Sentences with phrase «upon plaintiffs and defendants»

Ensuring that MDL courts only conduct trials when all parties agree to such, putting an end to the use of «bellwether» trials, which are often forced upon plaintiffs and defendants to pressure them to settle.

Not exact matches

The plaintiff is seeking: A declaration that upon a true and proper interpretation of the provisions of the 1992 Constitution, particularly Articles 88 (5), 218 (a) and (e), 284 and 287 thereof, the 1st defendant can not act as the legal representative for Honourable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta, the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Ghana, in a pending investigation bordering on conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whdefendant can not act as the legal representative for Honourable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta, the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Ghana, in a pending investigation bordering on conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant; A further declaration that the purported response filed by the 1st Defendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant on behalf of the said Honorable Kenneth Nana Yaw Ofori Atta in respect of the petition concerning conflict of interest and abuse of office before the 2nd Defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whDefendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever;

Plaintiff further avers that 1st Defendant could only exercise that discretionary power upon publishing a statutory instrument with regulations that are not inconsistent with PNDC Laws 284 and 286 and also the provisions of the 1992 Constitution to govern the exercise of the discretionary power.

When child custody jurisdiction is based solely upon the child's residence, and not upon the defendant's residence, does the family court have jurisdiction to make the defendant pay the plaintiff's attorneys fees?

The plaintiff has failed to comply with court orders on several occasions, has failed to produce relevant documentation upon numerous and repeated requests by the defendants, has failed to participate in examinations for discovery in good faith, and has failed to attend court appearances, such as the recent trial management conference.

The High Court applied the principles established in Dunlop Tyre in deciding whether the contractual clause entitling the defendant to draw upon and retain the bank guarantee in the face of the plaintiff's default constituted a penalty clause.

The usual response is for the defendant to challenge the plaintiff's choice of forum by bringing a motion to stay the action based upon lack of subject - matter jurisdiction and / or personal jurisdiction (the reformulated Van Breda test for assumed jurisdiction based upon a «real and substantial connection»).

The Fact Sheets are agreed - upon documents that each plaintiff and defendant fills out to provide the opposing side with some good preliminary information.

«This cause came on for final hearing before the court upon the plaintiff wife's second amended complaint for separate maintenance (alimony unconnected with the causes of divorce), the defendant husband's answer and counterclaim for divorce on grounds of extreme cruelty and adultery, and the wife's answer thereto setting up certain affirmative defenses...»

Such interim orders contained provisions stating that the plaintiff and the defendant shall have interim joint custody and guardianship, that the primary address of the children shall be the defendant's address, that for the purpose of access arrangements the plaintiff shall promptly inform the defendant of her monthly work schedule, and the defendant shall make efforts to ensure the children spend equal time with both the plaintiff and the defendant and, upon receipt of such work schedule, draw a calendar setting out parenting time for each parent for the coming month, and that the plaintiff shall be allowed to travel to Japan with the children from November 2, 2002 through November 18, 2002.

[24] The Plaintiffs provided documents that indicate that there may have been third party manipulation and alteration of the expert reports that the Defendants will rely upon at trial.

-- At the second stage, the core of the analysis rests upon the connection between Ontario and the plaintiff's claim and the defendant, respectively.

If, instead of bringing counterclaims in the original lawsuit, the defendant brings a separate lawsuit against the plaintiff, the plaintiff could seek to either (1) consolidate the cases if they are filed in the same court system (i.e. a federal case and a federal case, or a New York State case and a New York State case), or (2) move to dismiss the new lawsuit because the claims were required to be brought in the original lawsuit as mandatory counterclaims, or (3) move to stay proceedings in the second lawsuit pending resolution of the first lawsuit, or (4) move to dismiss the claims in the second lawsuit on the merits if it is apparent from the face of the countersuit that it does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted or was filed in the wrong court.

As to balancing the rights of the plaintiff with those of the defendant in this case, «Under the circumstances the plaintiff should not be put out of court and the defendant granted a windfall that it could not have known about or relied upon.»

Perhaps the only thing that plaintiffs and defendants can agree upon is the need to keep discovery costs low.

Depending upon whether or not an insurance company is disputing liability in a personal injury case, witnesses can be helpful in proving the defendant's breach of the applicable duty of care, the extent and amount of the plaintiff's damages, or both.

Under Court Rule 22 N.Y.C.R.R. § 202.16 - a, the listed orders are binding upon a plaintiff upon commencement of the matrimonial action and upon a defendant upon service of the summons or summons and complaint (see Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B][2][b]-RRB-.

The defendant was told upon her return to duty that the plaintiff underwent a surgery to identify and repair a bowel injury.

