Search for: "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs" Results 81 - 100 of 3,907
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
That effort failed when the court rejected plaintiffs’ argument that the stockholder vote was not fully informed in Elizabeth Morrison v. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
  And Judge Orrick rejected the adequacy of the right of publicity claims, noting that the Complaint failed to allege “any facts specific to the three named plaintiffs to plausibly allege that any defendant has used a named plaintiff’s name to advertise, sell, or solicit purchase of DreamStudio, DreamUp or the Midjourney product. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 10:54 am by Michael C. Dorf
In Havens, the Supreme Court upheld the legal standing of tester plaintiffs on the ground that the FHA  not only confers a right to be free from race discrimination in the rental or purchase of housing but also, through 42 U.S.C. [read post]
5 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
Except when the plaintiff is required to show a “strong inference” of fraud (which is unnecessary in a Section 11 case), neither federal civil procedure nor the PSLRA requires the plaintiff to prove any form of intent at the motion to dismiss stage. [read post]
5 Dec 2023, 8:37 am by Erica Canas
In that case, the plaintiff (“JSC”) successfully argued that the defendant infringed JSC’s trade dress rights by selling knockoff copies of their furniture designs (see sample images below). [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 4:58 am by Peter Mahler
The plaintiff Flor worked for many years as a civil engineer with a New Jersey public sector engineering firm. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 3:39 am
" [W]hile the evidence under the DuPont factor that assesses both the “buyers to whom sales are made” and also “[t]he conditions under which” those sales are made (“i.e., ‘impulse’ vs. careful, sophisticated purchasing”) pull in opposing directions, the evidence here convinces us that sophisticated purchasing is the overriding consideration. [read post]
3 Dec 2023, 5:24 am by centerforartlaw
”[26] The Real Banksy But how can Banksy operate in the art world without any direct personal contact to it? [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 2:29 pm by Eugene Volokh
SB 419 explicitly bans TikTok because of its direct connection to a specific foreign nation…. [read post]
  For example, while the plaintiffs in BNSF are not being permitted to assert a one-violation-per-scan theory in their new trial because the court found that plaintiffs had not adequately disclosed that theory, plaintiffs asserted that such a theory would have raised the number of violations from 45,600 to 1,171,608. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 9:34 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
Owen provides direct support for the proposition that upon a strong showing, courts in business divorce litigation may award judgment as a matter of law on a claim of faithless servant. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 7:26 am by centerforartlaw
These restrictions might prevent the sale of an item, direct how a work is to be displayed, or require the performance of regular maintenance. [read post]
20 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
Consequently, the redemption payment had no direct effect on BLMIS in the US. [read post]
20 Nov 2023, 4:38 am by jordan
The burden is on the injured party or the plaintiff to provide evidence. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 5:05 am by centerforartlaw
Environmental Perils: From Tropical Storms to Wildfires The days when art collectors could simply purchase general insurance policies are fading. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 4:07 am by Peter Mahler
(More recent authority echoing Widewaters includes Doyle v ICON, LLC, 103 A.D.3d 440, 959 N.Y.S.2d 200(1st Dept. 2013), where the First Department wrote, “Plaintiff’s allegations that he has been systematically excluded from the operation and affairs of the company by defendants are insufficient to establish that it is no longer ‘reasonably practicable’ for the company to carry on its business, as required for judicial dissolution under [LLCL] § 702. [read post]
10 Nov 2023, 1:03 pm by John Ross
Dissent: Interesting conclusion, but the plaintiffs don't have standing. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 1:26 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  And what current courts call “likely confusion” would be unrecognizable to Founding-era courts—or post-Reconstruction courts—both of which protected trademark owners in far more limited circumstances: only in cases of “passing off,” where the defendant’s goods would substitute for purchases of the plaintiff’s goods. [read post]