Search for: "Test Plaintiff" Results 7141 - 7160 of 21,971
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2009, 4:08 am
Derivative Claim and the Tooley Test The defendants challenged plaintiffs’ actions arguing that under Delaware law, these types of allegations (with certain exceptions involving controlling shareholders that not applicable here) are derivative not direct claims, citing Tooley v. [read post]
15 Oct 2015, 3:55 pm by Nadia Kayyali
That was the message from the Third Circuit on Tuesday when it told the plaintiffs in Hassan v. [read post]
4 Jan 2013, 5:08 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Plaintiffs allege that the bars were labeled ‘All–Natural’ but in fact were not. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 12:02 pm by Andrew Delaney
This test is not rigid—because that would be too convenient for us—but instead is “flexible and calls for such procedural protections as the particular situation demands. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 9:08 am by Marcel Pemsel
One of the offers concerned a trim lead bag, which the plaintiff ordered as a test. [read post]
20 Jun 2022, 2:40 am by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)
*MOUSE PRINT: Plaintiffs’ counsel commissioned testing of Defendant’s Products, which show that the Products do not contain the amount of stated protein amount and/or protein DV [Daily Value] %. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 9:46 pm by Ken
Submitting evidence can make it dramatically more difficult for a plaintiff to carry his burden. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:39 am
August 11, 2005): Defendants contend that all of Plaintiffs' cited cases involve some sort of punitive aspect to a seizure, i.e. in Chandler, a testing of urine was a prerequisite to qualify for state office. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 2:15 am by Woodrow Pollack
 Rather, the test is the test defined in the statute -- if the deposition transcript was "necessarily obtained for use in the case," it's recoverable. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:39 am
August 11, 2005): Defendants contend that all of Plaintiffs' cited cases involve some sort of punitive aspect to a seizure, i.e. in Chandler, a testing of urine was a prerequisite to qualify for state office. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 6:51 am by emagraken
The dominant purpose test is still the appropriate test to be applied in determining litigation privilege but is “more compatible with the contemporary trend favouring increased …mutual and reciprocal disclosure which is the hallmark of the judicial process”; see Blank v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 2:59 pm
Barrett does some historical sleuthing to determine the scope of trademark use in commerce" doctrine, and she offers a suggested multi-factor test for defining use in commerce in the future. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 5:20 am by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano
Specifically, the court noted that the obligation to obtain consent rested with the physician who ordered the test, not the technician that performed the test. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 2:24 am by Arfaa Law Group
In other words, they must demonstrate that the decedent was exposed to a substantial risk of harm, which is the objective test, and that the prison officials knew about and disregarded this risk, which is the subject test. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 4:14 pm by Robert Elliott, J.D.
    "After the plaintiffs surgical complications occurred, unopened batches of defendants Healon product were tested and found to be infected with a virulent strain of bacteria that causes endophthalmitis," the ruling stated. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 4:07 pm by Samantha G. Wilson
While the Special Master disagreed with plaintiff’s argument that some Delaware cases “stand for the proposition that the privilege proponent must always be given further opportunity, in the face of a Rule 26(b)(5)(A) challenge, to take another stab at an adequate description” (and in this case the plaintiff had already amended its log several times, id. at 3-5) the Special Master found “very few” Rule 26(b)(5)(A) issues in plaintiff’s… [read post]