Search for: "Other Defendants-Class III-a, Class III-b, Class III-c"
Results 321 - 340
of 473
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Dec 2011, 6:25 am
The Failing Faith in Class Actions: Dukes v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 4:22 am
C52491, made the ih day of October 2011, and for any further or other order that the Court may deem appropriate. [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 9:56 am
., Appellee. 1st District.Administrative law -- Agency for Health Care Administration -- Revocation of assisted living facility licenses, denial of licensure renewal applications, and imposition of administrative fines -- Claims against licensee were not proven where only evidence to support claims was uncorroborated hearsay -- Claim that licensee operated another assisted living facility without obtaining a valid license or qualifying for a license exemption was not proven where evidence was… [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 10:18 am
Defendants typically argue that the class theories are no longer viable under Dukes, and Plaintiffs often defend their class claims as being consistent with the SCOTUS ruling. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 12:40 pm
--Where separate defences have been raised by the defendants or groups of defendants, payment of such costs shall be a condition precedent to the further prosecution of the defence by such defendants or groups of defendants as have been ordered by the Court to pay such costs. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
Rev. 1553 (June 2008) Geoffrey C. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 9:43 am
Rev. 1553 (June 2008) Geoffrey C. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 3:00 am
Opinion written by Justice Mansfield Charge: Count I: homicide by vehicle-OWI, a class “B” felony in violation of Iowa Code section 707.6A(1) (2009); Count II: homicide by vehicle-reckless, a class “C” felony in violation of Iowa Code section 707.6A(2); and Count III: involuntary manslaughter, a class “D” felony in violation of Iowa Code section 707.5(1). [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 6:42 pm
HOWARD DINNER, D.C., P.A., a/a/o DENISE CHAPMAN, Respondent. 4th District.Civil procedure -- Default on motor vehicle lease -- Summary judgment -- Trial court properly entered summary judgment where there were no issues of material fact -- Remand for correction of scrivener's errorGEORGE C. [read post]
8 Oct 2011, 4:36 am
(c) C [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 6:02 pm
Unlike the final report, this article will primarily focus on environmental SLAPPs because public interest groups and ordinary middle-class citizens that speak out on environmental issues tend to be the targets of SLAPPs.[4] Ordinary middle-class citizens are particularly vulnerable targets because of their personal liability, as well as their lack of financial support and ideological dedication to defend against a SLAPP lawsuit.[5] This focus on should not be taken to… [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 11:36 am
§ 1692k(c). [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 2:00 am
”[4] Under the misappropriation theory, insider trading can be established where “(1) … the defendant possessed material, nonpublic information; (2) which he had a duty to keep confidential; and (3) … the defendant breached his duty by acting or revealing the information in question. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 2:00 am
”[4] Under the misappropriation theory, insider trading can be established where “(1) … the defendant possessed material, nonpublic information; (2) which he had a duty to keep confidential; and (3) … the defendant breached his duty by acting or revealing the information in question. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 2:54 pm
Campbell (Bratschi), Bratschi C. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 2:54 pm
Campbell (Bratschi), Bratschi C. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 12:37 pm
(emphasis supplied) In Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 12:50 pm
Ajitkumar C. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 3:07 pm
§ 501.2105 entitle a prevailing defendant to an attorney's fee award in a case in which a plaintiff brings an unfair trade practices claim under the FDUTPA, but the district court decides that the substantive law of a different state governs the unfair trade practices claim, and the defendant ultimately prevails on that claim? [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 6:09 am
Joinder of DefendantsRule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in relevant part, permits a plaintiff to join multiple defendants into one action if “(A) any right to relief is asserted against them ... arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action. [read post]
