Sentences with phrase «use reasonable judgment»

Specifically, the provider must use reasonable judgment and current medical evidence or the best available evidence, to individually assess:

Negligence in legal terms describes a failure of a person, business, or other entities to use reasonable judgment and care, and due to this, injuries are caused.

I will use my reasonable judgment, based on IP addresses and other information, to determine if a commenter is engaging in this practice.

Not exact matches

You shall indemnify The Endocrine Society and its directors, officers, employees, agents, contractors and licensors («The Endocrine Society Indemnitees») against all claims, actions, suits, and other proceedings («Claims») arising out of or incurred in connection with the Site and your use of the Site, your fraud, violation of law, negligence, willful misconduct, or any other use of the Site, the User Materials, the Site Materials, the services, products, information and other materials on and in and made available through the Site, (except to the extent attributable to The Endocrine Society), or any breach by you of these Terms and Conditions and shall indemnify and hold the Endocrine Society Indemnitees harmless from and against all judgments, losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses (including without limitation reasonable attorneys» fees and attorneys» disbursements) arising out of or incurred in connection with such Claims.

For example, ESSA only slightly broadens the focus from test scores, does nothing to confront Campbell's Law, * doesn't allow for reasonable variations among students, doesn't take context into account, doesn't make use of professional judgment, and largely or entirely (depending on the choices states» departments of education make) continues to exclude the quality of educators» practice from the mandated accountability system.

The cardholder agrees that s / he will defend and indemnify the Priority Pass group of companies, its directors, officers, employees and agents (collectively «the indemnified parties») against and hold each indemnified party harmless from all liabilities, damages, losses, claims, suits, judgments, costs and expenses (including reasonable legal fees) for injury to or death of any person or damage to, or destruction of, any property arising from the use of any lounge by the cardholder or any other person accompanying the cardholder, except that such indemnification shall not extend to acts of gross negligence or wilful misconduct by the indemnified parties.

You agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Company, its affiliates, licensors and service providers, and its and their respective officers, directors, employees, contractors, agents, licensors, suppliers, successors and assigns from and against any claims, liabilities, damages, judgments, awards, losses, costs, expenses or fees (including reasonable attorneys» fees) arising out of or relating to your violation of these Terms of Use or your use of the Website, including, but not limited to, your User Contributions, any use of the Website's content, services and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the WebsiUse or your use of the Website, including, but not limited to, your User Contributions, any use of the Website's content, services and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the Websiuse of the Website, including, but not limited to, your User Contributions, any use of the Website's content, services and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the Websiuse of the Website's content, services and products other than as expressly authorized in these Terms of Use or your use of any information obtained from the WebsiUse or your use of any information obtained from the Websiuse of any information obtained from the Website.

Other than the general suggestion that Canadian privacy legislation must permit collection, use and disclosure of personal information in a manner consistent with «reasonable expectations» to be constitutionally permissible, today's judgment raises difficult questions about the permissible scope of privacy legislation under the Charter.

Judge Reiss granted the defendants» motion for summary judgment, finding that «the only reasonable interpretation of that language is that it requires Killington Ltd. to provide the designated passholder free use of all ski lifts operated by Killington Ltd. at the Killington Ski Area so long as it operates in that area... «The term corporation, she wrote, «clearly refers to the named corporations, Sherburne and Killington Ltd.» and «reveals no intention to bind Killington Ltd's successors... To the contrary, Killington Ltd.'s obligations under the passes clearly terminate with its cessation of operations in the area.»

Giving the leading judgment, Lord Lloyd - Jones observed the centrality of Hardial Singh principles which stipulate that (i) the authorities must intend to deport the person and can only use the detention power for that purpose, (ii) the deportee may only be detained for a reasonable period, (iii) if it becomes apparent that the authorities will not be able to effect deportation within a reasonable period then it should not seek to exercise the power of detention, and (iv) the authorities should act with reasonable diligence and expedition to effect removal.

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.

The increasing use of summary judgment motions to decide straightforward wrongful dismissal actions has resulted in it now being commonplace for a court to grant judgment in a wrongful dismissal action before the expiration of the dismissed employee's reasonable notice period.

It also allows covered entities to use professional judgment and experience with common practice to make reasonable inferences of the individual's best interest in allowing a person to act on an individual's behalf to pick up filled prescriptions, medical supplies, X-rays, or other similar forms of protected health information.

A covered entity may use professional judgment and its experience with common practice to make reasonable inferences of the individual's best interest in allowing a person to act on behalf of the individual to pick up filled prescriptions, medical supplies, X-rays, or other similar forms of protected health information.

Casey v. Masullo Brothers Builders, Inc. (218 A.D. 2d 907)- Buyer sues seller for fraud, misrepresentation, mistake of fact and breach of contract where buyer purchased residence based upon representations by seller through newspaper advertisements and representations by seller's Realtor regarding the school district within which the property was located; Realtor's statement based upon own investigation, loan profile sheet from an abstract company prepared prior to the closing, and town tax rolls which confirmed placement of the property within the disclosed school district; unless the facts are matters peculiarly within one party's knowledge, the other party must make use of means available to him to ascertain, by the exercise of ordinary intelligence, the truth of such representations; question of fact exists whether a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the correct school district; order dismissing seller's motion for summary judgment affirmed.