TMG counterclaimed that Depp dug himself into a financial hole, .
|
|
He counterclaimed for $100,000 and said he didn't have an infection.
|
|
He subsequently counterclaimed that the Monaco judiciary was biased in favor of Mr. Rybolovlev.
|
|
But, accepting all that, Mark mentally counterclaimed, why not just have a petition in the form of a petition?
|
|
SBCCI counterclaimed for copyright infringement and other allegedly wrongful acts.293 F.3d at 793-94, 809-10.
|
|
They counterclaimed that CIA did not comply with Belgian law. CIA argued that because the 1990 law and 1991 decree was not notified, it did not apply.
|
|
Co. v. Pure Fishing, Inc., No. 05 C 00725 (N.D. Ill.) Pure Fishing denied infringement and counterclaimed alleging that Stoller's trademark business violated various state and federal laws against unfair business practices.
|
|
When the barrels were collected, they were damaged. When Bradshaw refused to pay Spurling Ltd, the company sued for the cost. Bradshaw counterclaimed for damages for breach of an implied term of a contract of bailment to take reasonable care.
|
|
Ilco counterclaimed that the patents were not valid. In August 1996, court decided that both patents were invalid on basis that its utility patent was already covered in a prior art and that keyway shape was not an ornamental concern for the users.
|
|
Stroger came under increased fire in the later years of his presidency for what his critics call a scandal- and patronage-ridden administration. Stroger supporters counterclaimed that he dedicated his public career to providing quality and affordable health care for the poorer residents of Cook County.
|
|
The blocks became nicknamed "The Piggeries". The tenants, conducting a rent strike, refused to pay rent. In an action by the council to eject them, they counterclaimed that the council was in breach of a duty to keep the common parts of the estates in decent repair.
|
|
Adroa had counterclaimed for repairs to the car, but this also failed, as the magistrate did not want to create a precedent for donors to ask for their gifts back if prayers were not fulfilled.Uganda: Church Loses Libel Case, New Vision, 22 June 2010. Cited at AllAfrica.com. Retrieved 18 October 2010.
|
|
Samsung applied to the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, in Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited & Anr v. Apple Inc., for a declaration that its Galaxy tablets were not too similar to Apple's products. Apple counterclaimed, but Samsung prevailed after a British judge ruled Samsung's Galaxy tablets were not similar enough to be confused with Apple's iPad.
|
|
He had signed the contract but he refused to go through. Mr Redgrave sued for specific performance and Mr Hurd counterclaimed for rescission based on fraudulent misrepresentation. Fry J held that because Mr Hurd had not taken the opportunity to check through the papers, he could not be taken to have relied on them. Mr Hurd appealed.
|
|
Systems sent a letter to Network saying Network's usage of "ActiveBatch" as a keyword was infringing Systems' trademark rights. As a result, Network filed a lawsuit seeking declaratory judgement of non-infringement. Subsequently, Systems counterclaimed, and asserted trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114 and therefore sought a preliminary injunction against Network's usage of "ActiveBatch".
|
|
Kimble, 135 S. Ct. at 2406. Marvel subsequently learned of the Brulotte decision and realized that under the Brulotte doctrine it was not obliged to pay royalties after the patent expired. Kimble sued Marvel for breach of contract and Marvel counterclaimed for a declaration that it was no longer obligated to pay Kimble after the patent expired. Marvel prevailed in the litigation.
|
|
From 1964, Mr Mardon negotiated a lower rent with Esso but was still losing money. Esso then brought an action for possession against Mr Mardon, who counterclaimed for damages of Esso's breach of warranty or negligence under Hedley Byrne. Lawson J held there was no contractual warranty and damages for negligent misstatement were limited to losses before 1964. Mr Mardon appealed.
|
|
The Library Illustrative of Social Progress was a series of pornographic books published by John Camden Hotten around 1872 (falsely dated 1777). They were mainly reprints of eighteenth-century pornographic works on flagellation. Hotten claimed to have found them in the library of Henry Thomas Buckle (1821–1862) but Henry Spencer Ashbee counterclaimed that they were in fact from his collection.Ashbee (1877) pp.
|
|
Dr Wallersteiner sued for libel. Mr Moir counterclaimed, and joined two of his companies as defendants, for £500,000 to be repaid. In a first judgment (Wallersteiner v Moir) the Court of Appeal held that the libel action would be struck out for deliberate delay and awarded £235,000 in damages to Mr Moir, but gave Dr Wallersteiner leave to defend the remaining issues, including fraud.
|
|
Other allegations included that McCormick had a former chauffeur arrested and interrogated by a private detective. McCormick then counterclaimed that he had made loans to Adams which had to be repaid. The case was heard by Federal Court Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis in November. It was hinted that McCormick had promised to forgive the loans if Adams dropped his suit to reopen the divorce.