[91] While I have decided that there was no negligence on Mr. Ulmer contributing to the collision, based upon the evidence that I have accepted, I can not say that this was a defence advanced in bad faith for the ulterior purpose of emotionally disturbing the plaintiff and putting pressure on her to settle at a figure favourable to the defendants.

It is alleged by the defendant in error in this case that the plea to the jurisdiction was a sufficient plea; that it shows, on inspection of its allegations, confessed by the demurrer, that the plaintiff was not a citizen of the State of Missouri; that, upon this record, it must appear to this court that the case was not within the judicial power of the United States as defined and granted by the Constitution, because it was not a suit by a citizen of one State against a citizen of another State.

On closing the testimony in the court below, the counsel for the plaintiff prayed the court to instruct the jury, upon the agreed state of facts, that they ought to find for the plaintiff, when the court refused, and instructed them that, upon the facts, the law was with the defendant.

As to the first guideline, the court also relied upon Campbell to note the relevance of such factors as whether the defendant caused physical or economic harm, evinced a reckless disregard for the plaintiff's health and safety, preyed upon the vulnerable, engaged repeatedly in the harmful conduct, and caused harm through intentional, malicious or mere accidental means.

This formulation represents the traditional version of the tort which imposes liability upon a defendant for inducing breach by a plaintiff's promisor, such as when a defendant intentionally and without justification induces a plaintiff's employee to breach an employment contract and come to work for that defendant.

Specifically, with regard to being unqualified to offer an opinion subject to the Daubert rule, the defendant challenged the witness» ability to offer such an opinion, based upon the physician's alleged failure to review various CT & MRI scans and other diagnostic tests prior to reaching his conclusions related to the car accident that contributed to an exacerbation of the plaintiff's pre-existing condition and other related considerations.

Scientific evidence is often called upon to establish the causal link between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's harm, i.e., «but for» the act or omission of the defendant, there is a 51 % chance that the injury would not have occurred.

It is further alleged that the defendants intentionally committed certain acts (said to be acts of bad faith and improper conduct bordering upon fraud) that impeded the transfer of assets, constituting breach of contract, and thereby caused the plaintiff to suffer specific financial losses.

Represented defendant MRC in a trademark infringement action filed in federal court in Boston, in which plaintiff alleged that MRC's popular television series «House of Cards» and related gambling slot machines and memorabilia infringed upon plaintiff's trademark.

So, instead of receiving money and dropping claims, the injured plaintiff was now actually promising to pay the defendants upon certain contingencies.

(2) If the plaintiff does not file a case conference report within two hundred and forty (240) days after the service of a summons and complaint upon a defendant, the case may be dismissed as to that defendant upon motion or on the court's own initiative, without prejudice.

There, the defendant applied to the court for an order requiring the plaintiff bank to produce various documents, including computer records, disks and tapes in or upon which records were kept that related to the action and from which the documents included in the plaintiff's statement of claim originated.

[9] In a law review article written in 1960, the leading American torts scholar, William Prosser, listed four distinct kinds of invasion of privacy interests as follows: (i) intrusion upon the plaintiff's seclusion or solitude, or into his private affairs; (ii) public disclosure of embarrassing private facts about the plaintiff; (iii) publicity which places the plaintiff in a false light in the public eye; and (iv) appropriation, for the defendant's advantage, of the plaintiff's name or likeness: see William L. Prosser, «Privacy» (1960) 48 Cal.

This concerned the Defendant who brought a Case Planning Conference and obtained an order requiring the Plaintiff to «notify counsel for the defendant of the name of the neurologist with whom the appointment had been made and the date of the appointment, and secondly, that the parties were to provide opposing counsel with written notice forthwith upon any appointment being set for the plaintiff with medical experts, such notice to include the name of the expert, the expertise of the expert, and the date of the appoinDefendant who brought a Case Planning Conference and obtained an order requiring the Plaintiff to «notify counsel for the defendant of the name of the neurologist with whom the appointment had been made and the date of the appointment, and secondly, that the parties were to provide opposing counsel with written notice forthwith upon any appointment being set for the plaintiff with medical experts, such notice to include the name of the expert, the expertise of the expert, and the date of the appoinPlaintiff to «notify counsel for the defendant of the name of the neurologist with whom the appointment had been made and the date of the appointment, and secondly, that the parties were to provide opposing counsel with written notice forthwith upon any appointment being set for the plaintiff with medical experts, such notice to include the name of the expert, the expertise of the expert, and the date of the appoindefendant of the name of the neurologist with whom the appointment had been made and the date of the appointment, and secondly, that the parties were to provide opposing counsel with written notice forthwith upon any appointment being set for the plaintiff with medical experts, such notice to include the name of the expert, the expertise of the expert, and the date of the appoinplaintiff with medical experts, such notice to include the name of the expert, the expertise of the expert, and the date of the appointment ``.