the mayor pledged to reunite police with communities across the city and to respect the constitutional rights of every New Yorker.

Plaintiff Mark Janus, an Illinois state worker who declined to join the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, argues in his lawsuit that the payments he's compelled to pay the union violate his First Amendment rights.

The plaintiffs said because the governor has not issued a Proclamation of Election in a «reasonably timely manner,» they have been denied their constitutionally - protected rights to vote and to representation.

The plaintiff — Illinois state worker Mark Janus — argues that agency fees violate his First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and association by compelling him to underwrite union political activity with which he disagrees.

A number of witnesses were to testify in favor of a marriage equality plank in the platform: Marc Solomon, national campaign director for Freedom to Marry; Allison Herwitt, legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign; Army Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, a lesbian New Hampshire guardsman with stage - four incurable breast cancer and a plaintiff in Servicemembers Legal Defense Network's lawsuit against the Defense of Marriage Act; Michael Macleod - Ball, the American Civil Liberties Union's chief of staff for the Washington Legislative Office; and Aaron Zellhoefer, a gay delegate to the Democratic National Convention representing the National Stonewall Democrats.

However, the court on Friday dismissed the application and said the plaintiffs did not demonstrate in any way that their rights had been violated or would be violated if Dr Rawlings went ahead to contest this year's parliamentary elections on the ticket of the NDC.

As the Rokita court noted, voters who lack Photo ID undoubtedly exist somewhere, but the fact that Plaintiffs, in spite of their efforts, have failed to uncover anyone «who can attest to the fact that he / she will be prevented from voting» provides significant support for a conclusion that the Photo ID requirement does not unduly burden the right to vote.

He also sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from interfering with his rights and or privileges as a senator and preventing him from entering «or remaining within the precinct or chamber of the Senate or National Assembly or attempting to forcibly remove him from the chamber or precinct of the National Assembly or in any way impeding or undermining the plaintiff's ability to function as a senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.»

Castorina argues that the plaintiffs and others are «being denied their right to vote for a representative in the vacant 11th Congressional District in New York due to the failure of defendant to comply with mandatory provisions of Article I, Section II, Clause IV of the United States Constitution and the New York Public Officers Law Section 42 [3],» according to court documents.

The Court, according to counsel to the plaintiff, Inibehe Effiong, a Lagos based human rights lawyer, was to established whether Luke and his security aides had fallen foul of the law, against his client and sought damages amounting to N100million as well as additional N400million as exemplary damages.

The plaintiffs» attorneys have countered that the chemicals in the bloodstreams of the residents constitute an injury and the pollution of their wells was an invasion of their right to clean drinking water.

The Human Rights Division of the Superior court of Jurisdiction in High court of Justice Accra, preferred an out of court settlement, which was accepted by both the plaintiffs, Mr. Philip Ayamba and seven others and the Defendant, the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General's Department in respect of L.I 2146.

In the light of the above, the course aims at adopting a right - based approach to improve the inclusivity and provide comprehensive access to justice for PWDs, either as direct or indirect participants and whether as victims of crime, suspects, witnesses, plaintiffs, defendants, appellants, remand prisoners and / or prison inmates.

The plaintiffs argued that an individual's right to privacy was compromised at little or no benefit to the public, says John Roberts, who directs the Massachusetts chapter of the ACLU.