Sentences with phrase «ruled on the motion for summary judgment»

Not exact matches

The Arbitrator (i) shall apply internal laws of the State of New York consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and applicable statutes of limitations, or, to the extent (if any) that federal law prevails, shall apply the law of the U.S., irrespective of any conflict of law principles; (ii) shall entertain any motion to dismiss, motion to strike, motion for judgment on the pleadings, motion for complete or partial summary judgment, motion for summary adjudication, or any other dispositive motion consistent with New York or federal rules of procedure, as applicable; (iii) shall honor claims of privilege recognized at law; and (iv) shall have authority to award any form of legal or equitable relief;

On July 8, the public got its first view into how the U.S. Department of Labor will defend its fiduciary rule when it filed a cross motion for summary judgment, asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to dismiss a law suit brought by the National Association for Fixed Annuities.

All parties have submitted motions for summary judgment, which means they are seeking to avoid a trial by asking Judge Dewayne Thomas to rule on the briefs submitted.

Here's a closer look at the court's ruling on the district's and individual defendants» motion for summary judgment for Ms. I's claims.

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Timothy C. Batten Sr., ruling on Fastcase's motion for summary judgment, denied the motion and dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning that Fastcase is not barred from refiling the lawsuit in another court.

Plaintiffs and defendant all filed motions for summary judgment, and on Feb. 2, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a memorandum ruling in favor of plaintiffs and an order permanently barring Public.Resource.Org from posting any of the plaintiffs» standards.

The motions judge also subsequently awarded costs against Affinia on a «substantial indemnity» basis, relying on a rule in Ontario's rules of civil procedure which applies where a party has acted unreasonably in responding to a motion for summary judgment.

Another example is a motion for summary judgment, which asks the court to rule in the requester's favor because essential facts are no longer in dispute (perhaps because of what has been learned in discovery), making a jury's decision unnecessary on some — or all — points.

In the absence of expert testimony, there was no triable issue of material fact as to whether a defect in the speed control deactivation switch installed on a pickup truck was the proximate cause of a fire that damaged a brake shop, a federal court in Mississippi ruled, granting the pickup truck maker's motions for summary judgment on the business owner's products liability and negligence claims (the latter of which was subsumed by the products liability claim), and on the punitive damages claim (Mildemont, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., January 13, 2017, Ozerden, H.).

[5] In the months following the amendments to Rule 20, it has become a matter of some controversy and uncertainty as to whether it is appropriate for a motion judge to use the new powers conferred by the amended Rule 20 to decide an action on the basis of the evidence presented on a motion for summary judgment.

There is no shortage of rhetoric in the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision on the scope and interpretation of amendments to Ontario's Rule 20 governing motions for summary judgment.

Update 4:35 p.m.: In a ruling today, Federal Court Justice Russel Zinn held in Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals that the Federal Court had jurisdiction to consider Apotex's impeachment action and motion for summary judgment and declared Pfizer's patent on Viagra, Canadian Patent No. 2,163,466 invalid.

On cross motions for summary judgment, the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

[22] Rule 20.04 (2.1) is a statutory reversal of the case law that had held that a judge can not assess credibility, weigh evidence, or find facts on a motion for summary judgment.

The Rules of Civil Procedure require that a responding party on a motion for summary judgment «must set out, in affidavit material or other evidence, specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue requiring a trial».

For those of you who aren't familiar with the Ontario rules, a summary judgment motion is a motion brought by a party to obtain judgment without a trial on the basis that the result is so clear cut that a full trial is not necessary.

D. New Mexico, 2014 (Docket No. 11 - CV -784-BRB / RHS), a New Mexico federal court granted the defendants» motions for summary judgment, ruling that the plaintiff's failure to designate an expert witness on the issue of medical causation before an April 17, 2013 deadline required that the case be thrown out.

The webinar cover the impact recent rulings will have on: Confidentiality of settlement negotiations Coverage liability Expert evidence at trial Limitation periods Motions for summary judgment Motor vehicle liability Property claims Statutory accident benefits.

In reviewing the factors in Rule 57.01 (1) and the relevant case law, Justice Healey noted that the applicant had total success on the motion for summary judgment and that there had been insufficient evidence to support the respondents» positions.

In the recent costs ruling on Columbos v. Columbos, 1 the self - represented litigants who were on the receiving end of a motion for summary judgment were ordered to pay the applicant's and moving party's costs.