It was 2009, and co-counsel and I were sitting
through plaintiff counsel's closing arguments in a bench trial involving a prisoner alleging that he was denied due process before his prison - gang validation.
Not exact matches
But the
plaintiff,
through his
counsel, Frank Tietie, contended in the suit that «in the absence of a resolution by the Executive Council of the Federation» as required under section 144 (1) of the Constitution, the Senate President could constitute such medical panel «to determine the health status of the President.»
A copy of the suit said: «This honourable court will be moved by Gary Nimako Marfo ESQ.,
counsel for and on behalf of
plaintiff / applicants herein praying for an order of interlocutory injunction to restrain defendants / respondents, whether by themselves, agents, servants, workmen, hirelings, privies or any person claiming under or
through them or howsoever described, from holding out the second defendant / respondent, [as] the parliamentary candidate - elect for Klottey Korle constituency.»
A copy of the suit, which is available to ClassFMonline.com said: «This honourable court will be moved by Gary Nimako Marfo ESQ.,
counsel for and on behalf of
plaintiff / applicants herein praying for an order of interlocutory injunction to restrain defendants / respondents, whether by themselves, agents, servants, workmen, hirelings, privies or any person claiming under or
through them or howsoever described, from holding out the second defendant / respondent, [as] the parliamentary candidate - elect for Klottey Korle constituency.»
The
plaintiff through her
counsel, I. A. Adedipe (SAN), had prayed the court to restrain the EFCC from infringing on her right.
Counsel to the
plaintiff had earlier said they were in court to claim damages for the stress and harassment his client went
through over the issue.
The
plaintiff,
through his
counsel, Ifeanyichukwu Obasi - Nweze, is seeking a judicial review to determine whether or not the Office of Mark had not become vacant by the provisions of Section 68 (1)(e) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, and Section 3 (3)(a) of the National Institute for Legislative Studies Act, 2011.
In the suit before Justice Gabriel Kolawole, the
plaintiffs through their
counsel, Mr. Kan Osieke are praying for court to grant them relief on this followings:
«COME NOW
Plaintiff in this adversarial proceeding, -LSB--RSB--LRB-»
Plaintiff»), and the Defendant Department of Education («DOE»), by and
through their undersigned
counsel of record, and hereby stipulate and agree:
Having regard to institutional fairness will send the message that the court will not approve a settlement if
through misadventure, incompetence, opportunism, lassitude, or fatigue the Representative
Plaintiff and Class
Counsel do not achieve a settlement that is truly fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of class members.
Defendants John T. Boring (hereinafter, «Boring»), Suzie K. Rote (hereinafter, «Rote»), and Paul J. Muddle (hereinafter, «Muddle»)(collectively referred to herein as the «Individual Defendants»), by and
through their undersigned
counsel, Long, Winded, and Writing, PLLP, collectively and jointly bring this motion to dismiss the First Amended and Consolidated Complaint (hereinafter, «Complaint») of the
Plaintiffs ABC Corporation, Inc. (hereinafter, «ABC»), MNO Corporation, Inc. (hereinafter, «MNO»), and XYZ Corporation, Inc. (hereinafter, «XYZ»)(collectively referred to herein as «
Plaintiffs Corporations») under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 (b)(6) and 9 (b)...
The
Plaintiff brought an application to compel pre trial examination under oath of this witness but this was dismissed with the Court noting that a witness willing to speak
through counsel is indeed being responsive.
In addition to the Lead
Plaintiff, the Iowa Public Employees» Retirement System, Orange County Employees» Retirement System («OCERS»), the State of Oregon, by and
through the Oregon State Treasurer and the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Board on behalf of the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Fund («Oregon») and the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits of the United Methodist Church («the General Board»), all were appointed class representatives and Cohen Milstein was appointed Class
Counsel in the litigation in October 2011.
Counsel for foreclosure
plaintiffs initially tried to get to judgment more quickly
through motions for final summary judgment.
On September 28, 2015,
plaintiff's
counsel requested that the defendant provide specific, up - to - date sales figures up
through and including October 15, 2015, prior to mediation.
Weil successfully represented Procter & Gamble (P&G) as lead
counsel in a high - profile MDL in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in which
plaintiffs alleged that they were injured
through their use of the popular denture cream, Fixodent.
Plaintiffs claim that the PACER fee schedule violated the E-Government Act of 2002, 28 U.S.C. § 1913) and seek reimbursement of the excess fee pursuant to the Little Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346, on behalf of all individuals and entities, excluding class
counsel and federal governmental agencies, who paid PACER fees from April 2010
through April 2016.
[24] The
Plaintiff has confirmed,
through counsel, that the most significant of her injuries, in terms of general damages, loss of income and future care costs, are the injuries to her lower left leg and foot.