Search for: "Plaintiff(s)" Results 1241 - 1260 of 178,346
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2017, 12:42 pm by Needle Law Firm
 The plaintiff must show that the defendant’s conduct was particularly malicious or outrageous. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 5:44 am
California Court overturns Hartford's denial of long term disability to plaintiff who suffers from chronic fatigue syndrome and awards benefits without remand. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 5:58 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  The Supreme Court overturned the trial court's holding and found that the plaintiffs supposed “stipulation” did not limit the amount in controversy in the case. [read post]
21 Oct 2021, 5:53 pm by Foran & Foran, P.A.
  The medical experts disputed whether or not, at that point, the plaintiffs infertility could have been reversed. [read post]
26 May 2015, 7:00 am by Ann Tweedy
In a little noticed decision issued a couple of months ago, the First Circuit reinstated a bisexual plaintiffs employment discrimination claims under the Maine Human Rights Act, reversing the district court’s dismissal on summary judgment. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 5:00 am by Jon Robinson
  The court noted that the DBA’s exclusive remedy provision, the doctrine of field preemption, and the doctrine of conflict preemption all barred Plaintiffs’ common law claims. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 12:00 am by Doug Austin
Lammens denied the plaintiffs motion to compel the defendant’s responses to discovery requests “based on Plaintiff's very limited showing as to the relevance of the requested discovery and the broadly drafted discovery requests”. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 3:36 pm
 The Defendant made a formal offer to settle the Plaintiffs claim for $22,000 plus disbursements. [read post]
26 Dec 2019, 2:11 am by Foran & Foran, P.A.
 Although the plaintiffs insurance policy did include underinsured motorist coverage, her claim was not immediately approved. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 1:38 pm by Peter Thompson & Associates
The grocery store argued that it should not be held liable because the woman’s attack of the plaintiffs wife was not foreseeable. [read post]
17 Mar 2018, 8:30 am by Kevin C. Ford, Trial Lawyer
The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the order of the trial court and rejected Cooper Tire’s argument that the trial court focused exclusively on whether plaintiff subjectively knew that a lawsuit over the incident and tire tread allegation was likely. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 2:54 pm by Foran & Foran, P.A.
The plaintiff claimed the driver’s employer was vicariously liable for the negligence of its employee. [read post]