On rehearing en banc, the 4th Circuit says it has no jurisdiction to consider appeals by Iraqis who were detained and tortured at Abu Ghraib military prison and elsewhere and whose
tort claims against defendant government contractors were partly dismissed...
Not exact matches
No Prejudice In Arguing All
Defendants Should Be Liable / Failure to
Claim Tort of Another Fee Damages At Trial Dispositive
Against Fee Petitioner.
Nevertheless, the arguments are frequently crunched through, probably because of an important Illinois Supreme Court ruling from 1990 which is still good law, Rollins v. Ellwood, involving
claims brought
against a Baltimore police officer, among others, sounding in intentional
tort for his role in the apprehension of a misidentified criminal
defendant and Illinois resident in Illinois, for which the Court found the officer was not subject to Illinois jurisdiction.
The case involved issues as to the interpretation of DIFC regulatory law and
claims against the
defendant bank in both contract and
tort.
«We conclude that even if Roe's pleading was sufficient to state a
claim of negligence
against the
defendants, his
claim is barred by the two - year statute of limitations of the Nebraska State
Tort Claims Act,» said the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Attorney General, 2017 ONSC 1333, the Court allowed an employee's
claim against his employer and two superiors for the «
tort of harassment» and awarded significant damages
against the
defendants as a consequence.
The arbitrator granted summary disposition in favor of the
defendants, finding that: (1) CHSI was not a proper respondent to the action and that Weirton failed to state
claims against CHSI; (2) all of Weirton's
claims, except for the breach - of - contract
claim against Quorum, were barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel; (3) Weirton's breach - of - contract
claim against Quorum was time - barred under the applicable Tennessee statute of limitations; (4) Weirton's
tort claims were alternatively barred by the gist - of - the - action doctrine; and (5) Weirton's unjust enrichment
claim was barred because of the parties» contracts (the «Second Award»).
Once jurisdiction is established
against one or more
Defendants within this jurisdiction, the question of which
claims may be pleaded and proved
against them is a question of the applicable law of the
tort.
Kurdish victims of mustard gas attacks in northern Iraq in the late 1980s have not stated
claims under the Torture Victim Protection Act or the Alien
Tort Statute
against defendant chemical manufacturer, who allegedly sold thiodiglycol to Saddam Hussein; the...
The decision also contains important messages about the nature of the evidence necessary to support an application for interim springboard relief and the extent of the English court's jurisdiction when
tort claims are asserted
against non-domicile employee
defendants.
5 Nov. 17, 2016)(unpublished),
defendants won a «waste» lease dispute
against a plaintiff alleging two
tort claims, and one of the
defendants also won on a slander cross-claim (resulting in $ 1 nominal damages), but lost on three other cross-
claims.
[1] The plaintiff, Mahmoud Elfarnawani, has commenced an action
against the
defendants, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and its internal Ethics Commission (EC),
claiming damages for the
torts of defamation, breach of a duty of good faith, and abuse of process.
[41] The plaintiff, in reply, submits that he understood that any settlement offers made by the
defendant were full settlements of both the tort claim and Part 7 claims against ICBC, and that at no time did defence counsel convey that Part 7 benefits would still be available in the event that the Defendant's Offer was
defendant were full settlements of both the
tort claim and Part 7
claims against ICBC, and that at no time did defence counsel convey that Part 7 benefits would still be available in the event that the
Defendant's Offer was
Defendant's Offer was accepted.