Search for: "INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS"
Results 461 - 480
of 507
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jan 2009, 9:47 am
Yet another factor complicating the counting is that during 2008 plaintiffs initiated a number of securities class action lawsuits in state court (about which I previously commented here). [read post]
9 Dec 2008, 8:04 am
Bruce Nagel and David Mazie, formerly of Nagel, Rice & Mazie, represent separate plaintiffs in consolidated class action suits aimed at getting Horizon to increase benefits for eating-disorder patients. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 3:19 am
As reflected in their press release (here), on October 22, 2008, plaintiffs’ attorneys filed a purported securities class action in the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased securities of the recently nationalized Belgium-based financial services company, Fortis N.V. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 11:30 am
The court concluded that plaintiffs’ direct and indirect evidence of class-wide significant exposure fell short of establishing common proof for each and every class member’s exposure to C-8. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 6:15 pm
The plaintiffs in this case, however, have trouble recognizing this. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 8:12 pm
In fact, there was no contact between [the defendant] and [plaintiff] whatsoever. [read post]
5 Sep 2008, 12:12 pm
UtilCorp United, Inc., 497 U.S. 199 (1990); because plaintiffs were “indirect purchasers,” defendants argued that they lacked standing to prosecute the antitrust class action. [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 6:23 pm
We remand to allow the trial court to correct the abstract of judgment to indicate that it entered judgment as a Class A misdemeanor instead of as a Class D felony. [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 6:13 pm
The Supreme Court also expressed concern that if a direct purchaser were not allowed to sue for overcharges passed on to indirect purchasers, indirect purchasers would lack the incentive to bring an antitrust action. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 9:37 pm
If I recall my economics classes at Cal oh so many years ago, there is such a thing as "price elasticity of demand. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 6:13 pm
The Supreme Court also expressed concern that if a direct purchaser were not allowed to sue for overcharges passed on to indirect purchasers, indirect purchasers would lack the incentive to bring an antitrust action. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 6:00 pm
The judges disagreed, saying Dale's wife didn't necessarily stand to gain any extra pay from the case, and they declined to bar lead plaintiffs with such an indirect connection to the class attorneys. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 4:02 pm
Followers of this litigation are directed to the April 14, 2008 Post discussing the First Circuit’s treatment of class certification. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 10:13 pm
Antitrust case involving issues of indirect purchaser standing. [read post]
7 Jul 2008, 8:28 am
Thus, to survive summary judgment in a mixed-motive case, the plaintiff need only show: an adverse action, and some evidence that the protected class was a motivating factor for that adverse action. [read post]
20 Jun 2008, 12:17 am
Indirect self-promotion alert: Paul's second posting comments on my second posting here on Prawfs.) [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 8:30 am
Coryell pursued his age discrimination claim under the indirect method of proof, which requires a prima facie showing that: the plaintiff is a member of the statutorily protected class; the plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action; the plaintiff was qualified for the position; andthe plaintiff was replaced by a substantially younger person or that a comparable, substantially younger person was treated more favorably. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:31 am
The White Paper also proposes several measures designed to give plaintiffs better access to evidence in civil actions. [read post]
28 Mar 2008, 4:56 pm
They also cast asparagus on "novel" expert opinions concerning whether the class of plaintiffs suffered actual harm as a result of a conspiracy to restrain trade. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 6:58 am
Even the plaintiffs in the case were unable to show any harm to the market of their work. [read post]
