Lawsuit In Court Research Articles

Social context and employment lawsuit dispute resolution

PurposeUsing an institutional theory perspective (micro and macro), the authors examined employment lawsuits across case type and alternative dispute resolution methods (negotiated settlements versus trials and arbitrations).Design/methodology/approachThe authors examined actual data from US federal court lawsuits (N= 98,020). The data included the type of lawsuit, the dispute resolution method used and the outcome of the lawsuit in terms of the dollar amounts awarded.FindingsThe results show that employers were more likely to win in high social context cases (civil rights) than in other cases (Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, ERISA). In arbitrations, plaintiffs won more frequently and were awarded higher amounts in arbitration than in court trials. In arbitration, plaintiffs received more in high social context cases than in other cases.Practical implicationsThe results show that employers lose more often and in larger dollar amounts in arbitration than in litigation. However, if arbitration rulings more closely matched the likely outcomes of trials, subsequent litigation would be less likely to be overturned, and transaction costs would be reduced. If this were the case, the arbitration of employment lawsuits would more closely match the arbitration of contractual grievances under the typical labor relations system, where the arbitrator’s decision is usually final and binding. This could be a better outcome for all stakeholders in the dispute resolution process.Originality/valueThis is the first study of its kind to examine actual workplace conflicts that result in employment-related lawsuits from the perspective of social contextual factors.

Corporate litigation and changes in CEO reputation: Guidance from U.S. Federal Court lawsuits

This study examines corporate litigation and changes in CEO reputation. Based on a sample of 9959 filed and settled environmental, antitrust, intellectual property (IP) and contractual lawsuits in the U.S. Federal Courts over the 2000–2007 period, we find that CEOs experience poorer reemployment prospects following contractual lawsuits. Additionally, reputational consequences depend significantly on the nature of the allegation and lawsuit merit. We also observe that IP lawsuits are associated with an increase in the number of outside board seats; no penalties follow politically sensitive environmental lawsuits. Overall, our findings contribute to the extant literature on market-based penalties for corporate wrongdoing.

论工伤待遇“私了”协议的法律效力

近年来，劳动者在工作中发生事故后，与用人单位自行签订工伤“私了”协议的现象越来越多。一方面劳动者能够尽快拿到补偿；另一方面双方可以避免过多纠缠，尽快息事宁人。但是这种私下达成的协议，劳动者得到的赔偿往往低于法定赔偿数额，不能够很好地保护本身的切实利益，所以不少劳动者在签订该协议后反悔诉至法院，但是其效力往往受到法律的质疑。关于工伤“私了”协议的效力该如何认定，在实际中有比较大的分歧。 In recent years, there has been a rise in private settlement of work-related injuries between workers and employers. On the one hand, the workers can get compensation promptly; on the other hand, both parties can avoid excessive dispute and make quick and peaceful settlement of the matter. But the sum of compensation the workers get through private settlement is usually much lower than that stipulated by law; therefore private settlement often fails to protect the workers’ interests effectively. As a result, many workers will file lawsuits in court after they sign agreements of private settlement. The effect of private settlement agreements is hence challenged by law, and there exists great controversy on the determination of the effect of private settlement agreements for work-related injuries in juridical practice.

