Tammy Dixson and The Mark Wallace Dixson Irrevocable Trust filed competing claims to the proceeds of a term life insurance policy insuring the life of Tammy‟s deceased husband, Mark Dixson. The insurance company, Banner Life Insurance Company (BLI), filed a complaint for interpleader asking the district court to resolve the competing claims. Tammy and the Trust subsequently filed cross-motions f

Relator Dorothy English appeals a judgment dismissing an alternative writ of mandamus against defendants.(1) English sought mandamus to compel defendant county to satisfy a final judgment for just compensation pursuant to ORS 197.352 (2005) (commonly known as Measure 37) that she had against the county in the amount of $1,150,000.(2) The trial court entered a judgment dismissing the alternative

¶1 Robert Howell and Pete Hodap bring separate appeals related to a civil suit alleging multiple constitutional and tort violations arising out of the execution of a search warrant. Patti Howell and Randy Johnson submit cross-appeals. For the following reasons and those set forth in the simultaneously filed memorandum decision,1 we affirm in part and reverse in part.

I.

¶2 On W

Herman Verwers1 appeals the jury verdict returned in favor of Dr. Philip Kohler in Verwers’ medical malpractice claim.2 Verwers argues the district court erred in refusing to give a general negligence (res ipsa loquitur) jury instruction in Verwers’ medical malpractice claim. We reverse and remand. I. Background Facts and Procedures. On September 2, 2004, Dr. Philip Kohler and Dr. Joseph Rhoad

We filed our opinion in this appeal on April 8, 2009, but subsequently granted the plaintiff-appellant City of Johnston‟s petition for rehearing. Our April 8, 2009 decision is hereby vacated and this opinion replaces it. The City of Johnston (City) appeals from a district court ruling on remand dismissing its petition for declaratory judgment against Andrew Christenson. We reverse the judgment o

An Iowa attorney brought a class-action lawsuit on behalf of homeowners against the manufacturer of roofing shingles and its president. The action asserted seven theories of recovery, most of which were based in contract. After the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the manufacturer and its president, the president requested sanctions against the attorney who filed the class actio

Metro Health Professionals, Inc. (“MHP”), appeals the trial court‟s grant of summary judgment to Chrysler, LLC. MHP raises one issue, which we revise and restate as whether the trial court erred by granting Chrysler‟s motion for summary judgment and denying MHP‟s motion for summary judgment. We reverse.

The relevant facts as designated by the parties follow. On October 10, 2006,

We have consolidated for decision two appeals (Abad and Pastor) that present similar issues concerning the doctrine of forum non conveniens (“inappropriate forum”). The doctrine allows a court to dismiss a suit if there are strong reasons for believing it should be litigated in the courts of another, normally a foreign, jurisdiction. E.g., Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Int’l Shipping Corp

This is a consolidated appeal arising out of flooding on residential property located on Rathmor Road in the City of Bloomfield Hills. In Docket No. 275580, plaintiff Marilyn Froling Revocable Living Trust (the Froling Trust) appeals as of right from the trial court’s December 21, 2006 order granting the City of Bloomfield Hills (the City), Alan and Marilynne Kiriluk, Roger and Barbara Smith, an

Appellant Williamson County ("the County") brings this interlocutory appeal from the trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in a suit for property damages resulting from a collision between appellee Dan Voss's vehicle and a tractor owned and operated by the County. The County asserts on appeal that the trial court erred in denying its plea to the jurisdiction because there is no wai

“Sovereign immunity protects the State from lawsuits for money damages.” Tex. Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 853 (Tex. 2002). But “an action to determine or protect a private party’s rights against a state official who has acted without legal or statutory authority is not a suit against the State that sovereign immunity bars.” Fed. Sign v. Tex. S. Univ., 951 S

Plaintiff Lawrence B. Lockwood appeals from the orders granting special motions to strike his original complaint and first amended complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (hereafter, section 425.16), and the judgment entered in favor of defendants Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton and Jonathan Hangartner (collectively, Sheppard Mullin). Hangartner individually cross-appeals from t

