Search for: "Liable Defendant(s)"
Results 4801 - 4820
of 21,104
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2012, 11:32 am
The Court reasoned a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Defendant's failure to tender a neurosurgeon, i.e., provide maintenance and cure between the First Incident and the Second Incident, aggravated Plaintiff's condition. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 7:25 pm
Can defendant-company be liable on the same basis as defendant-doctor? [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 10:38 am
Next, with respect to the jury’s damages award, Dr. [read post]
15 Aug 2007, 5:49 pm
In this case, PharmaStem's theory of liability was that the defendants were liable under section 271(c) for contributory infringement, not under section 271(a) for direct infringement, and PharmaStem has continued to press that theory on appeal. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 1:39 am
Since the entire damages case was sent back for a new trial, the defendant's claim that $500,000 was excessive was not ruled upon by the appellate judges. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 8:55 am
Only one of those causes of action sought vicarious liability; the remainder held Agape primarily and independently liable. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 11:30 am
The court also rejected the defendant’s claim that the plaintiff’s claim arising from pre-sale assessments amounted to a collateral attack on the foreclosure sale and was barred by res judicata. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 1:02 am
The defendant and his law firm was hired to bring a wrongful death action for decendent's (Anderson’s) estate and to assert loss of consortium action by Anderson’s wife. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 9:53 am
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment for defendants. [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 8:31 am
After setting forth that point of law, the Appellate Court found that the contractor was liable to the condo owners: “The evidence is undisputed that defendant builder failed to construct the party walls of plaintiff’s unit in accordance with those specifications filed with the Town of Bay Harbor Islands as a matter of public record and, therefore, having departed from those specifications, is liable to plaintiffs for breach of implied warranties… [read post]
21 Aug 2017, 11:19 am
The defendants argued that the reproduction of the tattoos that appear on three players in the NBA 2K video game does not amount to copyright infringement but rather “constitutes de minimis use and fair use”. [read post]
12 Oct 2017, 4:51 pm
Fortunately, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit agreed that Ripoff Report is not liable. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:50 am
The Second Circuit’s holding in Kiobel surprised many observers. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 9:01 pm
Dorf is the Robert S. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 8:28 am
Rooter’s operator) were alter egos of one another, S&S was liable for the past-due contributions on behalf of Mr. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 7:30 am
In the liability determination litigation in Marcantuone, the Trial Court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. [read post]
2 Aug 2016, 4:00 am
To make its case, the plaintiff asked to Court to “lift the cloak of privilege” over the mediation process and to consider the defendant’s mediation brief, which stated categorically that: “it is the defendant’s position that the plaintiff will be shut out at trial and will be liable for the defendant’s costs. [read post]
31 Oct 2021, 9:14 am
If you sustain injuries due to the negligence of another party, or if you are liable for some else’s damages, you will need to hire a personal injury lawyer. [read post]
1 May 2013, 1:36 pm
Anyway, some more–here’s a great article by a partner at Pattishall McAuliffe (the law firm that bears the name of my late trademark law prof) named Uli Widmaier that gets to the heart of the matter (I’ve removed the citations for bloggy reading and added a link or two): In other words, for a defendant to be liable for contributory trademark infringement, the defendant must have knowledge of specific individuals engaged in… [read post]
6 Sep 2017, 9:52 am
Her family filed a wrongful death action, alleging that there was negligence by the obstetricians and that the defendants were liable based on respondeat superior. [read post]
