Search for: "Million v State" Results 6101 - 6120 of 24,661
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2019, 9:49 am by Brad Kuhn
  In documenting a settlement, property owners can sometimes attempt to retain certain rights to seek additional damages, but a recent court of appeal decision, Sani v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 11:57 pm by Florian Mueller
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of the United States has won the first round of litigation against Qualcomm. [read post]
21 May 2019, 10:08 am by John Jascob
The complaint states that the claims are purely strict liability and negligence claims, and that the plaintiff expressly eschews any allegation sounding in fraud. [read post]
20 May 2019, 10:00 am
In 2016, the state paid the ACLU of Alabama $1.7 million after a federal court struck down a medically unnecessary law that would have forced the majority of the clinics in the state to close. [read post]
20 May 2019, 9:18 am by Schachtman
Evidence that the Maritime Commission had warned Bethlehem Steel about the hazards of asbestosis, and to maintain a threshold limit value of 5 million particles per cubic foot, was not particularly germane or helpful in avoiding mesothelioma among employees. [read post]
20 May 2019, 7:30 am
However, patentintensive industries promote innovation, increase the GDP, and create millions of jobs. [read post]
19 May 2019, 4:15 pm by INFORRM
General, aggravated, punitive and special damages of $2.5 million and a permanent injunction were granted. [read post]
18 May 2019, 9:27 am by MOTP
" He gave some examples of why the cost of this litigation was so high—searching through "millions" of emails and reviewing "hundreds of thousands" of documents during discovery, over forty depositions taken, and a forty-page motion for summary judgment. [read post]
17 May 2019, 12:09 pm by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
“Pursuant to CPLR 4111 (c), when the answers on a verdict sheet ‘are inconsistent with each other and one or more is inconsistent with the general verdict, the court shall require the jury to further consider its answers and verdict or it shall order a new trial,’” wrote the panel, quoting Marine Midland Bank v. [read post]