Search for: "Plaintiff(s) v. Defendant(s)" Results 1 - 20 of 69,900
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jun 2009, 3:30 am
Southern Waste Systems, LLC This case was before the Court pursuant to Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendants Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs Complaint. [read post]
2 May 2012, 3:00 am by Doug Austin
The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had accessed the plaintiffs computer systems in an unauthorized manner using the personal computers at issue and contended that the defendants’ ongoing use of the computers would result in the loss of relevant data. [read post]
15 May 2007, 5:34 am
Here, law firm disqualified because it represented plaintiff and defendant at the same time in different cases. [read post]
28 Aug 2021, 8:06 am by Gregory B. Williams
In denying Defendants motion to dismiss Plaintiffs allegations of direct infringement, the Court agreed with Plaintiff. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 9:16 am by Stan Gibson
The post Defendants Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs Lost Profits Damage Expert Denied Even Though Plaintiffs Expert’s Opinion Was Contradicted by Testimony from Plaintiffs Corporate Designee appeared first on Patent Lawyer Blog. [read post]
24 May 2011, 3:00 am by Doug Austin
Hummingbird Speedway, Inc., in which the court ordered the plaintiff to provide his username and password to the defendants attorney., as a precedent. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 6:49 am by Andrew Frisch
This case was before the court on Plaintiffs motion to dismiss the Defendants counterclaim, which sought a declaratory judgment that Plaintiff was exempt from the FLSA’s overtime provisions. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 7:27 am by Docket Navigator
The court granted plaintiff's motion in limine to preclude any reference to plaintiff's attempt to retain defendant's expert. [read post]
14 May 2013, 12:00 am by Doug Austin
Cosbey took the unusual step of allowing the plaintiff direct access to a defendant company’s database under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34 because the plaintiff made a specific showing that the information in the database was highly relevant to the plaintiffs claims, the benefit of producing it substantially outweighed the burden of producing it, and there was no prejudice to the defendant. [read post]