Midwest Division – RMC, LLC (RMC) appeals the trial court‟s judgment upon a jury verdict finding for U.S. Neurosurgical, Inc. (USN) and awarding $1,919,124.49 in damages to USN on its breach of contract claim. On appeal, RMC claims that the trial court erred in denying RMC‟s motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict because USN failed to make a submissible case fo

Donald C. Austin (Austin) filed suit against Stokes-Craven Holding Corporation d/b/a Stokes-Craven Ford (Stokes-Craven), an automobile dealership, after he experienced problems with his used vehicle and discovered the vehicle had sustained extensive damage prior to the sale. A jury found in favor of Austin and awarded him $26,371.10 in actual damages and $216,600 in punitive damages.

Stoke

Our concern is with the threshold of appealability. The particular aspect thereof that commands our attention is the collateral order doctrine. Does the denial in this case of a motion to quash a discovery order qualify as a privileged collateral order within the contemplation of the doctrine? Or shall its review more properly await a final judgment?

The Procedural Background

The app

This is an appeal by defendant DuPont Chambers Works from the denial of its post-trial motions after a jury awarded DuPont's former employee, plaintiff John Seddon, $724,000 as compensatory damages and $500,000 as punitive damages, based upon the jury's finding of a violation of plaintiff's rights under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA), N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 to -8. The entire amount of

This appeal and cross appeal, along with the companion cases decided today, Branford v. Santa Barbara, 294 Conn. 785, A.2d (2010), and Branford v. Santa Barbara, 294 Conn. 803, A.2d (2010), arise from the named defendant town of Branford’s (town)1 exercise of eminent domain with respect to an approximately seventy-seven acre parcel of land, known as 48-86 Tabor Drive. In this action brought purs

This case presents two issues concerning damages under the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA�). 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654 (2006). In an issue of first impression, we consider whether the court, rather than the jury, determines the amount of the front pay award1 and whether the district court’s calculation of that award was clearly erroneous. Second, we address whether the district court

In the case before us, petitioner Christy Aills seeks review of the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Aills v. Boemi, 990 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).1 In that case, the Second District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment in favor of Aills, the patient, in a medical malpractice action against the defendant plastic surgeon, Dr. Luciano Boemi, arising out of negligence in connecti

This appeal arises from a Title VII claim brought by African-American civil engineer Geneva Brown against her employer, the Alabama Department of Transportation (“the Department�). Brown claimed that the 1 Department denied her nine separate promotions on account of her race, or for retaliatory reasons, between 2000 and 2005. Following a five-day trial, a jury sitting in the Northern District

At issue in this appeal is the constitutionality of section 2–1706.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) (735 ILCS 5/2–1706.5 (West 2008)), which was adopted as part of Public Act 94–677 (Act) (see Pub. Act 94–677, §330, eff. August 25, 2005). Section 2–1706.5 sets certain caps on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases. Relying on this court’s decision in Best v. Taylor Ma

Hilda Negrete sued the City of Laredo (“the City�) under Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code, alleging claims for hostile work environment and retaliation. See Tex. Lab. Code Ann. §§ 21.051, 21.055 (Vernon 2006). The jury found in favor of Negrete on both of her claims, and she was awarded $300,000 in compensatory damages plus attorneys’ fees. We reverse the trial court’s judgment to the

Lespia King, a former deputy in the sheriff’s office for the
City of Roanoke, Virginia, sued Sheriff George McMillan in
his official capacity under Title VII for sexual harassment and
in his individual capacity under Virginia law for battery.
While King’s suit was pending, Octavia Johnson replaced
McMillan as sheriff, and the district court substituted Johnson
as the de

¶1 In this appeal from a plaintiff's verdict in a manufacturers' products liability action, the appellant, who manufactured the automobile tire which the jury found caused the injury, submits three propositions of error. The appellant complains that a letter was improperly excluded from evidence, that an instruction was improperly worded, and that the verdict was excessive. In his answer brief, t

The plaintiff, Thomas Martinez, filed a medical malpractice case against the defendants, Samuel Elias, M.D. and the Bone & Joint Center, alleging that Dr. Elias performed unnecessary procedures on the plaintiff's lower spine. Following trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the amount of $500,000. The trial court granted the defendants' posttrial

