Sentences with phrase «suffering substantial harm»

In order to upset an earlier judgment, the fraud must be material, and the plaintiff (victim) must prove that 1) she suffered substantial harm as a result, and 2) she could not have detected the fraud at the time it occurred by using reasonable care.

Not exact matches

That's because, since the process started, the threshold for seeking secrecy protection went from a «reasonable probability» to «substantial likelihood» that donors would suffer some sort of harm or threat if their identities were known.

Substantial evidence from educational psychology indicates that students who are placed in higher - achieving groups can suffer psychological harm.

The plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction, arguing that they were likely to prevail on the merits because SB 302 was clearly unconstitutional and that Nevada's public school children will suffer irreparable harm because the education savings accounts will divert substantial funds from public schools.

We have more than two decades of experience helping clients pursue medical malpractice lawsuits and wrongful death claims, and our lawyers have recovered substantial compensation for the harm our clients have suffered as a result of hospital negligence, physician negligence and nursing negligence.

Thus, where a plaintiff suffers a single injury as a result of the tortious acts of multiple defendants, the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to demonstrate that the conduct of each defendant was a substantial factor in the harm.

We have recovered substantial awards for injured victims and surviving family members who suffer irreparable harm in a high - speed crash.

Second, the chambers judge had found that if Unifor was ultimately successful in the arbitration, the impact on the privacy and dignity rights of the employees could not be remedied; in the absence of the continuance of the injunction the Unifor employees would suffer irreparable harm from the non-consensual taking of bodily fluids, which is a substantial affront to individuals» privacy, security and bodily integrity (citing Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707 v. Suncor Energy Inc, 2012 ABCA 373 (CanLII) at para 5)(Unifor, ABCA 2018 at para 12).

[59] The primary test to be applied in determining causation is commonly articulated as the «but for» test: a defendant will be fully liable for the harm suffered by a plaintiff, even if other causal factors were at play, so long as the plaintiff establishes a «substantial connection» between the injuries and the defendant's negligence beyond the de minimus range: Farrant v. Latkin, 2011 BCCA 336 (B.C.C.A), at paras 9 and 11; Athey v. Leonati, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458; Blackwater v. Plint, 2005 SCC 58; Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7; Clements v.Clements,, 2012 SCC 32.

Second, the court found that there were questions of fact which needed to be considered for the alleged violations of the consumer protection law, such as whether the Form could deceive a «substantial portion of the public» and also whether the tenants suffered any harm because of the Form.