Sentences with phrase «year damages limitations»

Not exact matches

Actual results may vary materially from those expressed or implied by forward - looking statements based on a number of factors, including, without limitation: (1) risks related to the consummation of the Merger, including the risks that (a) the Merger may not be consummated within the anticipated time period, or at all, (b) the parties may fail to obtain shareholder approval of the Merger Agreement, (c) the parties may fail to secure the termination or expiration of any waiting period applicable under the HSR Act, (d) other conditions to the consummation of the Merger under the Merger Agreement may not be satisfied, (e) all or part of Arby's financing may not become available, and (f) the significant limitations on remedies contained in the Merger Agreement may limit or entirely prevent BWW from specifically enforcing Arby's obligations under the Merger Agreement or recovering damages for any breach by Arby's; (2) the effects that any termination of the Merger Agreement may have on BWW or its business, including the risks that (a) BWW's stock price may decline significantly if the Merger is not completed, (b) the Merger Agreement may be terminated in circumstances requiring BWW to pay Arby's a termination fee of $ 74 million, or (c) the circumstances of the termination, including the possible imposition of a 12 - month tail period during which the termination fee could be payable upon certain subsequent transactions, may have a chilling effect on alternatives to the Merger; (3) the effects that the announcement or pendency of the Merger may have on BWW and its business, including the risks that as a result (a) BWW's business, operating results or stock price may suffer, (b) BWW's current plans and operations may be disrupted, (c) BWW's ability to retain or recruit key employees may be adversely affected, (d) BWW's business relationships (including, customers, franchisees and suppliers) may be adversely affected, or (e) BWW's management's or employees» attention may be diverted from other important matters; (4) the effect of limitations that the Merger Agreement places on BWW's ability to operate its business, return capital to shareholders or engage in alternative transactions; (5) the nature, cost and outcome of pending and future litigation and other legal proceedings, including any such proceedings related to the Merger and instituted against BWW and others; (6) the risk that the Merger and related transactions may involve unexpected costs, liabilities or delays; (7) other economic, business, competitive, legal, regulatory, and / or tax factors; and (8) other factors described under the heading «Risk Factors» in Part I, Item 1A of BWW's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended December 25, 2016, as updated or supplemented by subsequent reports that BWW has filed or files with the SEC.

Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Limitation — Vote Passed (218 - 210, 6 Not Voting) The House passed a bill that would limit to $ 250,000 the non-economic damages that can be awarded in a medical malpractice lawsuit in which the plaintiff's health care was paid for in whole or in part via a federal program, subsidy or tax benefit, and would establish a statute of limitations for initiating such lawsuits of either three years following the plaintiff's injury, or one year after the plaintiff discovers such injury, whichever occurs first.

«The next 5 to 10 years are all about damage limitation,» says Stephen Curry, a structural biologist at ICL.

In addition, Act 133 changes from six years to the three years the statute of limitations for claims for damage to real or personal property arising from a motor vehicle accident.

The act retains the six - year statute of limitations for claims for damage to real or personal property not arising from a motor vehicle accident.

If your newborn was injured during birth, even if they were born multiple years ago, you may still be able to recover payment in damages as a result, since the statute of limitations on such cases is different than other statutes in Massachusetts.

Utah has a strict statute of limitations for personal injury claims of four years, meaning that you will be given four years from the date of your accident to pursue damages.

That means if you missed the two year statute of limitations for the Wrongful Death claim, if the person suffered before death, had substantial medical bills or had a punitive damages claim, then there may still be a suit that can be brought on behalf of the unrepresented Estate because it has been tolled by O.C.G.A. Sec. 9-3-32.

Any such policy that permits destruction within much less than ten years after an event probably fails to take reasonable account of the standard six year limitation period under the Limitations Act for actions in tort or contract, plus some period to allow for a discoverability period, which allows for discovery of the damage and those responsible prior to the commencement of the limitation period.

A first communication interrupting the limitation period was sent by the Agent on October 18, 2011 (one day before the expiration of the first year after the termination notice) claiming for the clientele and damages compensations.

In Petrella v. Metro - Goldwyn - Mayer, Inc., 134 S. Ct. (2014), the Supreme Court ruled that the equitable defense of laches is not available when a copyright owner brings a claim for damages under the Copyright Act within the Act's three - year statute of limitations period.

Under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, an individual who wishes to bring an action for damages following an accident must do in three years.

