Search for: "Liable Defendant(s)"
Results 6841 - 6860
of 21,107
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2018, 9:38 am
One day, the plaintiff visited the defendant’s bar after work. [read post]
5 Jul 2018, 5:30 am
During the course of trial, the remaining Defendants requested, and were granted, permission to add that defense to their pleadings.At the close of the Plaintiff's case, the trial court granted a nonsuit in favor of all of the Defendants, finding that the Plaintiff had failed to show evidence of willful misconduct or gross negligence on the part of the Defendants and that, as such, the Defendants were entitled to the protections of the limited… [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 9:54 am
It is therefore not uncommon to see efforts made to hold the large brand-name franchisor liable for what might happen in an individual franchisee’s store. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 9:00 am
As a participating provider, you have an affirmative obligation to cooperate with the UPIC’s requests. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 7:10 am
The Court’s Opinion The court concluded that the defendant manufacturer was not liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 7:10 am
The Court’s Opinion The court concluded that the defendant manufacturer was not liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 7:08 am
Plaintiff is seeking to serve the subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 to ascertain what it describes as Defendant’s name and address. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 5:31 am
Most significant was the finding that lender Wells Fargo was solidarily liable with the other defendants for damages. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 4:19 am
However, this is not fatal to a negligence claim as, even in the absence of privity, New York law allows the assertion of a cause of action for negligence resulting in property damage (see 905 5th Assocs., Inc. v Weintraub, 85 AD3d 667, 668 [1st Dept 2011] [finding that “the lack of privity does not affect plaintiffs’ ability to bring a general negligence claim against the [defendant] architect for property damage sustained by them” where there are “issues of fact as… [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 6:14 pm
If the plurality opinion is the law, Section 230 defendants have a lot to celebrate. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 11:32 am
Title 24-A s. 2902. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 11:32 am
Title 24-A s. 2902. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 9:39 am
As a recent case out of Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal makes clear, however, a person who has violated the terms of his or her probation is liable to face some serious consequences. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 7:18 am
Jun. 27, 2018)After trial of this case, the jury returned a verdict, finding in relevant part that defendants were liable for false designation of origin, basically about the origins of Oculus’s technology with a lagniappe of use of ZeniMax’s trademarks in a Kickstarter promotion. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 6:56 am
As such, merely returning search results to purportedly display a trademark does not show that Defendant is liable under the Lanham Act. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 12:34 am
In more recent cases the Court has focused in particular and among other things on the ‘indispensable intervention’ of the user/defendant, and referred to the user’s profit-making intention. [read post]
1 Jul 2018, 11:05 pm
Are you only ever liable under contract? [read post]
1 Jul 2018, 8:16 am
As such, merely returning search results to purportedly display a trademark does not show that Defendant is liable under the Lanham Act….insofar as Plaintiff alleges that Defendant is liable for trademark infringement unless its search engine returns only search results from Plaintiff’s own website, Plaintiff’s theory is inconsistent with the Ninth Circuit’s view of search engine functionality. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:17 am
The primary cause for reversal, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled, was the trial court’s decision to allow prior acts and omissions by the hospital system defendant. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:17 am
The primary cause for reversal, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled, was the trial court’s decision to allow prior acts and omissions by the hospital system defendant. [read post]
