Search for: "ALL POTENTIAL CLAIMANTS"
Results 4701 - 4720
of 4,856
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jun 2008, 10:32 am
It is not all one-sided. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 10:04 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: Court reconsidering baseless ‘making available’ theory in file-sharing case Capitol Records v Jammie Thomas; amicus briefs from, MPAA, PFF: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Electronic Fontier Foundation), (Techdirt), (Ars Technica), (Patry Copyright Blog), (Patry Copyright Blog) ICANN approves rules allowing brands to be registered… [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 6:16 pm
Second, while Glenn involved an insured benefit, an employer that self-insures a benefit plan may also want to consider establishing and documenting “active steps to reduce potential bias and to promote accuracy” of claims decisions. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 5:00 pm
The claimant, he tells us, trumped up the damages. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 2:45 pm
This was particularly true since the default rates of the ARS purchased for claimants’ accounts were less than the purported market rates. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 2:45 pm
This was particularly true since the default rates of the ARS purchased for claimants’ accounts were less than the purported market rates. [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 8:40 pm
Wandsworth London Borough Council [2005] 2 All ER 192 followed. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 2:45 am
In this same vein, the government showed little respect for Bennett’s plea for leniency made in reliance on his cooperation with the civil claimants (or at least “some” of the civil claimants, as the government emphasizes). [read post]
15 Jun 2008, 4:05 pm
Natural Answers couldn't lose any customers or potential customers from GSK's ads, because it didn't have any at the relevant time. [read post]
14 Jun 2008, 10:50 am
I see a potential loophole, or wormhole, however. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 12:12 pm
That's a great way to attract business to the state.And worst of all, lawyers practicing in New Jersey have to use the New Jersey state reporters, rather than the West System, when citing cases in their papers.And although it's not like defendants had no luck at all in New Jersey (in his younger days Bexis helped with cases that rejected market share liability and recognized the learned intermediary rule: Shackil v. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 3:43 am
(EADS) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York takes all of that and puts in into a truly interesting and potentially combustible mix – the plaintiffs are U.S. citizens, but they exclusively bought their shares in this foreign-domiciled company outside the U.S. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 5:00 pm
As with any potential benefit, a workers' comp claimant in Pennsylvania should fully investigate whether applying for SSD benefits would be a good choice in their particular situation (in some cases, the injured worker may be better off not applying for SSD). [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:49 am
Dress it up as they will, it remains that a number of settlement professionals enjoy using 468B QSFs on single claimant cases because they can keep all of the commissions. [read post]
9 Jun 2008, 10:50 pm
Having read it, I can honestly say I’m not sure what to make of it at all. [read post]
9 Jun 2008, 6:06 pm
According to Campbell, 468B QSFs and 130 Qualified Assignments represent strategic and potentially cost-efficient settlement planning tools for all parties and stakeholders - including the U.S. government, state governments and taxpayers. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 9:20 pm
And all the other big ones too. [read post]
26 May 2008, 3:09 pm
There is a potentially disturbing implication of the Court's asymmetrical approach to the role of international human rights law in this case. [read post]
26 May 2008, 8:58 am
The cases involve a wide variety of claimants and defendants, and a diverse array of legal theories. [read post]
25 May 2008, 12:23 pm
" Bashaway's first argument would lead to a drastic expansion in potential liability for tortfeasors, since it would potentially expand the loss of consortium cause of action to all intimate cohabitants, while the second argument would mark a much more modest expansion, just to same-sex cohabiting partners. [read post]
