Search for: "P Plaintiff" Results 1081 - 1100 of 13,770
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jul 2022, 7:30 am by David McLain
  Homes, Inc., 395 P.3d 788 (Colo. 2017), which may remain in effect even if Vallagio were to be overturned [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 1:54 am by INFORRM
As mentioned above, on 20 and 21 July 2022, the Court of Appeal (Vos MR, Sharp P and King LJ) heard the appeal Guardian News and Media v Executor of HRH Prince Philip challenging the decision to exclude the press from the hearing in September 2021 regarding the will of Prince Philip. [read post]
22 Jul 2022, 8:38 am by Richard Hunt
The defendant attacked the plaintiff’s standing to sue, which is a real issue for this plaintiff (4), but the most interesting part of the decision concerns the defendant’s claim that the website was in fact accessible. [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 9:57 am by Ashley Belanger
Because of that, the plaintiffs are putting Zuckerberg back on the stand, hoping that six hours of deposing the billionaire and depositions from other high-level Meta executives will end a “long overdue discovery” process that the plaintiffs say has already dragged on too long. [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 6:55 am by Jennifer Davis
The plaintiffs argued the deals were made in violation of the Nonintercourse Act. [read post]
20 Jul 2022, 10:43 am by Rebecca Tushnet
”  Chiusa also has a registration for a brochure, stating that he created “text, photograph(s), [and] artwork on p.1” therein. [read post]
19 Jul 2022, 2:59 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In the following guest post, the authors revisit the question of whether or not securities class action lawsuits against development-stage biotech companies are likelier to survive a motion to dismiss compared to securities suits against other kinds of companies. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 4:05 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The amended complaint also alleged that Howard Fensterman made false statements to the plaintiffs, and filed a motion without the plaintiffs’ knowledge or consent. [read post]
17 Jul 2022, 5:00 am by Dennis Crouch
§ 314.53(c)(2)(i)(O)(2), (c)(2)(i)(P)(2). [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 4:47 pm by INFORRM
The Court reasoned that it was not proven that the communications contained an “announcement of a future certain and clear harm, an unavoidable requirement of the criminal qualification proposed by the plaintiff in his appeal” [p. 4]. [read post]