Search for: "State v. Settle" Results 3841 - 3860 of 15,567
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Aug 2013, 1:03 pm
In 2005, paint manufacturer DuPont settled with Rhode Island in the amount of $12.5 million dollars after the state brought claims against it and other industry leaders for public nuisance. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
A public employee’s First Amendment right of free speech involving matters of public concern is subject to the Pickering Balancing Test Munroe v Central Bucks School District, United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, Docket #14-3509 It is well settled that “Public employees do not surrender all of their First Amendment rights merely because of their employment status. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 7:06 pm by Daniel E. Cummins
In this post-Koken case it appears that the claim against the third party tortfeasor has since been settled and the Plaintiff has continued on with the UIM claim against State Farm. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 1:02 pm by zshapiro
Presumably if the states develop different definitions the Supreme Court will settle issue at some time in the future. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 2:43 pm by lennyesq
“You bypass all that antiquated state common law and go straight to a federal court where juries can consider damages,” Green says. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 8:31 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Based on a review of the Foreman's medical records, Mid-Century denied the Foremans' claim for failing to obtain consent before settling with State Farm and Buehner under the policy terms. [read post]
11 May 2020, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
He reaffirmed the Court of Appeal’s finding in Campbell v MGN Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1373 that the defendant’s state of mind is irrelevant to the tort of misuse of private information. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 6:08 pm by Lyle Denniston
The case is American Broadcasting Companies v. [read post]
18 Jul 2024, 7:19 am by Felix Le Roux
The Constitutional Court stated that the courts favour a settlement because it reduces the demands on the judiciary and allows their limited resources to be reallocated to other cases. [read post]