The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ antitrust claim founded on § 1 of the Sherman Act, holding that 1) Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 24 P.3d 493 (Cal. 2001), precludes the allegations made in the operative pleading; 2) Defendants’ exchange agreements can not be aggregated to establish market power and anticompetitive effect; and 3) even if the exchange

The City of Waverly sued Randall Hedrick, David Hedrick and Carol Reynolds on an eminent domain theory to acquire by condemnation certain real estate and interests therein by condemnation. The commissioners apporinted by the court awarded the Defendants $312,000. Defendants asked for a jury trial on the issue of damages claiming that the commissioners' award was insufficient compensation.

Appellant Jayanti Patel appeals the trial court=s granting Appellee City of Everman=s (the City) no-evidence and traditional summary judgment motions. In six issues, Patel contends that the City failed to attach evidence to its motion for traditional summary judgment; that under the Alaw of the case@ doctrine this court is compelled to reverse the trial court=s judgment; that the trial court erre

Appellants, C.A. Walker Construction Company and Safeco Surety (collectively "Walker"), appeal from the trial court's judgment awarding appellee, J.P. Southwest Concrete, Inc. ("J.P."), $47,000 in actual damages, as well as attorney's fees and pre- and post-judgment interest. In its first three issues, Walker contends the trial court erred in the amount of damages awarded to J.P. because (1) the d

The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ antitrust claim founded on § 1 of the Sherman Act, holding that 1) Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 24 P.3d 493 (Cal. 2001), precludes the allegations made in the operative pleading; 2) Defendants’ exchange agreements can not be aggregated to establish market power and anticompetitive effect; and 3) even if the exchange

Wendell Gorum, Ph.D., appeals the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Allen Sessoms, Ph.D., President of Delaware State University (“DSU�), and the DSU Board of Trustees (the “Board�).1 Gorum alleged that Sessoms retaliated against him for engaging in speech and association protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.2 For the reasons that follow

[¶1] Appellants, Mark and Laura Voss, request relief from a district court decision in a declaratory judgment action finding that the Albany County Board of County Commissioners (Board) did not have authority to grant Appellants temporary access across Appellee‟s, Beverly Goodman‟s, land during a private road condemnation case.

ISSUES

[¶2] 1. Did the district court have jur

¶1 BROWN, C.J. Daniel Buckett paid the property taxes on a portion of his neighbors’ property for over twenty-five years, but neither he nor his neighbors, Glenn and Elsie Jante, knew it. It was not until the Wisconsin Department of Transportation condemned the parcel and paid the Jantes $63,000 that both parties found out. Buckett wanted to be paid back, so he sued, inter alia, for a portion o

¶1 In 2003, the City of Green Bay condemned a department store in downtown Green Bay. The store was owned by Wisconsin Mall Properties, LLC and leased to Saks, Inc. Saks and the City claimed the condemnation extinguished Saks’ obligations under the lease. A prior appeal in this case established that Saks’ obligations under the lease continued, despite the condemnation. On remand, the circuit

Defendant Haywood Oil Company appeals from a judgment entered 4 June 2007 after a jury awarded defendant $57,500.00 “as just compensation for the appropriation of a portion of their property for highway purposes� and from an order entered 17 August 2007 which denied defendant's motion for a new trial. For the reasons stated herein, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. F

The City of Long Branch, New Jersey sued Frances DeLuca on an eminent domain theory seeking to acquire her home by condemnation for inclusion in the city's Beachfront North Phase II redevelopment zone project. Commissioners appointed by the Court awarded DeLuca $750,000. She claimed the property was worth $1.2 million.