This case arises out of a complex set of contractual relationships between the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the patent-management entity for the University of Wisconsin; certain research scientists at the University; and Xenon Pharmaceuticals, a Canadian drug company. The Foundation and Xenon jointly own the patent rights to an enzyme that can lower cholesterol levels in the human body. T

The defendants, the city of New Haven (city), the city’s department of fire service (fire department), and the city’s board of fire commissioners,1 appeal2 from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a jury trial, in favor of the plaintiffs, John R. Brantley and Christopher Texeira,3 two African-American firefighters employed by the fire department. The jury found that, by promoting o

Norman Smith, a thirty-two year-old pretrial detainee, arrived at Cook County Jail on April 24, 2004, and died less than a week later from pneumococcal meningitis. His mother, Marlita Thomas, sued Cook County, the Cook County Sheriff, and a number of correctional employees, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 2 Nos. 08-2232, 08-2233, 08-2482 & 08-2597 & 08-2948 alleging that the defendants violated her sonâ€

¶ 1 Appellants, Diagnostic Imaging, Inc. and its agent Dr. Robert T. Smith, appeal from the judgment entered on a jury verdict in this medical malpractice action. The verdict was entered in favor of the plaintiffs, Appellees Joan P. Whitaker and Barbara V. Leezer, in their capacity as guardians ad litem for Caroline Monaghan. The jury determined that Dr. Smith and Dr. Harold J. Gauthier, who had

In the second appearance of this case here, the question is whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting a motion for a new trial, after a remand from this court instructing the trial court to address the motion. Jennings v. Jones (Jennings II), 499 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2007). There was no abuse of discretion and we affirm.

I.

Plaintiff Adam Jennings, an employe

This is an appeal from a Court of Appeals' opinion reversing the Judgment of the Warren Circuit Court in favor of Appellant/ Cross- Appellee, Tim Emberton ("Emberton"), on the grounds that his personal injury action against Appellee/Cross-Appellant, GMRI Inc . ("GMRI"), was untimely filed and thus barred by the statute of limitations. For reasons that GMRI actively concealed Emberton's probable ca

The plaintiff, Ghassan Saleh, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, which set aside the jury verdict and ordered a new trial on the issue of damages after he refused to accept a court-ordered remittitur. The plaintiff’s sole claim on appeal is that the court improperly ordered the remittitur in the absence of any reason to determine that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence

In this case, a policyholder brought causes of action for breach of contract and bad faith rescission against his insurance company, and sought actual and punitive damages for the company’s termination of his health care insurance from original issuance on the grounds of a purported misrepresentation. The jury awarded the policyholder $36,000 in actual damages on the breach of contract claim,

Following a jury trial, defendants Jovon Broadcasting and Joseph Stroud, the owner and operational manager of Jovon Broadcasting, were found liable for retaliation against plaintiff Jerri Blount, a former employee of Jovon Broadcasting. The jury awarded Blount a total of $3,082,350 in damages, which was comprised of $257,350 for back pay, $25,000 for physical and/or emotional pain and suffering, a

Appellant, Janell S. Marin appeals from a judgment in favor of appellee, IESI TX Corporation ("IESI"). The judgment was rendered in accordance with the jury's findings that Marin committed forgery, misapplication of fiduciary property, fraud, and conversion. In nine issues, Marin challenges the trial court's admission of evidence, the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence, and the award o

Giant of Maryland, LLC (“Giant�) appeals a judgment entered on a jury verdict in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County in favor of Julia M. Taylor, a former Giant employee, in an employment discrimination and retaliation case. After a seven-day trial, the jury found by special verdict that, during a particular time period ending on February 3, 2003, Giant discriminated against Taylor

In June 2006, Albert Snyder instituted this diversity action in the District of Maryland against Westboro Baptist Church, Incorporated (the "Church"), and several of its members (collectively, the "Defendants"). Snyder’s lawsuit is predicated on two related events: a protest the Defendants conducted in Maryland near the funeral of Snyder’s son Matthew (an enlisted Marine who tragically died in