Indonesia

The existence of a lawsuit in court against the certificate is not a new thing anymore , given stelsel adopted in the system of land registration in Indonesia is negative stelsel positive tendency . If on the certificate that was sued earlier , based on court decisions that have permanent legal force ( inkracht van gewisjde ) should be revoked and canceled by the National Land Agency, but de facto the decision can not be implemented by the National Land Agency with some particular reason , then this is where the role of National Pertanahann Agency to be able to realize the judgment which can not be implemented as Non - Executable decision. In this study will answer perrmasalahan , namely : Why is the National Land Agency wants the Indonesian Supreme Court Decision 158 / PK / TUN / 2011 on Cancellation of Certificate Broking No. 132 on behalf of PT . TOP As the verdict of Non - Executable ?, How the National Land Agency Role In Delivering the Indonesian Supreme Court Decision 158 / PK / TUN / 2011 As a verdict of Non - Executable ? How Legal Certainty The winner of the Indonesian Supreme Court Decision 158 / PK / TUN / 2011 and the Justice and Legal Protection against the owner of Certificate Broking No. 132 Certificate of derivatives and their owners ? To address this problem used approach Legislation , Case Approach , Conceptual Approach , Approach Sociology of Law and Political Law. Based on the survey results revealed that : First , there are two main reasons why the National Land Agency wants the Supreme Court Decision No. 158 / PK / TUN / 2011 as Non - Executable ruling that reasons are normative juridical considerations and Juridical Technical . Pertimbangann normative juridical reason is that the decision of cancellation of the Certificate Broking No. 132 on behalf of PT . TOP is overdue / expired / verjaring , Ultra Petita and filed by the plaintiffs who do not have other interests and there is a decision in the administrative court ruling that the criminal verdict. While consideration juridical reason partly because the decision concerning civil rights and legal justice for the hundreds of people or communities certificate owner derivative or fragment of a Certificate of Right to Building No. 132 certificate as a parent, but it also relates to issues of Local Government Assets and Money State. Second, the role of the National Land Agency in realizing the Supreme Court Decision No. 158 / PK / TUN / 2001 to a decision of Non-Executable is a way to initiate a peace between the parties that the winning parties and the ruling party Certificate holder Broking No. 132 as a party that has been lost. The essence of peace is how the BPN role in creating the conditions that the parties who won the verdict, his rights can still be given, while for the owner of Certificate Broking No. 132 does not need to be canceled. Then after a peace between the parties earlier, the peace agreement must be drawn up in an authentic deed in this case the notarial deed, then a notary deed are then registered to Class I Palembang District Court to get the verdict determination of Non-Executable. Third, the Rule of Law which can be given to the winner of the verdict is that they can still get their rights as they are demanded in the lawsuit, while the owner of Certificate Broking No. 132 does not need to be done for cancellation as a command decision, so that the legal protection and legal justice for the hundreds of citizens derivative of the certificate holder Certificate nno Broking. 132 can still be given. In this study is recommended in order to be reviewed and revised the regulatory legislation has tended to impose to government officials to have to melaksanaka command decision that has ikracht, while there has not yet been set on the criteria that can be used as a benchmark as the ruling Non -Executable as well as an alternative solution, so there will be a legal umbrella for state administration officials were not able to carry out a court decision that has inkracht due to constraints of both factors normative juridical and technical factors. Especially for the internal BPN, it is recommended that in the Minister Substitute Regulation of the National Land Agency No. 3 of 2011 which is currently being created in the Ministry of Agricultural and Spatial / BPN RI put special rules regarding the decision of non-executable and its completion, resulting in the implementation later, this rule can be used as a benchmark by all officials BPN RI in the face of problematic decision of non-executable.

Civil liability related to imaging exams in Brazil

Aim: To analyze all court lawsuits in Brazil in relation to civil liability involving radiographic and tomographic images up to February 2014. Methods: All Brazilian courts were surveyed for “civil liability,” “error,” “radiology,” “radiography,” and “tomography,” returning 3923 second-instance lawsuits. Out of them were excluded labor legislation, health insurance coverage of radiological examinations, and criminal liability cases and 359 were selected. Compliance with expert reports, involvement of imaging exams, the defendant professional, the reasons of claims and convictions, and indemnity were evaluated. Results: Of the 359 selected lawsuits, physicians were defendants in 71%, radiologist physicians in 10.6% and dentists in 18.4%. The prevalence of physicians found liable was related to the lack or delay in requesting the imaging exams (49.6%), and among radiologist physicians, misdiagnosis (47.1%). Considering the dentists, imaging exams had mostly an indirect involvement, and failure of the proposed treatment (73.8%) was the most prevalent cause of dentists found liable; no radiologist was sued. Regarding indemnity, 50% of lawsuits resulted in compensation up to R$ 20,000 (US$ 8,583). Conclusions: Misdiagnosis was the main cause of claims and radiologists were found liable. The medical field showed the largest absolute number of claims and physicians were found liable, but the highest proportion was directed to dentists.

Kewenangan Jaksa dalam Memulihkan Kekayaan Negara

Abstract: this article discusses about the authority of the prosecutor in restoring the state’s assets based on Undang-Undang Kejaksaan No. 16 tahun 2004. Such a constitusional authority is in the form of obtainning special authorization from the government agencies as defined in article 30 paragraph 2 of Undang-Undang Kejaksaan. The scope of the authority includes, law enforcement, legal aid, legal consideration, saving and restoring the state’s wealth. In accordance with restoring the state’s wealth, it can be done by filing a lawsuit in court or by offering peace outside of the court. The authority of prosecutor in restoring the state’s wealth, according to the political jurisprudence, is valid in accordance with the authority of hisbah as a government official supervisor to resolve the dispute in the case of administrative irregularities. So, the prosecutor’s attempt to resolve the dispute can be justified, either by the litigation or non-litigation way. Likewise, it is the hisbah which has the authority to do prosecution and call the parties to be peacefully resolved.Keywords: Prosecutor, recovery, wealth, state, political jurisprudence

Dochodzenie roszczeń związanych ze szkodą wyrządzoną wadliwą decyzją administracyjną

