Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
DeGraffenreid v. General Motors, 413 F. Supp. 142 (E.D. Mo. 1976), was a legal case in which a United States district court held that black women could not sue for discrimination as a group when they were unable to demonstrate that the defendant discriminated against black people generally, or against women generally, and that the statutory protections against discrimination based on race and ...
Doe et al. v. Trump Corporation et al. is an ongoing case commenced in the U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York in October 2018, [3] [4] in which plaintiffs Lynn Chadwick, Markus Frazier, Catherine McKoy and Millard Williams [5] filed a previously anonymous lawsuit against the Trump Corporation, Donald Trump and three of his adult children — Donald Jr., Eric, and Ivanka ...
In 2010 Congress passed the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, which provided $3.4 billion for the settlement of the Cobell v. Salazar class-action trust case (and four Indian water-rights cases.) [ 13 ] Among the provisions of the settlement are for the government to buy land from Indian owners, which has been highly fractionated by being divided ...
Below is a rundown of all the current claims you could be eligible for, and steps concerning how to recoup any money you may be owed. AT&T Total settlement: $60 million.
The case went back to the California federal district court and eventually proceeded to jury trial, where it was established that Coca-Cola Co.'s Minute Maid "Enhanced Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored 100% Juice Blend" was 99.4% apple and grape juices and only 0.3% pomegranate juice, 0.2% blueberry juice, and 0.1% raspberry juice.
TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), was a United States Court case dealing with standing under Article III of the Constitution related to class-action suits against private defendants. In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that only those that can show concrete harm have standing to seek damages against private defendants.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
The case was first heard at the District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2008. [2] During the pre-trial discovery phase , Viacom requested and received a court order for YouTube to hand over data detailing the viewing selections of every user who had ever watched videos on the site.