Search for: "Non Insurer Defendants" Results 81 - 100 of 7,056
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Apr 2015, 6:32 am by Mark S. Humphreys
To establish that a non-diverse defendant has been improperly joined to defeat diversity jurisdiction, the removing party must show (1) actual fraud in the pleading of jurisdictional facts, or (2) inability of the plaintiff to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state court. [read post]
3 Aug 2020, 5:33 pm
  Your client makes a motion for a default judgment against the non-answering defendants, who don't appear and oppose the motion. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
.): This dispute arises from no-fault insurance benefits that Plaintiffs … paid to Defendants … for the treatment of [Plaintiffs'] insureds pursuant to Michigan's No-Fault Act. [read post]
24 Nov 2013, 10:17 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Defendants have not claimed any actual fraud; therefore, this Court's inquiry was limited to whether a reasonable basis exists for predicting that Plaintiff might be able to recover against non-diverse Defendant Mason. [read post]
3 Jan 2009, 12:50 pm
For many plaintiffs, this assignment to the life company alleviates the stress of future contact with the defendant, their insurer, or any party responsible for the injury".Is the above statement correct? [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 6:08 am by Mark S. Humphreys
To establish fraud in joining a non-diverse defendant, the removing party must establish the plaintiffs’ inability to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state court. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 6:42 am
In Persimmon Homes Ltd v Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) Plc [2010] EWHC 1705 (Comm), the High Court ruled that dishonesty on the part of a claimant which has taken out after the event (ATE) insurance can amount to a material non-disclosure such that the insurer may avoid the policy.Persimmon Homes Ltd (Persimmon) was the defendant in litigation with another property development company, CPH. [read post]
30 Aug 2009, 4:23 pm
Lombard Insurance (2008) 91 O.R. (3d) 63 that appeared to support the position that where there is a duty on an Insurer to defend even one of the claims made by an Insured, and that claim embodies the true nature of the claim, a duty to defend the entire claim arises. [read post]
23 Nov 2013, 7:46 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Defendants have not claimed any actual fraud; therefore, this Court's inquiry is limited to whether a reasonable basis exists for predicting that Plaintiff might be able to recover against non-diverse Defendant Mason. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 6:09 pm
Therefore, the Court found it could exercise personal jurisdiction under Maryland's long-arm statute.Due process allows personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant when the defendant has minimum contacts with Maryland, "such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. [read post]
31 May 2020, 5:39 am by Mark S. Humphreys
  The Defendants assertion was that there were not proper causes of action asserted against the three non-diverse defendants, Stineman, Streamline, and Roman. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 5:08 pm by Robert Wood
 Given how broad this provision is, the broker is deprived of one of the best arguments that defendants in non-solicitation cases usually have—i.e., “I didn’t solicit the customers—they contacted me! [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 3:19 pm by Mavrick Law Firm
 Peter Mavrick is a non-compete lawyer who has extensive experience with non-compete agreements and defending against non-compete lawsuits. [read post]
15 Feb 2023, 7:23 am by Eugene Volokh
Thus, Progressive requests that the parties use the name of the non-party driver as the defendant. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 3:31 am by Kevin LaCroix
The defendants’ costs of defending themselves from the claims exhausted the policy’s $5 million limit. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 1:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
  I am sure that at least some carrier-side observers may find it a surprising outcome that there was found to be coverage in connection with fees incurred for  non-party employee witnesses who were not defendants in the SEC action. [read post]
12 Mar 2008, 1:15 am
  In so ruling, the court held that, where an underlying claimant had done nothing more than serve the insured with a demand letter and had not filed any actual complaint against the insured, no justiciable dispute yet existed as to whether the insurer owed a duty to defend the insurer for the as yet non-existent claims.Upon dismissal, the insured sought to recover the attorneys’ fees it had incurred in… [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 1:20 pm by Lebowitz & Mzhen
The Court Finds the Defendant Had a Non-Delegable Duty to Maintain the Shop The court rejected each the defendant’s arguments on appeal. [read post]