|
|
Stewart counterclaimed for dissolution of the partnership, and Stewart became the sole owner of the building after settling the suit with Monzio. In April 1982, Stewart was robbed at gunpoint upon leaving the building in broad daylight with his three- year-old daughter. The gunman stole Stewart's Porsche Carrera. In July 1983, the Coronet, which was vacant at the time, was nearly destroyed in a fire.
|
|
On April 24, 1943, Waterfield married actress Jane Russell, his sweetheart from Van Nuys High School who had subsequently gained fame as a pin-up girl. The couple eloped to Las Vegas shortly after Waterfield entered the military. They adopted three children, Thomas, Tracy, and Robert John, during the 1950s. Russell filed for divorce in February 1967, and Waterfield counterclaimed accusing Russell of habitual intemperance and excessive drinking.
|
|
Orders made by the Paper Control Tribunal on 8 July 1920 provided for a reduction of the price that had been paid, representing margins in excess of the regulated price. The Manitoba Free Press brought an action against Fort Frances in the Supreme Court of Ontario to recover the specified amount. Fort Frances counterclaimed for an amount equal to the market price of the paper, less sums already paid.
|
|
Aerotel sued Telco Holdings Limited for patent infringement in February 2005 and Telco counterclaimed for revocation of the patent. The action started in the Patents County Court, but HHJ Fysh QC transferred it to the High Court in November 2005. In February 2006, Telco applied for summary judgment on its counterclaim, basing the application on the exclusion to patentability. This application succeeded before Lewison J who ordered revocation of the patent on 3 May 2006.
|
|
Courage Ltd claimed that Crehan had not paid for deliveries of beer. Crehan argued that the agreement was contrary to TEC article 81, and unenforceable, and counterclaimed for damages. It was shown that free houses were able to buy beer at much lower prices than tied tenants, reducing their profitability. Inntrepreneur had sought negative clearance from the Commission in 1992 that it could not infringe competition law under TEC article 81(3).
|
|
In 1986, the Gallo brothers sued their younger brother Joseph for selling cheese branded with the Joseph Gallo Farms name. Joseph then counterclaimed, alleging that Ernest and Julio conspired to steal his share of the inheritance from their father. This claim included the winery, where the evidence submitted by Joseph's attorney suggested that it was actually started by their father. Joseph Gallo lost both suits and was forced to change the name of his business to Joseph Farms.
|
|
He was > given two deadlines to deliver a 'director's cut' and missed both deadlines. > His guild has rules for withdrawing his name from the picture and he missed > those deadlines. The production company will vigorously oppose the lawsuit. In November 2015 the producers counterclaimed for breach of contract, saying they had terminated the director's formal editing rights period and notified the Directors Guild of America when the film was $2 million over budget and late for delivery.
|
|
In April 1976 his solicitors wrote to her giving her two months notice "to determine her licence to occupy", and demanded possession in June 1976. She refused to go. In this action he sued her for possession of what he regarded as his legal home; she counterclaimed for an order to give effect that he held the house on trust for her (and her heirs and assigns absolutely) and that the contents of the house belonged to her.
|
|
The IRS again notified the University on April 16, 1975 of the proposed revocation. Officially, the IRS revoked the University's tax exempt status on January 19, 1976. The University paid $21 in unemployment taxes for one employee for tax year 1975 and then filed for a refund in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. The Government counterclaimed for unpaid federal unemployment taxes for the taxable years 1971 through 1975, in the amount of $489,675.59, plus interest.
|
|
Concerning the patent on the framebuffer controller, in 1997 Lans as an individual sued several companies, including Compaq, Gateway and Hewlett Packard, for not paying royalties, and allegedly infringing on his patent. The defendants counterclaimed that the patent was assigned to Uniboard AB, a company wholly owned by Lans. The judge ruled that this was the case and thus Lans lost the case. This has led to a dispute between Lans and his attorneys, who Lans has sued for misconduct.
|
|
He was placed on probation and ordered to drug and alcohol rehabilitation. In December 2005, Deborah filed a lawsuit against Brando in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleging spousal abuse involving an incident in Brando's home. Brando counterclaimed for "a savage beating" during the same incident claiming that she broke into his home and beat him because he wanted to annul their marriage only 10 weeks after exchanging vows. They stayed in contact while Christian was sent to a treatment center for his drug abuse/use.
|
|
The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, the jurisdiction where McLean lies. iParadigms counterclaimed, alleging one of the students hacked into its service. Approximately one year later, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of iParadigms and against the students based on the doctrine of fair use, and against iParadigms on their hacking claim because they failed to prove any monetary damages. Both parties appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
|
|
Unbeknownst to the parties, the sodium nitrite preservative used in the Norwegian herring meal produced a substance, dimethylnitrosamine (DMNA), toxic to many animals, highly so to mink. None of the parties were aware that DMNA (the potential dangers of which were known, although lethal dosages were not) was present in the meal. When Ashington Piggeries withheld payment for the feed, Christopher Hill sued, and Ashington Piggeries counterclaimed for damages which they claimed were caused by violation of contract. According to them, Christopher Hill had supplied an ingredient not sanctioned by contract: herring meal plus DMNA.
