Amy Silverman v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago |
Amy Silverman sued the Board of Education of the City of Chicago alleging that the Board first discriminated against her on the basis of her pregnancy and then retaliated against her for filing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, both in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. |
Michael Blevins v. Government Employees Insurance Company |
¶1 We are asked to decide whether Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 20-259.01(B) (Supp. 2010) requires that an insured sign a form rejecting underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage. Because the statute does not require a signed form, we reverse the summary judgment granted to Michael Blevins and remand this matter to the trial court with instructions to enter summary judgment for $0 (03-24-2011 - AZ) |
David Evan Schanzle v. JPMC Specialty Mortgage LLC |
We withdraw our opinion and judgment dated December 9, 2010, and issue the following in its place. Appellant David Evan Schanzle, appearing pro se, appeals the trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of appellee JPMC Specialty Mortgage LLC ("JPMC") in a suit for judicial foreclosure and breach of contract based on Schanzle's default on a home equity loan. We affirm the judgment of t $0 (03-11-2011 - TX) |
Lola Bodansky v. Fifth on the Park Condo, LLC |
This case requires us to determine the extent to which a federal consumer protection law, the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (“ILSA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1701-20, protects individual buyers or lessees who purchase or lease lots in large, uncompleted housing developments. Defendants-Appellees, developers or agents who sold condominium units to Plaintiffs-Appellants, claim that those sale $0 (03-22-2011 - MY) |
John Mathews v. Denver Newspaper Agency, L.L.P. |
I. Introduction |
Allstate Insurance Company v. Charles Herron |
We must decide, among other issues, whether an insurance company’s failure to settle a claim against its insured by a ALLSTATE INSURANCE v. HERRON 3383 claimant’s stated settlement deadline constitutes a breach of the insurer’s duty of good faith and fair dealing under Alaska law. |
John Thacker v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C. |
These cases arise out of a dispute over the respective rights of lessors and lessees under Kentucky oil and gas leases. Both actions are resolved by determining whether Kentucky law allows lessees, in calculating gas royalty payments, to take into account certain post-production costs as an offset against the value or proceeds upon which royalty payments are based. Because the two appeals involve $0 (03-16-2011 - kY) |
Del-RAy Battery Company v. Douglas Battery Company |
Appellants, battery recyclers, were sued under the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act (the “SWDA”) in Texas state court for contribution to environmental clean-up costs incurred by Appellees. Appellants asserted in their defense that the Superfund Recycling Equity Act (the “SREA”)—an amendment to the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) $0 (03-14-2011 - TX) |
Melvin Steinhardt v. UBS Securities LLC |
Plaintiff-Appellant Melvin Steinhardt appeals from a March 19, 2010 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Ross, J.) granting defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and dismissing his complaint with prejudice. Steinhardt, on behalf of himself and a putative class of shareholders in Genesco, Inc. (“Genesco”), brought suit against $0 (03-04-2011 - NY) |
Irish Oil and Gas, Inc. v. Gerald C. Riemer |
[¶1] Irish Oil and Gas, Inc. appeals from the district court judgment dismissing its complaint against Gerald C. Riemer, Doris E. Riemer, Lillie J. Riemer, and Joanne Johnson ("the Riemers") with prejudice. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for proceedings consistent with this decision. |
Linda Wolicki-Gables v. Arrow International, Inc. |
Robert Gables and Linda Wolicki-Gables appeal from the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Arrow International (“Arrow”), Codman & Shurtleff (“Codman”), Johnson & Johnson, and Greg Nelson (collectively “Appellees”). The Gableses contend that the state law claims they brought against Appellees are not preempted by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (“MDA”). T $0 (03-08-2011 - FL) |
Oklahoma Natural Gas, Inc. v. Stephen A. Messer |
¶1 Petitioners Oklahoma Natural Gas, Inc. and/or ONEOK, (collectively, Employer) seek review of an order of a Workers' Compensation Court, affirmed after modification by a three-judge panel, authorizing consequential psychological overlay treatment for Stephen Messer (Claimant) and denying Employer's res judicata defense. The order is neither contrary to law nor unsupported by competent evidence $0 (02-22-2011 - OK) |
Frater Oklahoma Realty Corp. v. Allen Lauhon Hardware Company |
¶1 The parties to this action will be referred to in this opinion as they appeared in the trial court. |
Thomas Dunn v. Nexgrill Industries, Inc. |
