Search for: "Plaintiff(s) v. Defendant(s)" Results 661 - 680 of 69,997
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jun 2020, 9:00 pm by The Clinton Law Firm
The primary basis for Defendants argument is that Plaintiffs 2013 suit is still pending on appeal. [read post]
13 Dec 2007, 4:45 am
The Second Department granted defendant's motion to dismiss, in Williams v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 7:04 am by Docket Navigator
The court sanctioned plaintiff for disclosing defendant's litigation budget and corporate revenues in an unrecorded PTAB hearing. [read post]
3 Jan 2022, 5:56 am by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.
Plaintiff filed this personal injury suit, asserting that defendants negligence caused his injuries. [read post]
2 May 2020, 7:49 am by Eric Goldman
The plaintiff accuses the defendants of infringing the plaintiffs copyrights. [read post]
23 May 2016, 7:34 am by Docket Navigator
In response to the parties' dispute concerning the scope of a protective order governing confidential information, the court ordered the parties to submit a revised order imposing a prosecution bar on plaintiff's in-house litigation attorneys and granting defendants a covenant not to sue on plaintiff's after-acquired patents in the lighting industry. [read post]
28 May 2008, 9:43 am
As we observed in a previous post, California has a unique requirement that a plaintiff must introduce evidence of the defendant's financial condition in order to recover punitive damages. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 12:22 am
Plaintiffs' conduct also delayed Defendant's investigation into Plaintiffs' standing and the overall progress of this case, which warrants a finding of bad faith. [read post]
12 Jun 2017, 5:29 am by Jonathan L. Shapiro
May 11, 2017), a plaintiffs DTSA claim survived dismissal, overcoming the defendants argument that “no acts occurred after the effective date of the Act. [read post]
12 Jun 2017, 5:29 am by Jonathan L. Shapiro
May 11, 2017), a plaintiffs DTSA claim survived dismissal, overcoming the defendants argument that “no acts occurred after the effective date of the Act. [read post]