|
|
He worked with local Methodist preachers, who led hymn-singing at union meetings, and also organised co- operation with the neighbouring South Yorkshire Miners' Association (SYMA). In response to the newly confident union, mineowners in Staveley sacked 500 workers for union membership, out of a total workforce of 1,800 in the town. Owners in Hucknall and Kimberley then locked out miners, and the three areas brought in strikebreakers from across Britain. The union counterclaimed for a working day of less than 12 hours, and when being paid by the ton, for this to be based on 21 cwt, not 28 cwt.
|
|
In 1988, Quality Inns (now Choice Hotels) was planning to open a new chain of economy hotels under the name "McSleep." After McDonald's demanded that Quality Inns not use the name because it infringed, the hotel company filed a suit in federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that "McSleep" did not infringe. McDonald's counterclaimed, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. Linguist Roger Shuy testified for Quality Inn, that "the Mc prefix had become part of everyday English"; David Lightfoot argued for McDonald's that in all those cases these meanings "were characteristics of McDonald's and its reputation".
|
|
In June 1940 Mercoid sued Honeywell and Mid-Continent in Chicago federal district court for a declaratory judgment that its fan and limit controls did not infringe or contribute to the infringement of Honeywell's Freeman patent, that the patent was invalid, and that Honeywell was restraining trade in violation of the antitrust laws. Honeywell counterclaimed and sued for patent infringement. The district court held the patent not shown invalid but misused. The court explained the misuse: > [I]t must be held that Minneapolis-Honeywell has been so using its patent as > to tend to create a monopoly in an unpatented device.
|
|
There is contemporaneous evidence that suggests that Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt were not the sole authors of Olympus has Fallen, but in fact Mr. Rothenberger's former partner, John S. Green, a lawyer in Pennsylvania and a fellow University of Pennsylvania alumnus with Rothenberger, was the source of the movie's characters and material. In 2013, Rothenberger sued Green in federal district court in California, seeking a declaration that he was sole author. Green counterclaimed that he was the source of substantial material in the 41-page treatment that was registered with the WGA in the year 2002. The project languished for several years, and the partners began working on it again in 2009.
|
|
In 2010, Democratic Underground was sued for alleged copyright infringement in a member's posting of a few paragraphs from an article in the Las Vegas Review- Journal. The suit was brought by Righthaven, an entity that finds Review- Journal quotations online, buys the copyright for that story from the newspaper, and retroactively sues for copyright infringement. In response to the lawsuit, DU asserted that the quoted excerpt (five sentences of a 54-sentence article) was fair use, and counterclaimed against Righthaven for fraud, barratry, and champerty. DU is being represented in the case pro bono by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, attorneys from the firm of Winston & Strawn, and Las Vegas attorney Chad Bowers.
|
|
The United States then counterclaimed that European tax regulations concerning extraterritorial income were also GATT-incompatible. In 1976, a GATT panel found that both DISCs and the European tax regulations were GATT-incompatible. These cases were settled, however, by the Tokyo Round Code on Subsidies and Countervailing Duties, predecessor to today's Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM), and the GATT Council decided in 1981 to adopt the panel reports subject to the understanding that the terms of the settlement would apply. The WTO Panel in the 1999 case later ruled that the 1981 decision did not constitute a legal instrument within the meaning of GATT-1994, and hence was not binding on the panel.
|
|
Mr Solle, a tenant, claimed that he should be repaid money over the statutory rent regulation for a flat he leased, and Butcher, the landlord, counterclaimed that their contract should be void because both were mistaken about rent regulation applying. Mr Charles Butcher had leased the flat in Maywood House, Beckenham, to Mr Godfrey Solle at £250 a year, believing that the Rent Acts did not apply to the property. The Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act 1920 sections 1 and 14 and Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act 1938 section 7 regulated rent rises, and gave tenants basic rights upon renewal, to prevent the housing market becoming unaffordable. Butcher was in fact in a business partner, doing real estate, with Solle.
|
|
Ecolab filed an action in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against FMC for infringement of the '729, '286, and '963 patents. FMC counterclaimed that Ecolab infringed FMC's '676 patent, and each party asserted its opponent's patent claims were invalid. The case was tried before a jury, and the jury found that: (1) claims 17, 19, 20 and 22 of Ecolab's '729 patent were invalid as anticipated or obvious; (2) claims 1-4 of Ecolab's '286 patent were invalid as obvious; (3) claims 7, 17, 19, 20 and 22 of Ecolab's '963 patent were invalid as anticipated or obvious; (4) the '676 patent claims asserted by FMC are not invalid; (5) FMC willfully infringed claim 7 of the '729 patent and claims 25, 27 and 28 of the '963 patent; (6) Ecolab infringed claims 1, 5, 6, and 7 of FMC's '676 patent; and (7) neither party induced infringement of any claims. The jury awarded reasonable royalty damages to both parties, and the district court entered judgment on the jury's verdict.
|
|