Following a fire at the residence of Thomas and Thelma Dunn (the Dunns), the Dunns filed a complaint against Nexgrill Industries, Inc. (Nexgrill), the manufacturer of the propane fired gas grill they used on the night of the fire, claiming that the fire was caused by a design defect in the cabinet of the grill which allowed a rubber regulator hose to come in contact with a heated grease tray, then $0 (02-25-2011 - MO) |
Empress Casino Joliet Corporation v. Rod R. Blagojeich |
This civil racketeering suit has some factual overlap with the federal prosecution of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, now awaiting retrial on various criminal counts that were tried last summer but resulted in a hung jury. Four riverboat casinos claim they are victims of a pay-to-play scheme engineered by Blagojevich and John Johnston, the owner of two Illinois horse-racing tracks.1 The $0 (03-02-2011 - IL) |
Lorenzo Pearson dba L&L Exotic v. United States Department of Agriculture |
Petitioner Lorenzo Pearson petitions for review of the decision and order of the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, terminating his license to own and exhibit wild animals, issuing a cease and desist order, and imposing civil sanctions in the amount of $93,975, for alleged violations of the Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131–2159. For the reasons set forth below, the p $0 (02-17-2011 - MI) |
Professional Consultation Services, Inc. v. Schaefer & Strohminger, Inc. |
Professional Consultation Services (PCS-Global) and its owners have sued Schaefer & Strohminger (S&S) and its subsidiaries three times now: first in federal court in Maryland; then in state court in Maryland; and most recently in federal court in Michigan. |
Kathie Kay Dilthey v. Ballenger Construction Company |
By two issues, appellant, Kathie Kay Dilthey, contends the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee, Ballenger Construction Company (“Ballenger”), on the basis of limitations because: (1) her joinder of Ballenger “was res judicata by virtue of the trial court’s previous orders” (issue one); and (2) she timely joined Ballenger as a defendant (issue two). We af $0 (02-10-2011 - TX) |
Monte Strother v. City of Tyler |
Monte Strother and Joan Strother (the Strothers), individually and as representatives for all other wrongful death beneficiaries, and as heirs at law and representatives of the estate of Tracy Lynn King, deceased, appeal the trial court’s order granting the City of Tyler’s plea to the jurisdiction and dismissing their case. The Strothers raise three issues on appeal. We affirm. |
City of North Richland Hills v. Home Town Urban Partners, Ltd. |
In these consolidated interlocutory appeals, the City of North Richland Hills (the City) challenges the trial courts’ respective denials of the City’s partial pleas to the jurisdiction in the lawsuits filed against it by Appellees Hometown Urban Partners, Ltd. (Urban Partners), Arcadia Land Partners 25, Ltd., and Arcadia Holdings (collectively, Arcadia).[1] The City contends that governmental $0 (02-17-2011 - TX) |
Linell Redden v. Denton County |
In one issue, Appellants Linell Redden, individually and as representative of the estate of Robert Jones Redden, deceased; Sabre Marie Redden; and Sean Michael Redden (collectively, “Appellants”) complain that the trial court erred by granting Appellee Denton County’s plea to the jurisdiction. We affirm. |
City of North Richland Hills v. Laura Friend |
Appellant, the City of North Richland Hills (the City), brings this interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in the lawsuit filed against it by Appellees Laura Friend, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sarah Elizabeth Friend, Deceased, and Luther Friend, Individually (collectively, the Friends). The City contends in one issue $0 (02-24-2011 - TX) |
Holly Woods Association of Residence Owners v. Joe W. Hiller |
The plaintiffs in this action were property owners in the Holly Woods Development in Greenville or members of the Holly Woods Association of Residence Owners (the Association). The Association brought suit against the property developers in 2005. After a trial, the jury awarded the Association $971,000 in actual damages for its negligence claim and $1 for the breach of implied warranty of workma $0 (02-03-2011 - SC) |
Donald Brandt v. Jonathan E. Ozmint |
Donald Brandt instituted a legal malpractice suit against Elizabeth Gooding and her law firm, Gooding & Gooding PA, (collectively "Gooding") in South Carolina state court after Gooding represented Brandt in the closing of a real estate transaction. During the course of that proceeding, the state court summarily found Brandt guilty of criminal contempt and sentenced him to six months’ imprisonmen $0 (02-18-2011 - SC) |
Catherine Hutchinson v. Deval L. Patrick |
This appeal requires us to consider the circumstances under which a litigant who obtains significant relief through a court-approved settlement, rather than a verdict or a formal consent decree, may achieve "prevailing party" status and, thus, become eligible for an award of attorneys' fees under a typical federal fee-shifting statute. The appeal also requires us to consider when, short of the ent $0 (02-17-2011 - MA) |
Next Page |