Search for: "class Plaintiffs" Results 81 - 100 of 34,426
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 May 2024, 1:38 pm by Raymond Nhan
 Accordingly, if an employee successfully brings an action for injunctive relief to ensure compliance with Labor Code section 226, a plaintiff could still recover costs and attorneys’ fees. [read post]
  For more background on the current wave of website technology CIPA cases, see our previous blog post: Privacy Class Action Spotlight: Latest Wave of Wiretap Class Actions Continues Despite Dismissals as Plaintiffs Try New Approaches – Insights – Proskauer Rose LLP. [read post]
21 May 2024, 9:01 am by Lax & Neville LLP
On April 30, 2024, a class action was filed against Merrill Lynch in the Western District Court of North Carolina to recover the deferred compensation that Merrill Lynch cancelled upon Plaintiffs’ voluntary resignation. [read post]
21 May 2024, 6:51 am by Dan Bressler
” “A proposed class of investors represented by The Moskowitz Law Firm in February sued the firm for allegedly aiding and abetting the fraudulent activity that happened at the exchange. [read post]
20 May 2024, 10:00 pm by Sherica Celine
Wilmer Hale attorney authors give the lowdown on recent data breach decisions and what “risk of future injury” courts are finding sufficient to confer standing on plaintiffs. [read post]
20 May 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
For example, one court, applying Frutarom, denied standing to a plaintiff class in a merger and de-SPAC, despite acknowledging the merits of plaintiffs’ concern that Frutarom essentially creates a “loophole” whereby management of a pre-SPAC private entity can escape private Section 10(b) liability for fraudulent conduct. [read post]
20 May 2024, 7:09 pm by David Klein
   Facts Alleged in Nater’s TCPA Vicarious Liability Complaint  Plaintiff Gabriel Bou Nater (“Nater” or “Plaintiff”) sued State Farm on behalf of himself and two putative classes of consumers. [read post]
20 May 2024, 11:41 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
Wright II granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in a set of claims concerning ICE’s “knock-and-talk” practice in Kidd v Mayorkas , a class action lawsuit challenging ICE’s deceptive home arrest practices in Los Angeles and the surrounding region. [read post]
20 May 2024, 6:26 am by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court case that allowed securities class action plaintiffs to rely on a rebuttable presumption of market efficiency in demonstrating reliance, is over 35 years old.[10] So is the U.S. [read post]
17 May 2024, 12:07 pm by Yosi Yahoudai
Johns Dental and Galella have negotiated out-of-court settlements with the original 20 AGGA plaintiffs without publicly admitting fault. [read post]
17 May 2024, 9:16 am by Edward T. Kang
In earlier cases, courts dismissed plaintiffs’ challenges because they found that noncompetes involved de minimis effects on competitions and did not harm the public interest, as shown by the plaintiffs’ failure to show non-competes effects on the market. [read post]
16 May 2024, 10:00 pm by Adam Levitin
It's equivalent to the distinction between FRCP 23(b)(2) and FRCP 23(b)(3) classes. [read post]
16 May 2024, 7:23 pm by David Klein
   SB 73 further modifies Georgia’s telemarketing law to specifically allow plaintiffs to bring their claims as part of a class action and recover reasonable attorneys fees. [read post]
16 May 2024, 3:15 pm by Gal Gressel
 The district court ordered the plaintiff to arbitrate her individual and non-individual PAGA claims, and dismissed the matter. [read post]
15 May 2024, 5:32 pm by Gabriel Cheong
The plaintiff spouse files for divorce and the defendant spouse is served a summons. [read post]
15 May 2024, 2:11 pm by Wystan Ackerman
Depending on how the Supreme Court rules, the plaintiffs will recover either nothing or up to $600 million. [read post]
15 May 2024, 11:01 am by Jon Hyman
This case creates a dangerous precedent that it's legally acceptable to mistreat employees because of their race (or other protected class) as long as you're sure not to mistreat any one employee too frequently. [read post]