Search for: "Plaintiff(s)" Results 6861 - 6880 of 178,474
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Feb 2016, 5:02 am by Patrick T. Ryan
In Campbell-Ewald, the Supreme Court ruled that a named plaintiffs proposed class action is not rendered moot when the defendant makes a settlement offer or a Rule 68 offer of judgment that would satisfy the plaintiffs individual claim but the plaintiff refuses to accept the offer. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 5:02 am by Patrick T. Ryan
In Campbell-Ewald, the Supreme Court ruled that a named plaintiffs proposed class action is not rendered moot when the defendant makes a settlement offer or a Rule 68 offer of judgment that would satisfy the plaintiffs individual claim but the plaintiff refuses to accept the offer. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 9:27 am by Neumann Law Group
To establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must introduce evidence sufficient to establish that (1) the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, (2) the defendant breached that duty, (3) the defendant’s breach was a proximate cause of the plaintiffs injuries, and (4) the plaintiff suffered damages. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 9:27 am by Neumann Law Group
To establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must introduce evidence sufficient to establish that (1) the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, (2) the defendant breached that duty, (3) the defendant’s breach was a proximate cause of the plaintiffs injuries, and (4) the plaintiff suffered damages. [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 12:31 pm
FVA's motion seeking summary judgment over plaintiff is hereby granted. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
   The Superior Court confirmed that, under the current status of Pennsylvania law, the Plaintiffs use of the harness in an unforeseeable or highly reckless manner could serve to defeat the Plaintiffs §402A claim. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 9:19 am by Peter Thompson & Associates
Additionally, a jury or judge will reduce a plaintiffs damages award based on the plaintiffs degree of fault. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 12:17 pm by Sharifi Firm, PLC
More Blog Posts: California Court of Appeals Sides With Hospital in Fall Case, Southern California Injury Lawyer Blog, February 10, 2015 California Court Affirms Judgment in Favor of City Because Injured Plaintiff Had Not Sufficiently Pled Facts Showing City’s Duty to Light Crosswalk, Southern California Injury Lawyer Blog, August 18, 2016 [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 7:12 am by Docket Navigator
Following a $30 million jury verdict and defendant's filing for bankruptcy, the court granted plaintiff's motion to amend its complaint to add defendant's co-owners as defendants along with alter ego and veil-piercing claims. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 6:29 am by Howard Friedman
Plaintiffs actions indicate that she strongly preferred a locker room and a restroom in which individuals who are assigned biologically male are not present, and it is thus reasonable to infer that defendants’ failure to inform plaintiff of the unwritten policy affected her decision to join the gym.A person who successfully sues under Michigan's Consumer Protection Act may recover actual damages or $250, whichever is greater, plus attorneys'… [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 11:43 pm by Abbe Gluck
Congress has estimated that getting these new exchanges up and running will cost at least $350 billion in federal spending by decade’s end. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 3:26 am by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.
” Because plaintiff had “staked her appeal on [the Court] somehow departing from Ezell,” however, the Court was unable to rule in plaintiffs favor. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 1:06 pm by Eugene Volokh
Thanks to the Media Law Resource Center (MLRC) MediaLawDaily for the pointer.The post Plaintiff Professor's Losing Libel Lawsuit May Lead to His Former Lawyers Foreclosing on His Home appeared first on Reason.com. [read post]
1 Oct 2014, 7:12 am by Kenan Farrell
Defendants are accused of having repeatedly copied Plaintiffs advertising marketing and branding including copying the design of Plaintiffs showroom and jewelry boxes, interfering with Plaintiffs exclusive vendor contracts, and copying and/or plagiarizing several of Plaintiffs taglines and written advertisements. [read post]