Search for: "Test Plaintiff"
Results 7401 - 7420
of 21,971
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Sep 2017, 9:06 pm
The judge ruled: "The chain of causation alleged by the plaintiffs in this case is far too attenuated for a reasonable person to conclude that Apple’s conduct is or was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s harm. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 2:30 pm
But our amicus brief, like those we have recently filed in similar cases in Texas and the Seventh Circuit, focused on the fact that orders requiring the takedown of online content are always prior restraints and will be unconstitutional except in the rare situation in which the highly demanding prior restraint test is met: The injunction here is an unconstitutional prior restraint; it prohibits speech before there has been a full and final adjudication that the speech is not… [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 2:14 pm
The state plaintiffs also joined in the business plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in the District Court. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 11:40 am
The court also collapsed the state plaintiffs’ and business plaintiffs’ cases together and joined the state plaintiffs to the business plaintiffs’ pending summary judgment motion. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 11:40 am
The court also collapsed the state plaintiffs’ and business plaintiffs’ cases together and joined the state plaintiffs to the business plaintiffs’ pending summary judgment motion. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 11:12 am
Plaintiff sued defendant for alleged trademark infringement of their cleaning product. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 6:21 am
The Court of Appeals (Raggi, Leval and Lohier) says plaintiff has a case.As with all provisions of the Bill of Rights, we have multi-part balancing tests governing these disputes. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 5:32 am
Indiana, 414 U.S. 105, 108 (1973) (making clear that the imminence prong of the Brandenburg test precludes punishment for “advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time”). [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 5:18 am
On August 31, 2017, Judge Mazzant granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the two consolidated cases challenging the overtime rule, holding that the salary level the Department selected in 2016 conflicts with the FLSA, Nevada v. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 5:18 am
On August 31, 2017, Judge Mazzant granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the two consolidated cases challenging the overtime rule, holding that the salary level the Department selected in 2016 conflicts with the FLSA, Nevada v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 2:57 pm
Granting summary judgment in favor of the states and business plaintiffs who challenged the new overtime rule last November, Judge Mazzant determined that the DOL’s new overtime rule “effectively eliminates a consideration of whether an employee performs ‘bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity’ duties. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 2:19 pm
Giving another push from below, the district court on August 31, 2017, granted the business plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 12:47 pm
Largely based on the testing of Dr. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 7:32 am
For example, the “cognizable event” test triggering the accrual of the statute in certain legal and medical malpractice claims is judge-made law. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 6:12 am
The landowner alleges that the MOECC is liable for damages because it "decided to get involved in the oil spill on the Shell property, made the decision as to where the excavation of contaminated should stop, erred in failing to ensure that the contaminants were contained; as a result the plaintiff’s property became contaminated; and the plaintiff sustained damages. [read post]
30 Aug 2017, 5:00 pm
At the first appeal, the appellate court reversed and asked the district court to conduct a balancing test and determine if compelling HHS was appropriate. [read post]
30 Aug 2017, 2:48 pm
If all requirements are met, the court moves on to a balancing test. [read post]
30 Aug 2017, 7:04 am
APT tried to rely on a presumption of causation and materiality based on literal falsity, but those presumptions don’t apply when a plaintiff seeks only monetary damages, not an injunction. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 9:25 am
As a result of this rule, the entire retail set is usually assigned a single rate of duty.Following a 1991 Treasury Decision (T.D. 91-7), Customs argued that the 35% value added test must be applied to the entire set, including the lids. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 9:11 am
Robins Supreme Court Ruling Favor Plaintiffs Or Defendants? [read post]