The issue of pursuance of claims connected with damage inflicted by defective administrative decision was regulated by section 160 of the Administrative Procedure Code (APC) until 1 September 2004. The section was the basis for pursuance of claim in connection with ascertaining invalidity of administrative decision or a decision issued with breach of the law. However, since 1 September 2004, i.e. after the amendment of the Civil Procedure Code(CPC) came into force, the basis for liability for damage caused by final administrative decision issued before 1 September 2004 – even if its invalidity or issuing with breach of law were established after that date – constitutes section 160 of the APC - but only in the aspect of determining the wrongful act or premisses of responsibility (clauses 1–3) and also prescription of claim (clause 6). It is not applicable to the procedure (mode) of pursuance of claim (clause 4&5). In the present law, regardless of the date of issue of decision, the appropriate and only way of pursuance of claim is a lawsuit in court. This means that the administrative mode has been excluded, regardless of the basis of responsibility arising from section 160 of the APC or section 417(clause 2) of the CPC. The range of responsibility for defective decision issued before 1 Sept 2004 has also been differentiated, since the party claiming damage can demand compensation for sustained losses and lost benefits on the basis of section 160 of the APC – if the damage was caused between 17 Oct 1997 and 31 Aug 2004. If the damage was caused before 17 Oct 1997, the party can only demand compensation for sustained losses.

Tax issues for online retailers and consumers

This paper deals with tax issues that concern the online retailers and consumers. It points out three basic problems: internet access, taxable base, and sales tax collecting duties. Internet access fee is not taxable, while telecommunication is. However, they are quite often bundled together. This paper illustrates the necessity to separate them. Online products are taxable only to the extent of tangible personal properties. Today’s digitised products confuse the aspect of tangible products. Only the output is taxable, but not the input. A great many of software is used as an input; nevertheless, it is disguised as an output. This paper identifies what is taxable and what is not taxable. An out-of-state online retailer is required to collect sales tax from an in-state buyer only when there is nexus between the seller and the state. However, the concept of nexus is so controversial that it has resulted in at least 11 lawsuits in courts. This paper analyses them all. It further points out that the concept of nexus has been evolving from physical presence to economic nexus. This paper also offers some tax planning strategies for online retailers and consumers.

The Roots of Removal

Academic observers of federal litigation generally describe the field by reference to its constitutional and statutory foundations. Also at play within this landscape are powerful normative policy elements recognized by scholars and practitioners – at least implicitly – as essential to an adequate description of the litigation choices available to the participants. One of these policy features is the oft-repeated maxim that the plaintiff is the master of the claim. Although this basic premise quietly dominates both academic discussions and practice realities, a number of factors operate to impose very real limitations on that principle. These limitations, in turn, shape how we approach federal litigation, including, specifically, how we approach federal court jurisdiction. One of these limitations on a plaintiff's power that implicates federal jurisdiction is removal – and removal provides an instructive example of the exceptionally rich environment where policy elements interact with constitutional and statutory features. Removal is a means of moving a state court lawsuit into federal court, and approximately 30,000 civil cases are transferred in this manner annually. Through removal, under certain circumstances, a defendant is able to defeat the plaintiff's choice of forum. Thus, removal inherently raises questions regarding what limitations should be placed on a plaintiff's choice of forum. These questions have been answered in different ways depending on the specific issue and the timing, with the timing including both the historical context and the litigation point in time. The dramatic way in which these differences play out are illustrated in three particular aspects of removal law. As a general matter, when removal is accomplished at the very outset of a lawsuit, the procedures are quite straightforward. However, removal that is instituted after the initial thirty-day removal period raises more issues and has the potential to become more complicated. Three of the most difficult issues in removal law arise in such a subsequently-instituted removal context – the first (versus last) served defendant rule, the voluntary-involuntary rule, and the one-year limitation for removing diversity cases. Courts and commentators typically have discussed these issues separately, without realizing that these issues, when analyzed together, share an underlying commonality that yields a surprisingly effective framework: the inherent tension between deferring to the plaintiff's choice of forum versus the defendant's right of removal.

