Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Holding; To survive a motion for a summary judgment, a plaintiff seeking damages for a violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act must present evidence "that tends to exclude the possibility" that the alleged conspirators acted independently, such that the inference of a conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed ...
In law, a summary judgment, also referred to as judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition, [1] is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case.
Kajima builds high-rise structures, railways, power plants, dams, and bridges. Its subsidiaries are located throughout Asia, Oceania, Europe, and North America. A downturn in the construction industry during the latter half of the 1990s prompted Kajima to expand its operations to the environmental sector, specifically waste treatment, water ...
In law, a summary order is a determination made by a court without issuing a legal opinion. This disposition is also known as a nonopinion, summary opinion, affirmance without opinion, unpublished order, disposition without opinion, or abbreviated disposition. It is not to be confused with summary judgment, which means a decision without trial.
Summary execution, an execution in which a person is accused of a crime and then immediately killed without benefit of a full and fair trial. Summary judgment. A judgment in a summary proceeding, as one rendered pursuant to statute against the sureties on a bond furnished in an action. 50 Am J1st Suret § 209.
Kanae Kijima (木嶋 佳苗, Kijima Kanae, born November 27, 1974), known as The Konkatsu Killer, is a Japanese fraudster and serial killer, convicted for poisoning three would-be husbands and suspected of four more, spanning from 2007 to 2009.
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.Written by Associate Justice William Rehnquist, the decision of the Court held that a party moving for summary judgment need show only that the opposing party lacks evidence sufficient to support its case.
On April 30, 2007, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the judgment of the Federal Circuit, holding that the disputed claim 4 of the patent was obvious under the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §103, and that in "rejecting the District Court’s rulings, the Court of Appeals analyzed the issue in a narrow, rigid manner inconsistent with §103 and our precedents," referring to the Federal Circuit ...