Search for: "Liable Defendant(s)" Results 7741 - 7760 of 21,109
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Nov 2017, 9:48 am by Lebowitz & Mzhen
Of course, plaintiffs should only name defendants if there is a good-faith basis for believing that they may be liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 9:15 am by Clay Hodges
 According to news reports, after a two-month, hard-fought trial, the jury found that DePuy Orthopaedics and parent company Johnson & Johnson were liable to plaintiffs for the Pinnacle’s design and manufacturing defects. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 8:52 am by Christopher Simon
The trial court had found the dog wasn’t under the defendants control when it lunged. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 2:36 am by Hirsch & Lyon
  With negligence per se, the defendants law-breaking behavior serves as automatic proof of negligence. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 11:18 pm by Jon Gelman
 The trial court ruled that Sherwin-Williams, NL, and ConAgra are liable for cleaning up the hazard they created, and they appealed. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 8:25 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Inc., 836 F.3d 1263, 1270-71 (9th Cir. 2016) ("Yelp is not liable for disseminating . . . [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 1:58 pm by Mark Tabakman
One management side attorney observes, “every time I’m faced with a wage and hour lawsuit where there’s a temporary agency involved, it’s a sure bet it’s not only going to be the temp agency that’s named as a defendant. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 1:36 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
Similarly, a shopping center on Route 22 was not liable to a customer who was struck by a car while crossing the highway. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 7:39 pm by Wolfgang Demino
To the extent the Court permits any entities to intervene it should be for the limited purpose of objecting to the Bureau’s Motion to Approve the Proposed Consent Judgment.2BACKGROUNDA. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 11:49 am by William K. Berenson
 The prosecutor and defendant may call you as a witness at a DWI trial. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 11:01 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
  If it was not the driver’s fault due to the defective, would the manufacture be liable to the car accident victim? [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 10:44 am by Hanibal Goitom
The latter was found as a possible scenario and led the court to declare that “if the plaintiffs can prove at trial that CGN was Hudbay’s agent at the relevant time, they may be able to lift the corporate veil and hold Hudbay liable. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 10:44 am by Hanibal Goitom
The latter was found as a possible scenario and led the court to declare that “if the plaintiffs can prove at trial that CGN was Hudbay’s agent at the relevant time, they may be able to lift the corporate veil and hold Hudbay liable. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 9:04 am by Neumann Law Group
The plaintiff sued the defendants corporation, which, though it contested fault, did not contest that if the jury found its employee at fault, it would be liable under respondeat superior. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 9:04 am by Neumann Law Group
The plaintiff sued the defendants corporation, which, though it contested fault, did not contest that if the jury found its employee at fault, it would be liable under respondeat superior. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 8:08 am by Associates and Bruce L. Scheiner
That case could be accompanied with an order of restitution, but it’s often not nearly enough to cover the damages of so many – and that assumes defendant would ever be able to pay it. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 6:01 am by Joy Waltemath
But Washington courts employ the “functionally similar” test to determine whether the defendant had sufficient control over the plaintiffs employment to be held personally liable for discriminatory actions, the court pointed out, noting that as the entity making the hiring decision, ESD had complete control over the plaintiff’s possible employment, and the “functionally similar” was not relevant here. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 3:30 am by Eric B. Meyer
” Carter claims Shulda personally participated in Spirit’s employment decisions and, therefore, can be held liable as Carter’s employer. [read post]
The Eleventh Circuit noted that the Senate Judiciary Committee’s report on CAFA contained the statements that suggest that the “primary defendants” be interpreted to reach those defendants who are the real “targets” of the lawsuit—i.e., the defendants that would be expected to incur most of the loss if found liable. [read post]