Genes, Parents and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Mistakes, Race, Sex, and Law

In December 1998 a woman gave birth to twins, one of whom was European-American and one of whom was African-American, as a result of an embryo mix-up that occurred at an infertility clinic where she was receiving treatments. The genetic progenitors of the mistakenly implanted embryo challenged the birth mother's rights to one of the twins. They won their New York state court lawsuit, ultimately preventing the birth mother from even having visitation with her son. This essay examines the impact of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) mistakes on the legal analysis of parenthood (in particular maternity), offers a systematic critique of the court's reasoning in the case, makes clear the flaws in the analogies the court uses to reach its conclusion, argues that more courts are defaulting to a genetic essentialism to answer questions of parenthood and ARTs, challenges the legal system to reject a genetics-based definition of legal parenthood because of the sex (and race) biases reproduced through that approach, and exposes the buried assumptions about race and intimacy that led to the court's unreasonable decision. One key argument of this essay highlights the ways that a simplistic genetics-based analysis of parenthood creates a sex-bias by valuing all the biological contributions that a male makes to reproduction (gametes), but valuing only a small part of the biological contributions that a female makes (gestation, labor and birth). Another argument focuses on how the court uses a race-matching approach to parenthood that erroneously reduces race to a biological concept and that relies on deep cultural biases against interracial relationships. Mistakes with ARTs are inevitable. Our legal system must scrupulously examine its fundamental premises about parenthood, genes, race and sex in order to reach just decisions when ART mistakes occur.

Commercialization of Perennial GE Crops: Looming Challenges for Regulatory Frameworks

Overall, the deregulation of genetically engineered (GE) crops for commercial cultivation in North America has been a success story. In several cases, however, GE crops have sparked concerns and disagreements among the stakeholders and there are incidences of court lawsuits, including a recent one on glyphosate resistant (GR) alfalfa (Medicago sativa, L.). While GE crops can provide operational benefits to farmers, challenges are looming from commercialization of perennial GE crops. The unique ecology and biology of these crops and GE alfalfa in particular can facilitate adventitious presence (AP) of GE traits and it makes more visible that economic risks for conventional growers and food/feed producers have not been adequately addressed by the GE regulatory system in the United States (US). Asynchronous market approvals and the existence of a number of GE sensitive export markets create uncertainties among the exporters. Policy development in these fields may be helpful for ensuring a broader acceptance and market success of GE agriculture in general. The analysis is focusing on the US, although many diagnosed problems are also relevant to other jurisdictions—in particular if no co-existence policy is in place.

The Thomas S. case: report on progress with court compliance issues.

The present paper is a brief summary of the progress which has been made in the Thomas S. case, a U.S. Federal Court lawsuit The suit focused on adults with intellectual disability who had been inappropriately placed in state psychiatric hospitals in conditions which violated their constitutional rights. These constitutional rights include safety, protection from harm, treatment under safe conditions, freedom from undue restraint, and minimally adequate habilitation or treatment The present report summarizes the progress made by the 239 class members after they had received a Thomas S. service plan for 6-24 months. Overall, the results suggest that the class members have made significant progress in several areas. Two areas needing continued attention are the challenging behaviours of some class members and their lack of employment opportunities.

Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties? The Legality of State Court Lawsuits under the Fair Housing Act

Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties? The Legality of State Court Lawsuits under the Fair Housing Act

The Impact of Product Recalls on the Wealth of Sellers

What happens to the wealth of shareholders of firms producing defective products? Our answer-for producers of drugs and autos that were recalled from the market-is that the shareholders bear large losses. They are substantially greater than the costs directly emanating from the recall-for example, costs of destroying or repairing defective products. In fact, they are plausibly larger than all the costs attributable specifically to the recalled product; the losses spill over to the firm's "goodwill." They also spill over to competitors. This negative externality may even be larger in the aggregate than the losses to the producer of the recalled product.

Presence of malice: Scientific evaluation of reader response to innuendo

A survey was conducted to test whether or not the label “mouthpiece,” which appeared in the headline “Sinatra’s Mouthpiece,” was viewed as a derogatory term by a representative sample of financial publication readers who saw it used in reference to a lawyer. Four matched groups of subjects rated the person described by four headlines that varied the label (“mouthpiece” vs. “spokesman”) and the employer (Sinatra vs. John Doe) in a 2 × 2 ANOVA design. Results showed that the label “mouthpiece” produced a significantly negative impression regardless of the employer (p <.0001). The data were presented in a Federal Court lawsuit that produced a ruling more in favor of the First Amendment to the Constitution than toward either litigant.

TUNTUTAN PROVISI DALAM GUGATAN PELANGGARAN MEREK PADA PENGADILAN NIAGA

Act Number 15 Year 2001 regarding Trademark has set the provisional charges. Provisional charges may be filed by the plaintiff while the investigation process of trademark infringement lawsuit in court of commerce is still ongoing. In a civil proceeding, the provisional charge must not be the primary charge, however the provisional charge that is set out in the Trademark Act has already concerned the primary charge. Actions that can be requested in the provisional charge according to Article 78 paragraph (1) in the Trademark Act include cessation of production, cessation of circulation of goods and / or services using Plaintiff's trademark illegally. Using literature study that utilizes primary legal materials and secondary legal materials as the research object, the results of the discussion are expected to be based on sufficient arguments to provide benefits for those who are interested to learn the trademark law enforcement.