In these consolidated appeals, the principal issue we consider is whether the circuit court correctly applied Code § 15.2-2307 in finding that the owner/developers of a parcel of real property obtained a vested right to a particular use of the property under a rezoning ordinance subject to their proffers and, thus, are not subject to a subsequent amendment to the locality’s zoning ordinance tha

Plaintiff/Appellant Ralph L. Archuleta appeals a judgment entered by the District Court for Water Division No. 2. The judgment denied and dismissed Archuleta’s complaint for an injunction against Theodore Gomez seeking restoration of three ditch rights-of-way and delivery of water through the ditches. The water court ruled that Gomez adversely possessed, and is now the owner of decreed irrigatio

In 2004, the City and the Dallas Cowboys negotiated a “Master Agreement� detailing the basic terms by which the City would become the site of a new sports stadium complex. That August, the Arlington City Council passed Resolution No. 04-358, which designated the sports stadium project a “venue project� under Chapter 334 of the Local Government Code and established how the project would be

California’s eminent domain law permits acquisition of property only for “a particular use,� to wit: a “proposed project.� (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1240.020, 1240.030.)1 A public entity desiring to condemn private property must pass a “resolution of necessity� (§ 1240.040) that describes the proposed project and contains findings that the proposed project is necessary for the greater

Neil B. Schaffer (claimant) appeals a final award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the commission) that denied workers’ compensation benefits. This court affirms. Claimant sought compensation for an alleged occupational disease he asserts began approximately May 2, 2002.1 He was an employee of Litton Interconnect Technology (Litton) on the alleged injury date. He alleged that â€

This action arises out of a dispute over a twelvefoot- wide strip of land between the east side of West Shore Drive and Monona Bay in Madison, Wisconsin. The owners of two residential lots abutting the west side of West Shore Drive claim title to this land as does the City of Madison. The circuit court concluded that the City of Madison held title to this land, in trust for the public, and could t

Georgia Power Company sued Glade Farms, LLC on an eminent domain theory seeking to acquire by condemnation 109 acres of right-of-way for a three mile long stretch of power lines that it want to construct on undeveloped land in North Hall County Georgia. Georgia Power offered Glade Farms $3.9 million for the right-of-way but Glade Farms wanted $10 million to $18 million. he property is owned by t

This case stems from a prior appeal in this Court, New Properties, Inc v Newpower (New Properties I).1 This present matter is an appeal of the trial court’s decision on remand from New Properties I. Defendant Lakes of the North Realty, Inc. appeals by right the trial court judgment setting forth monetary damages payable to plaintiffs Robert W. Kitchen and Harriet Kitchen.

We affirm.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment in a condemnation case. At the center of the controversy is Texas=s longstanding rule that a property owner who is familiar with the market value of his property may testify regarding that market value, even if he is not qualified or designated as an expert witness (hereinafter AProperty Owner Rule@). Today we must decide whether this rule, applied count

This appeal involves the interaction of a local zoning ordinance establishing an airport safety overlay zone and an avigation easement1 sought by the Virginia Highlands Airport Authority2 (Airport Authority) to remove obstructions on the property of Singleton Auto Parts, Incorporated (Singleton), which were preserved pursuant to a grandfather clause in the ordinance. We are presented with the nove

In Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U. S. 373 (1911), the Court established the rule that it is per se illegal under §1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U. S. C. §1, for a manufacturer to agree with its distributor to set the minimum price the distributor can charge for the manufacturer’s goods. The question presented by the instant case is whether the Court should overrule the per

A jury awarded plaintiff Kevin Tobin more than $1.3 million in damages based on the failure of his employer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, to accommodate his disability as required by federal and state law. The district court subsequently ordered a $90,000 remittitur, but rejected Liberty Mutual's contention that the evidence was insufficient to support either liability or the remaining damage

The appellant property owner raises several issues in this eminent domain proceeding; however, the owner’s failure to timely raise the issues in the trial court precludes relief.

After the appellee agency filed this suit involving two properties of the owner, an agreed order of taking was entered, providing for stipulated values for both pieces. The agency deposited the correct amounts in

Michael Shaw, his wife, Joanne Shaw, and their business, JN and MC Shaw Management Corp., doing business as JM Management Company1 appeal from the trial court’s adverse judgment after a bifurcated bench trial on liability issues relating to their claims against the County of Santa Cruz and two of its employees for inverse condemnation, negligence, trespass, and nuisance.2 The judgment also dismi