Sentences with phrase «strict liability laws»

Notably, each state's strict liability laws are slightly different and, thus, a detailed legal analysis will need to be conducted to ensure all appropriate claims are pursued on your behalf.

Due to strict liability laws regarding the possession of such images, Service Providers who discover them are required by law to immediately contact law enforcement and surrender possession.

Both Utah and Washington State have strict liability laws that will hold the dog's owner liable for your damages, while Idaho adheres to the one - bite rule.

Wisconsin has strict liability laws regarding dog bites.

In Illinois, strict liability laws apply to construction vehicle manufacturers and they can be held liable for injuries caused by defective construction vehicles if:

Traffic calming, lower speed limits, decisions to not expand freeways, woonerfs, the re-emergence of car - free / light commercial districts, and strict liability laws all preceded the massive build out of cycle paths.

The MBTA, which was enacted in 1918, is a strict liability law.

Talc product liability cases require experienced professional counsel who understand the complexities of strict liability law and who have the resources and working relationships to bring these cases in court.

In cases of dog bite injuries, Kentucky has a strict liability law that is different than the laws in many states.

This is a strict liability law.

New York is considered a «mixed» state, which means that the one - bite rule is mixed with the strict liability law in regard to the state's dog bite statute.

California joins 27 other states with a strict liability law for dog bites — the law states California dog owners are strictly liable for dog bite injuries, even if the owner was not negligent and the dog has not bitten anyone before.

Not exact matches

Though there were concerns both in the EU and Canada that CETA would also enact stricter policies, including criminal liability measures similar to the much protested ACTA agreement, the negotiations ultimately yielded provisions that more closely match Canada's existing laws and the WIPO treaties.

Copyright extension and ISP liability are controversial issues in Canada, and there has been extensive criticism of the way that other agreements, most notably the TPP, have established stricter standards than established Canadian law.

See «SEC Commissioner Speaks Out Against Trend Toward Strict Liability for Compliance Personnel,» The Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol.

Horner, with NYPIRG, says the testimony illustrates the need to clean up New York's campaign finance laws by setting stricter caps on contributions and eliminating a loophole that allows donors to use LLCs or limited liability companies, to skirt existing donor limits.

Horner said the testimony illustrates the need to clean up New York's campaign finance laws by setting stricter caps on contributions and eliminating a loophole that allows donors to use LLCs, or limited liability companies, to skirt existing donor limits.

The governor went so as far as to circulate a questionnaire to candidates quizzing them on their support for ethics law changes, asking their position on limiting lawmakers» outside income and stricter campaign contribution requirements for Limited Liability Companies (LLCs).

Chairman of the Committee, James Klutse Avedzi, in his address, said giving false testimony and information to the Committee amounts to perjury and a liability to the strict application of the laws of the country and therefore cautioned the invited institutions and individuals to be careful and not fall foul of the law.

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL Nebraska School Nurses Association AND / OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE Nebraska School Nurses Association WEB SITE, WITH THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE Nebraska School Nurses Association WEB SITE OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE Nebraska School Nurses Association WEB SITE, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE Nebraska School Nurses Association WEB SITE, WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF Nebraska School Nurses Association OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES.

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL Healthy Paws AND / OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE Healthy Paws WEB SITE, WITH THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE Healthy Paws WEB SITE OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE Healthy Paws WEB SITE, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE Healthy Paws WEB SITE, WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF Healthy Paws OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES.

The allegations include breach of implied and express warranty, consumer and common law fraud, unjust enrichment, negligence, and strict products liability with defective design or manufacture and failure to warn.

Under no circumstances will the sites or the Chopra parties be liable to you for any loss or damages of any kind that are directly or indirectly related to the sites, the materials in the sites, the downloadable items, user content, your use or inability to use, or the performance of the sites, any action taken in connection with an investigation by the sites or law enforcement authorities regarding your use of the sites, and action taken in connection with copyright or other intellectual property owners, any errors or omission in the sites, technical operation, or any damage to any users computer, hardware, software, wireless devices, cellular phone, modem or other equipment or technology, including without limitation damage from any security breach or from any virus, bugs, tampering, fraud, scam, error, omission, interruption, defect, delay in operation or transmission, computer line or network failure or any other technical or other malfunction, even if foreseeable or even if the sites or Chopra parties have been advised of or should have known of the possibility of such damages, whether in an action of contract, negligence, strict liability or tort.

