In a legal case, say, A Company V. B Corp.,does that imply A wins the case?
347166
The order of the parties in case reporting is quite a complex question.\nUsually for the trial level case the party listed first if the party bringing a legal motion and the party listed second is the one defending.\n\nThe same is often true for the appeal level cases, The party who lost on the trial level and is now bringing a motion to appeal, is listed first. This leads to interesting namings:\nSay A sued B (case is called A v. B)\nSay A won and B appealed the case to the Court of Appeals -- now the case is called B v. A. \nSay the court of appeals reversed and held that B wins. Now A appeals the case to the Supreme court -- now the case is A v. B again.\n\nHowever there are weird cases -- when the party that won appeals the case (say because they think that the damages are inadequate)\nOr when both parties appeal the decision.\n\nIn cases like this each court has it's own policies.
699209
Well, not sure about specifically in CT (I have not reviewed case law for it), but based on a plain language reading, it would seem likely that the term "all" would indicate a level of exhustion. To illustrate, assume Reasonable Effort A and Reasonable Effort B are possible.  Under simple language of "reasonable effort", either A or B would suffice. In contrast, with the language of "all reasonable efforts," both A and B must be done, and the execution on only one would be insufficent (assuming doing only one was not a successful effort). \n\nOf course this is all just general and without any context. What is requried by reasonable effort or all reasonable efforts might depend on the context of the what the effort is for, what type of contract it is etc...Depending on these variables, it the langauge difference might not matter.
479838
Yes.\n\nPlease keep in mind that I am not an Attorney, I just play one here.
495076
A party of interest in a suit would indicate that person/company/entity would stand to gain or lose something depending on the outcome.  They can testify in or submit evidence to the court.
276435
I will give you a real world example.  I represented my father's construction company in a lawsuit.  He paid a subcontractor in full for work done on a project, but the subcontractor failed to pay for the concrete he used because of financial difficulties.  The concrete supplier filed a lien which my dad had to pay.\n\nI filed a lawsuit on his behalf.  The subcontractor filed an znswer to the lawsuit that admitted he owed my dad the money and needed more time to pay.  There was no factual dispute and the court granted a motion I filed called a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
326109
It depends on so many things, but a law suit can be settled in a matter of weeks if both parties agree; but obviously if there is a need for a law suit both parties don't agree.  \n\nSome big companies will make those who win law suits wait years and I mean almost a decade or more before paying off.  They do so with appeals and negotations.  Its ugly.
1003287
false, they can contest the will unless u leave a clause in your will that if it is contested they will get nothing.
134974
Your case could be from a State supreme court.
515934
It hasn't gotten to the Supreme Court yet.  Read the Fouth Amendment and case law surrounding it if you want an understanding of it.  I had to use it several years ago and convinced equal employment officials that my employer couldn't divulge the fact that I was scheduled for a standard drug test to anyone else in my workplace.  So, sometimes it can be interpreted fairly liberally although it isn't worded specifically to support such a claim.  It depends on who you have to convince.  I doubt my case would have stood up in court even though it would have stood up in the eyes of the media.  Research the topic for yourself before you believe what anyone (government or media) has to say about the issue.
214328
You can sue anyone for anything.Winning is another thing
72234
Maybe it's Innocent.\nOr try these other legal terms to help:\n\nPlea: An accused persons answer to a criminal charge. For example: not guilty; guilty; no contest.\n\nAcquittal: Judgement that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.\n\nNolo contendere: No contest-has the same effect as a\nplea of guilty, as far as the criminal sentence is concerned, but may not be considered as an admission of guilt for any other purpose.\n\nHope it helps!
787522
Yes, but it might be difficult to prove. It is called...i think slander or public defaming or something like that. Despite this, proof of the action(s) might be very difficult to prove, and the cost of the suit might not be reasonable.
764332
Only if you've done something wrong. The BBB gives you a chance to tell your side of the story and settle the matter. However, if the customer is unreasonable and demanding more than they were promised, you could get a black mark in your file.\n\nHowever, just about every company has a few black marks. People who use the BBB to judge businesses will take that into consideration. If you've shown that you went above and beyond the call of duty and still didn't please the customer, I think it actually makes you look good. Here's someone who couldn't be pleased, yet you tried very hard to do so.
793216
i believe that it can be proved otherwise...\na corporation can make money and still serve society though it takes a lot of work and balance...\nokay sooo maybe conflict is inevitable, but that doesnt mean that a money making corporation cannot serve...\nthere is a company i believe they are doing well for themselves and still have the initiative to do what's best for their consumers, okay, so its a water refilling station, they make a lot of money and sure people argue that they have high prices but its really pure clean water (in contrast to scammers in the our in town selling cheap but unsafe water), so they serve society by providing the best quality of water they can.
240300
Yes. Even if you are not prosecuted, any officer of the court can say you were guilty. The most likely scenario would be saying, "The defendent is, indeed, guilty. There just wasn't enough evidence to convict." Or "The defendent is, indeed, guilty. The jury just saw it otherwise." Or something to that effect.
1092291
Determined by supreme court case.
1175588
Yes, if they have sued you and won a judgement against you in a court of law.  Were you sued?