Plaintiff

The issues are whether there is an exception regarding to the majority rule and proper plaintiff rule in Foss v Harbottle? In the cases of Foss v Harbottle provides two types of rule which is “majority rule” and “proper plaintiff rule”. “Majority rule” is the majority shareholder decisions and choices over the minority shareholders. The majority votes from the shareholder within the company are ¾ of voting rights which is 75 %. The greater the majority rights and power of shareholder over the…

That on or about April 2nd, 2013 the Plaintiff was asked by Defendant James Dwight Coombs to Transport Household Appliances and Items, with the Plaintiff’s Truck and Trailer only, a Conditional reasonable agreement was made with Defendant James Dwight Coombs over the phone, the morning of said incident. Defendant Benny Hans Sorensen Communicated with the Plaintiff later in the day asking the Plaintiff to make another trip, to move more said Items. The Plaintiff communicated with the…

Case A: Adidas America Inc. vs. Sketchers USA Inc. Background On September 14th, 2015, Plaintiff A (Plaintiff Adidas America Inc.) filed a complaint of trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, deceptive trade practices and trademark and trade dress dilution, against Defendant S (Sketchers USA Inc.). Plaintiff A put forward such claims due to the assertion of belief that throughout the years, Defendant S had knowingly and continuously produced shoes designs which…

6. The camp said by the defendant that the original plaintiff transferred by the original plaintiff in early 2012 to the back of the plot subject of dispute which called under the name (WBG Camp) rent it, and benefit from it, this implies on the cross plaintiff's acknowledgement and its recognition that the original plaintiff has transferred the camp in 2012 but it erred in determining the next plot. The original plaintiff reviewed the provisions of the Federal Civil Transactions Law No. (5) of…

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES INTRODUCTION Mort Smith (hereinafter “Defendant”) has been served by Rick Sanchez (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) in an action of unlawful detainer pursuant to West’s Ann.Cal.C.C.P. §1161. Defendant declares, as a special appearance in support of a motion to quash service of summons on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction see. Defendant was never properly served with the summons and complaint in this action. As of the date of execution of this declaration,…

we deposed Yanelli Gutierrez, who is the plaintiffs’ daughter-in-law and was in front of plaintiff, Leonor Jaimes, on the subject escalator just prior to the occurrence. Ms. Gutierrez had a poor recollection of the occurrence. She has a pleasant personality, but will make a below average witness. Ms. Gutierrez testified she together with her husband and the plaintiffs went to Sears to purchase a garden tool as a gift for her father-in-law and plaintiff, Jose Jaimes, Sr. They entered the…

ARGUMENT I. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHOULD BE GRANTED BECAUSE PLAINTIFF CONSENTED TO AND WELCOMED THE SEXUAL ENCOUNTERS WITH DEFENDANTS. There remains a split in authority as to whether, as a matter of law, an inmate can consent to sexual relations with a correctional officer. Carrigan v. Davis, 70 F. Supp. 2d 448, 460 (D. Del. 1999). The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Sixth and Eighth Circuits have held that an inmate's Eighth Amendment rights are not violated when she…

The established custodial environment is with Defendant Father. Plaintiff Mother recently had a relapse on heroine, which resulted in Minor Child placed in Defendant Father’s care. Plaintiff Mother voluntarily relinquished her physical custody of Minor Child temporarily. Currently, the Minor Child resides with the Defendant Father. The parties share joint custody of Minor Child. The Minor Child looks to Plaintiff Mother for guidance, discipline, necessities of life, and parental comfort. However…

Plaintiff cannot overcome the presumption that out of state students lack the intent to remain in the new state indefinitely. Scoggins v. Pullock, 727 F.2d 1025 (11th Cir. 1984). Mas v. Perry 489 F. 2d 1396 (5th Cir. 1974) In Scoggins, the court held that the presumption was strong unless there was enough evidence to establish that the student’s domicile had indeed changed. The plaintiff in Scoggins originally moved to the new state to undertake graduate studies and did not have any definite…

right. To succeed in an action of tort, the plaintiff has to prove that he has been caused legal damage. To simplify, it is to be proved that there was a wrongful act or omission of an act which violated the legal right vested in the plaintiff. No action under law of tort can be taken unless there is a violation of legal right. If there has been a violation of legal right, the same is actionable in the court of law, irrespective of the fact that the plaintiff has suffered any loss or not. This…