As noted, given that the criteria of state liability for non-contractual breaches are more strict under (in this case) domestic law, Spanish courts have rejected all compensation claims brought by the affected investors, whereas some of the tribunals dealing with the ECT claims have awarded sizeable compensation to the claimants.

Nonetheless, C.B. Fleet Company may be held liable for negligence under pharmaceutical statutes or be subject to strict product liability laws, in which case negligence need not be proven.

Latin for «knowingly,» the theory behind scienter reflects common law strict liability claims, as well as the one bite rule.

The reason is that they can encompass different areas of law such as negligence, strict liability, and workers» compensation law.

[Where state trooper took affirmative action of allowing police dog to be off leash, there is no immunity from suit; actions for personal injury caused by police dog will be analyzed under the dog bite common law, whether the owner of the dog knew or should have known of the dog's vicious propensities, as the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act does not permit actions under strict liability.]

According to FindLaw, common law identifies four levels of fault for causing a motor vehicle accident: negligence, recklessness or groundless conduct, intentional misconduct, and strict liability.

Although products liability law has evolved from the days of «caveat emptor» (let the buyer beware) to the imposition in appropriate cases of «strict liability,» under which manufacturers are responsible for injuries caused by their defective or unreasonably dangerous products even if they were not negligent, the personal injury plaintiff still has a job to do.

Despite these strict Connecticut dog laws, defenses are available to dog owners, and liability for a bite or attack is not a foregone conclusion.

Currently law in Kentucky holds dog owners to a strict standard of liability if their dog bite someone.

Massachusetts also has a strict law which prevents liability for recreational uses if no fee is charged for using the property.

Insurance companies and juries evaluate product defects according to strict products liability laws.

Drug manufacturers who fail to properly warn victims of side effects may be held accountable under strict liability for product defects laws, which do not require negligence to be proven.

The laws have changed from caveat emptor («let the buyer beware») to Strict Liability for manufacturing defects that make a product unreasonably dangerous.

Strict products liability law applies to any accident caused or worsened by a product defect.

Under California personal injury law, a person who sustains injury under the three categories listed above: intentional misconduct, negligence or strict liability may be able to seek financial compensation for their injuries.

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software AND / OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software WEB SITE, WITH THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software WEB SITE OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software WEB SITE, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software WEB SITE, WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF SmartAdvocate ® - The best plaintiff personal injury case management software OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES.

Strict liability is defined as negligence as a matter of law, the consequence of which is to remove the burden from the user of proving specific acts of negligence.

Under California law, strict liability rules apply.

The amicus brief argues that the notion that an infringer's entire profit (on an infringing article) should be recoverable goes back to the 19th century, when only knowing infringement resulted in liability, while «even independent designers are [under today's strict liability regime] on the hook for patent infringement in modern design patent law».

If you have been attacked or bitten by a dog in Massachusetts and have suffered injuries, the owner of the dog may be held liable under MA law - Massachusetts is a strict liability state with respect to dog bites.

Under Colorado law, negligence and strict liability injuries have a statute of limitations of two (2) years.

Broken and fractured bones, as well as third degree burns are also considered serious bodily injuries under the terms of Colorado's strict liability dog bite law.

This is an action distinct from one brought pursuant to premises liability law and is often maintained as an action in strict liability.

The law puts strict liability on the owner of a dog that has bitten another person, generally making it the owner's responsibility for any injuries that were sustained during the attack.

Claimants have utilized the laws of strict liability, design defect and failure to warn to support their cases.

The law of strict - liability may vary from one jurisdiction to another.

TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers AND / OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers WEB SITE, WITH THE DELAY OR INABILITY TO USE THE Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers WEB SITE OR RELATED SERVICES, THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND RELATED GRAPHICS OBTAINED THROUGH THE Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers WEB SITE, OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers WEB SITE, WHETHER BASED ON CONTRACT, TORT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, EVEN IF Colorado Lawyers Helping Lawyers OR ANY OF ITS SUPPLIERS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES.