Search for: "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs" Results 881 - 900 of 3,913
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Mar 2010, 5:05 am
 Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants’ actions caused their proportionate corporate ownership to be diluted, a direct personal injury. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 9:52 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Although Yesterday itself was fixed in a tangible medium, what plaintiffs purchased was an intangible good. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 11:13 am
This, despite the fact that there already is the “recalcitrant worker” defense and plaintiffs must prove that their injuries were “proximately caused” by the safety violation. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 10:47 am
Plaintiff, Bauer, alleged that she purchased multiple condominium units in a building newly constructed by defendant Beekman International Center, LLC. [read post]
9 Aug 2015, 8:00 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 101292 (ED VA, Aug. 3, 2015), a Virginia federal district court permitted various of the inmate plaintiffs to move ahead with complaints regarding refusal to provide a diet consistent with Nation of Islam teachings, refusing sufficient time of NOI prayer and classes and refusal to allow plaintiffs to purchase CDs of weekly sermons by Louis Farrakhan.In Lilly v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 6:00 am by Maxwell Kennerly
In short, since "indirect purchasers" cannot bring federal antitrust claims — even if they were injured by antitrust violations — "indirect purchasers" like third-party payors and retailers have to resort to state law. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 4:32 am by Rebecca Tushnet
But Lexmark allows for proximate cause even without diversion of sales to a direct competitor. [read post]
20 Dec 2022, 12:46 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
” The court found the claims of direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringement time-barred because plaintiffs didn’t submit evidence of continuing infringement by the moving defendants within 3 years of the filing of the complaint. [read post]
13 Aug 2008, 4:39 pm
Investors who purchased or acquired auction rate securities from Stifel Financial Corp. between June 11, 2003, and Feb. 13, 2008, and who continued to hold the securities as of Feb. 13, 2008, may request appointment as lead plaintiff by the Court on or before Oct. 7, 2008. [read post]
18 Sep 2007, 6:00 am
The Court of Appeal explained in Shersher that this language was not intended to limit the UCL's restitution remedy to cases by "direct" purchasers: Nothing in the language of Korea Supply suggests that the Supreme Court intended to preclude consumers from seeking the return of money they paid for a product that turned out to be not as represented. [read post]
1 Sep 2022, 11:21 am by Kevin LaCroix
This type of lawsuit has been of particular interest since the Delaware Court of Chancery’s January 2022 “groundbreaking” ruling in the MultiPlan SPAC-related direct action lawsuit sustaining the plaintiff’s complaint. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 2:35 pm by admin
The problems of individualised loss become even more pronounced if the calculation has to take account of indirect purchasers (“IPs”) as well as direct purchasers (“DPs”). [read post]
24 Jan 2008, 11:46 pm
Of the $295 million, direct purchasers are to receive $22.5 million, and indirect purchasers $272.5 million. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 4:21 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Though the plaintiff alleged that "she was induced by the false representations to purchase and use" Relacore, no one knew "whether putative class members even saw the print or Internet advertisements or whether they purchased the product due to a recommendation from a friend or family member. [read post]