Ads
related to: autoclaims direct lawsuit cases examples free pdf filecourtrec.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
If you were affected, you can file a claim at this site with your computer’s serial number and proof of repairs. Synchrony Bank Total settlement: $2.6 million.
Kivalina v. ExxonMobil Corp., No. 4:08-cv-01138 (N.D. Cal.), was a lawsuit filed on February 26, 2008, in a United States district court.The suit, based on the common law theory of nuisance, claims monetary damages from the energy industry for the destruction of Kivalina, Alaska by flooding caused by climate change.
Argued April 26, 1983 Decided June 24, 1983; Full case name: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the United States, Inc., et al. v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company et al; Consumer Alert, et al. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al.; United States Department of Transportation, et al. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al.
Keele Valley Landfill#Resident class action lawsuit; Kemper Corporation#Class-action lawsuit; Kids for cash scandal#Victim lawsuits; Kweku Hanson#Class action lawsuit against Ocwen Federal FSB; Lead contamination in Washington, D.C. drinking water#Class-action lawsuit; Long-term effects of benzodiazepines#Class-action lawsuit; Lowe's#Lawsuits
One example can be a customer suing a company to repeal an action deemed an infringement on the rights of the customer as a citizen and thus a subject to federal or state law. The largest direct-action lawsuit in history ($333 million) was the subject matter of the motion picture Erin Brockovich .
Sample clearance fees prohibited the use of more than one or two samples for most recordings, with some mechanical rights holders demanding up to 100% of royalties. As each sample had to be cleared to avoid legal action, records such as those produced by the Bomb Squad for Public Enemy , which use dozens of samples, became prohibitively ...
Apr. 9—SANTA FE — Two companies involved in the construction of the Buckman Direct Diversion Water Treatment Project will pay $36 million as part of a settlement agreement with the Buckman ...
Argument: Oral argument: Case history; Prior: 697 F.3d 387 (6th Cir. 2012); cert. granted, 569 U.S. 1017 (2013).: Holding; Judgment AFFIRMED. Static Control's alleged injuries—lost sales and damage to its business reputation—fall within the zone of interests protected by the Lanham Act, and Static Control sufficiently alleged that its injuries were proximately caused by Lexmark's ...