Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In common-law legal systems, laches (/ ˈ l æ tʃ ɪ z / LAT-chiz, / ˈ l eɪ-/; Law French: remissness, dilatoriness, from Old French: laschesse) is a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right, particularly in regard to equity.
Finally, the defendants claimed the affirmative defense of laches, asserting that Steinberg had waited over six months to complain to Columbia Pictures about the alleged infringement in order to increase his award in the eventual lawsuit. The court dismissed this allegation on the grounds that Steinberg had registered his complaint with the ...
While claiming that it was applying "laches", the majority argument did not satisfy any of the traditional requirements for a laches defense. Among other things, laches requires delay in pressing a claim, but the Cayuga Nation had pressed its claim repeatedly since the 1800s, being stymied by various rules which prevented Indian nations from ...
Laches has a restricted scope in law for the following reasons: Its principal application was and is to claims of an equitable cast for which the legislature has provided no fixed time limitation. In the case, §507(b)'s three-year window provides for such a limitation. In addition, the Court has cautioned against invoking laches to bar legal ...
The lawsuit, regarding 53 ballots, [3] was filed by the Trump campaign and the Georgia Republican Party on November 4 in the Chatham County Superior Court of the Eastern Judicial Circuit of Georgia. [ 1 ] [ 4 ] The campaign claimed that two witnesses had seen late ballots being improperly mixed with on-time ballots.
Likelihood of misleading; Laches Majority: Clifford: Federal Trademark Act of 1870 Infringement requires a likelihood of misleading purchasers, not exact similitude; with laches, a court may deny past damages but still enjoin future infringement where infringement is clear. In re Trade-Mark Cases: 100 U.S. 82: 1879: 9–0: Substantive
This includes "he who comes to equity must come with clean hands" (that is, the court will not assist a claimant who is himself in the wrong or acting for improper motives), laches (equitable remedies will not be granted if the claimant has delayed unduly in seeking them), "equity will not assist a volunteer" (meaning that a person cannot ...
This was the second time the Supreme Court had granted certiorari to the Oneida's land claim. Over a decade earlier, in Oneida Indian Nation of New York v.County of Oneida (1974), the Supreme Court had allowed the same suit to proceed by unanimously holding that there was federal subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the claim. [2]