Following our grant of certification,1 the plaintiff, Geraldine D. Lyon, appealed from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the trial court, claming that the Appellate Court incorrectly interpreted General Statutes §§ 46a-60 and 46a- 70 as barring the plaintiff’s employment discrimination action under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The defendants, the office of th

Plaintiffs Scott Mann and the Estate of Nathan LaBrecque appeal from the Windsor Superior Court’s grant of summary judgment to intervenor-insurer Virginia Surety Company, determining that insurer would not owe indemnification to Adventure Quest should it be found liable to plaintiffs for sexual abuse they experienced while attending Adventure Quest’s school. On appeal, plaintiffs argue that i

Plaintiffs-Appellants, John M. Gardner, Susan L. Gardner, and Mt. Hood Polaris, Inc. (collectively “Appellants”) brought this action against Defendants-Appellees, Tom Martino, Westwood One, Inc., (collectively “Appellees”) and Clear Channel Communications, Inc.,1 for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, intentional interference with economic relations, and intentional interference

This case requires us to review the testing and interview procedures for new hires at a power plant in Pueblo, Colorado. Susan Turner alleges that Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) discriminated against her because of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it refused to hire her for an entry-level position at its Comanche Power Plant. The district court gran

Appellant, Dustin Mitchell, appeals from the trial court's rendering summary judgment in favor of appellees, Verizon Business Network Services, Inc. and Verizon Business Purchasing, Inc. f/k/a MCI, Inc. (collectively "Verizon"). The trial court granted Verizon's motion for summary judgment on the ground that Mitchell's previous claim with the Texas Workforce Commission was res judicata of his clai

Joseph Jaskolski and the National Insurance Crime Bureau (“NICB”) bring this interlocutory appeal from the trial court‟s denial of their Petition for Certification under the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1998, commonly known as the Westfall Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (2009). The Westfall Act provides that the remedies available under the Federal Tort Claims

¶1 Defendant/Appellants, Rex Urice (Urice) and Bancfirst, seek review of the trial court's judgment in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee, Patricia Bowers Edwards (Edwards), individually and as next friend of her son, Robert Drew Bowers (Drew), on Edwards' claims to set aside for undue influence amendments her mother, Eloise Cooper Bowers (Bowers), made to The Eloise Cooper Bowers 1991 Trust (Bowers 199

Robert Tur, an award-winning helicopter journalist, sued YouTube, a highly popular online video sharing service, for copyright infringement in the Central District of California. YouTube moved for summary judgment based upon the safeharbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512(c), which the district court denied. Shortly thereafter, Tur, hoping to join a putative New

Arizona law grants income tax credits restricted to taxpayers who make contributions to nonprofit organizations that award private school scholarships to children. Plaintiffs, certain Arizona taxpayers, allege that some of the organizations funded under this program restrict the availability of their scholarships to religious schools, and that the program in effect deprives parents, the program’

This case requires us to interpret the terms of a pre-annexation agreement between NT Home Builders (the plaintiff-appellant, hereafter NT) and the City of Buffalo (the defendant-appellee). Because we find that the agreement did not entitle NT to “B-1 Residential” zoning, we affirm the judgment of the district court. I. Background Facts and Proceedings In 2004, NT, a real estate development co

Petitioner Hydro Resources, Inc. (“HRI”) challenges a February 6, 2007, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Land Status Determination, in which EPA concluded that certain land owned by HRI in the “checkerboard” area of northwestern New Mexico—the so-called “Section 8” land—is “Indian country.” EPA’s Determination subjects HRI’s proposed uranium mine to EPA regu

This appeal requires us to examine a question that has created a split among our sister circuits: the scope of the fiduciary duty imposed on advisers of mutual funds by § 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“ICA”), 15 U.S.C. § 80a-35(b). Because we conclude that the district court construed too narrowly the extent of the defendants’ duty under § 36(b) and gave insufficient weight

Although many have tried to put a stake through the heart of this fee dispute which refuses to die, all have failed to do the trick. We, as the sixth forum to take a stab at it, are next in line. Now creeping along as a bankruptcy appeal, the case is here after stops at the District of Columbia Bar Attorney/Client Arbitration Board, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the Superior Cour