735 ILCS 5/13-213 (c): Alteration, modification or change No product liability action based on any theory or doctrine to recover for injury or damage claimed to have resulted from an alteration, modification, or change of the product unit after the date of first sale, lease, or delivery of possession of the product unit to its initial user, consumer, or other nonseller may be limited or barred by subsection (b) if the action is commenced within the applicable limitation period; and, in any event, within 10 years from the date the alteration, modification, or change was made, unless defendant expressly has warranted or promised the product for a longer period and the action is brought within that period.

In any such case, if the person entitled to bring the action was at the time the personal injury, death, or property damage occurred under the age of 18 years, under legal disability, or imprisoned on criminal charges and the claim is not against the Illinois Department of Corrections or any past or present employee, the limitation period does not begin to run until the person reaches the age of 18, the disability is removed, or the person ceases to be imprisoned.

735 ILCS 5/13-213 (d): Alternate limitation period Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (b) and (c), if the injury complained of occurs within any of the periods provided by subsections (b) and (c), the plaintiff may bring suit within 2 years after the date on which the claimant knew, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have known, of the existence of the personal injury, death, or property damage; but in no event may such an action be brought more than 8 years after the date on which the personal injury, death, or property damage occurred.

The Court considered the patent damages statute to be analogous to the copyright statute of limitations, which provides that a copyright damages claim filed within 3 years can not be dismissed on timeliness grounds.

California imposes a two - year statute of limitations on personal injury claims for damages, so it is important to seek the assistance of an experienced Glendale personal injury attorney as soon as possible after an accident.

While claims asserted under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and the Equal Pay Act (EPA) typically do not permit emotional distress damages and limit punitive damages (also known as «liquidated damages») to the amount of the back pay award, they carry a two (2)- year limitations period which can be extended to three (3) years in the case of a willful violation.

The Supreme Court, in a 7 - 1 decision written by Justice Alito, has held that laches can not be invoked as a defense against any claim for damages in a patent case brought within the 6 - year limitation on damages prescribed by Section 286 of the patent statute.

Often people will know that there is a two - year limitation on bringing a claim for personal injury damages.

At issue is whether and to what extent a laches defense may bar a claim for damages in patent infringement brought within the Patent Act's six - year statutory limitations period, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's 2014 decision in «Petrella v. Metro - Goldwyn - Mayer,» 134 S. Ct. 1962 (2014)(the so - called «Raging Bull» case, so named because the lawsuit involved copyright issues surrounding the script for the 1980 Martin Scorsese film).

However, Mr Justice Coulson's decision to exercise his discretion under s 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and to disapply the relevant three - year limitation period, so that the claimant, Mrs A, was entitled to pursue her claim for damages, represents a welcome sign that the courts are prepared to fashion the law in a manner conducive to achievinLimitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) and to disapply the relevant three - year limitation period, so that the claimant, Mrs A, was entitled to pursue her claim for damages, represents a welcome sign that the courts are prepared to fashion the law in a manner conducive to achievinlimitation period, so that the claimant, Mrs A, was entitled to pursue her claim for damages, represents a welcome sign that the courts are prepared to fashion the law in a manner conducive to achieving justice.

Under normal circumstances, Arizona provides accident victims with a two - year statute of limitations in which to file a personal injury lawsuit seeking damages.

A claim for damages for personal injuries caused by a sexual assault falls within the Limitation Act 1980, s 11 and so has a limitation period of three years from the date when the claimant first considered the injury sufficiently serious to justify proceedings — and the judge may extend that period, under s 33, if it is equitableLimitation Act 1980, s 11 and so has a limitation period of three years from the date when the claimant first considered the injury sufficiently serious to justify proceedings — and the judge may extend that period, under s 33, if it is equitablelimitation period of three years from the date when the claimant first considered the injury sufficiently serious to justify proceedings — and the judge may extend that period, under s 33, if it is equitable to do so.

Some of the more frequently overlooked (and therefore dangerous) limitation periods include: i) the limitation period set out in section 38 (3) of the Trustee Act which applies to certain claims brought by or against the estate of a deceased person; ii) the 6 month limitation period for dependent's relief claims that is set out in section 61 of the Succession Law Reform Act; and iii) the one year limitation period set out in section 259.1 of the Insurance Act, which applies to «a proceeding against an insurer under a contract in respect of loss or damage to an automobile or its contents».

Bodily injury and property damage claims have different statutes of limitations, and usually the bodily injury claim statute is longer by at least a year.