n. the attorney who represents a plaintiff (the suing party) in a lawsuit. In lawyer parlance a "plaintiff's attorney" refers to a lawyer who regularly represents persons who are suing for damages, while a lawyer who is regularly chosen by an insurance company to represent its insureds is called a "defense attorney."
The call to the bar (rarely, call to bar) is a legal term of art in most common law jurisdictions where persons must be qualified to be allowed to argue in court on behalf of another party and are then said to have been "called to the bar" or to have received a "call to the bar." "The bar" is now used as a collective
. the attorney who represents a plaintiff (the suing party) in a lawsuit. In lawyer parlance a "plaintiff's attorney" refers to a lawyer who regularly represents persons who are suing for damages, while a lawyer who is regularly chosen by an insurance company to represent its insureds is called a "defense attorney."
The call to the bar (rarely, call to bar) is a legal term of art in most common law jurisdictions where persons must be qualified to be allowed to argue in court on behalf of another party and are then said to have been "called to the bar" or to have received a "call to the bar." "The bar" is now used as a collective ...
The plaintiffs bar refers to a group of lawyers who primarily represent plaintiffs in civil litigation cases seeking compensation or damages. These lawyers advocate on behalf of individuals or groups who have been wronged or harmed by another party and seek to recover financial compensation for their clients.
Hi, in the court of law there is 3 sections of the court room, The judges desk, the defendant bar where the person that was accused of doing the crime, and there is a plaintiff bar where the prosecutor sits, or if its not a murder case, just a regular old case like stealing, damage of property etc. its the person who is suing.
One might read plaintiffs bar as specific as, say, personal injury lawyers representing a single client, all the way up to major mass tort litigation.
"Plaintiffs' consent" is correct. The apostrophe before the "s" indicates that the consent belongs to multiple plaintiffs.
The correct placement would be "Plaintiffs' Complaint" to indicate that the complaint belongs to multiple plaintiffs.
The plural form of plaintiff is plaintiffs.
"Plaintiff's" is the possessive form of "plaintiff," indicating something belonging to a single plaintiff. "Plaintiffs'" is the plural possessive form, indicating something belonging to multiple plaintiffs.
The plural possessive of "plaintiff" is "plaintiffs'".
"Plaintiffs' consent" is correct. The apostrophe before the "s" indicates that the consent belongs to multiple plaintiffs.
To refer to two plaintiffs without indicating possession, you would write "two plaintiffs" or "2 plaintiffs." This form does not suggest ownership or possession.
The plural form of plaintiff is plaintiffs.
The correct placement would be "Plaintiffs' Complaint" to indicate that the complaint belongs to multiple plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs do not have a surrebuttal. They have a rebuttal. Defendants reply is the surreebuttal. Plaintiffs case in chief Defendants case in chief Plaintiffs rebuttal Defendants surrebuttal
Not enough information contained in question.. Plaintiffs motion for WHAT? Motion for relief of WHAT?
(2 or more) Plaintiffs' Plural possessive (1 only) Plaintiff's Singular possessive
"Plaintiff's" is the possessive form of "plaintiff," indicating something belonging to a single plaintiff. "Plaintiffs'" is the plural possessive form, indicating something belonging to multiple plaintiffs.
Yes they do.
no
Piccadilly Circus - 1976 Plaintiffs and Defendants was released on: USA: 16 July 1977
The facts are straightforward and undisputed. On December 30, 2002, plaintiffs purchased a new motor home manufactured by defendant, which is located in Indiana. From the time that plaintiffs took possession of the motor home, water continuously leaked into it. Plaintiffs took the motor home to the dealer for repair of the leaks on several occasions, but the dealer failed to successfully fix the leaks. Plaintiffs also had several phone conversations with representatives of defendant, including the president of defendant, but again the leaks were not corrected. On December 23, 2003, plaintiffs' attorney mailed a letter to defendant notifying it of the leaks and the failed attempts to correct the leaks. In the letter, plaintiffs asked defendant to replace the vehicle in accordance with ORS 646.335. (1) The letter did not reach defendant until December 29, 2003, and plaintiffs filed their complaint the next day. (2) The trial court entered a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, rejecting defendant's contention that it did not have an opportunity to correct the defect before plaintiffs filed the action.