Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
"Every creditor coming in to prove under, and to take the benefit of, the English liquidation, must do so on terms of the English law of bankruptcy: he cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate, to claim the benefit of that law, and at the same time insist on retaining as against it, any preferential right inconsistent with the equality of ...
On hearing the plaintiff trying to break in, he shot his gun through a hole in the shed, injuring the plaintiff. At first instance, the judge awarded damages on the basis that the defendant had used violence in excess of the reasonable limits allowed by lawful self-defence and was negligent to the standard of care expected of a reasonable man ...
It is a factor also that is taken into account in damages for libel; one man should not be allowed to sell another man's reputation for profit. Where a Defendant with a cynical disregard for a Plaintiff's rights has calculated that the money to be made out of his wrong-doing will probably exceed the damages at risk, it is necessary for the law ...
He rattled off the 18 different studies, one by one, that his company had done examining the safety of Risperdal when given to children. Most had been placebo-controlled, meaning half of the participants had been given a sugar pill instead of medication and the results had then been compared.
(Jury Trial) Vol. I - January 23, 2015 Pledger v. Janssen, et al. - PLEDGER, et al. -vs- JANSSEN, et al. - Page 17 1 reason it's a problem is because it's not 2 filtered. 3 See, here we have evidence that comes
I am of the same opinion. I think the Plaintiff cannot complain of what is being done as a nuisance. A man who carries on an exceptionally delicate trade cannot complain because it is injured by his neighbour doing something lawful on his property, if it is something which would not injure anything but an exceptionally delicate trade. Cooke v.
Novo Nordisk's and Eli Lilly's weight loss drugs can cost over $1,000 for a month's supply, while compounded versions typically cost a few hundred dollars. The FDA needs more support, Califf said.
The key difference is that in this latter situation, the defendant need only attack one essential element of the plaintiff's claim. A finding that the plaintiff cannot prove one essential element of its claim necessarily renders all other elements immaterial and results in summary judgment for the defendant. So these motions tend to be ...