These consolidated matters arise from an action in which a law firm sought to recover attorney fees incurred for its representation of a corporation in a separate receivership and dissolution action. The district court awarded the requested fees; approved the law firm’s garnishment and directed the corporation’s receiver to pay the firm out of the receivership funds; and awarded the firm addi

Appellant Theodore DeJung (DeJung), formerly employed as a commissioner by respondent Sonoma County Superior Court (Superior Court), brought an age discrimination case against the Superior Court under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.).1 The trial court granted the Superior Court’s motion for summary judgment, finding (1) the Superior Court is pro

In this state-law libel and negligence action, the Appellants—officials from New York City and various investigators hired by the City to conduct investigations in Georgia—appeal the district court’s order concluding that Georgia privilege law applies to this case and that Georgia’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute does not apply in federal court. Becaus

Defendant Insurance Companies engaged the services of Plaintiff Randy Combs as an insurance sales agent. Plaintiff sued Defendants pursuant to Oklahoma law, alleging various contract and tort claims related to his agency contract. The district court granted summary judgment for Plaintiff on his claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. See Fed

Susan Mahl and Jim Aaron were live-in lovers in southern California in the late 1990s. But the romance only lasted until 2001 when Aaron left Mahl for another woman. However, for the past seven years or so, Aaron has been arduously pursing Mahl, from California to Indiana and then South Carolina; but sadly, not because he is having second thoughts about the demise of their relationship—as you wi

Dmitri Alano, a teacher and assistant band director at Hamilton Southeastern High School (“HSE”), engaged in an improper sexual relationship with a student. The student’s parents, the Hansens, filed suit individually and on behalf of their daughter against both Alano and the Hamilton Southeastern School Corporation (“HSSC”). They brought claims against both defendants under Indiana law,

With certain exceptions not applicable in this case, § 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) prohibits, among other things, an employer from "pay[ing], lend[ing], or deliver[ing] . . . any money or other thing of value" to a labor union or labor union representative. 29 U.S.C. § 186(a). The issue presented in this appeal is whether Freightliner LLC (Freightliner) delivered "money or o

Appellant, Hyundai Motor America, is appealing a decision by the Circuit Court for Cecil County awarding attorney’s fees to appellee, Angela Alley, under the fee shifting provisions of the Maryland Automotive Warranty Enforcement Act, the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, and the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The fees were awarded after the parties negotiated a settlement of the case, and

This is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of appellant Dave Johnson's special appearance. We conclude that Johnson proved that he lacked minimum contacts with Texas. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order and render judgment dismissing all claims against Johnson for lack of personal jurisdiction. I. Background A.

Facts

We draw this statement of the facts from a

After a trial before a jury on her takings claim under article I of the Texas Constitution, Heather Stewart obtained a judgment against the City of Dallas for the demolition of a residential structure she owned. The City appeals, arguing the case should never have been presented to the jury because the doctrine of res judicata bars Stewart's takings claim as a matter of law. For the reasons that f

Juan Jose Siller and Perfecta G. Siller appeal the trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of LPP Mortgage Ltd. in a lawsuit in which Juan and Perfecta assert numerous claims against LPP arising from a dispute over the title to certain real property. Because the summary judgment evidence raised a genuine issue of material fact with regard to the ownership of the property, we reverse

Appellant, David Lowry, appeals the summary judgment rendered in favor of appellee, Liberty Lloyd’s of Texas Insurance Company (Liberty), that claimed Lowry’s causes of action were barred by statutes of limitations and that Lowry’s claims had been released by a class action settlement in William Morris v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., No. CJ-03-714 (Dist. Ct., Pottawatomie County, Okla. Feb

This is a breach-of-contract case in which the district court granted a partial summary judgment that appellee Onca Petroleum Development, Inc. recover $234,000.00 from appellant PPI Technology Services, L.P. because PPI breached a consulting agreement. The district court then held a jury trial on PPI's counterclaims and rendered judgment on the verdict that Onca was liable to PPI for $220,516.27

Plaintiff Thomas E. Troyk filed a class action against defendants Farmers Group, Inc., doing business as Farmers Underwriters Association (FGI), and Farmers Insurance Exchange (FIE) (together Farmers) alleging causes of action for breach of contract and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 (Unfair Competition Law, hereafter UCL). He alleged FIE required him to pay a service cha

This case raises the issue of whether a Maine statute governing the management of a state-administered river, the Allagash Wilderness Waterway ("AWW"), Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 1882, is preempted by certain sections of a federal statute, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act ("WSRA"), 16 U.S.C. § 1271 et seq.

Plaintiffs Charles FitzGerald and Kenneth Cline (collectively "FitzGeral

Pukka Development appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Plaintiffs Saverio Pugliese, Michael Mieves, Antonio Saladino and Stephen Matolyak. This case turns on the interpretation of sections 1702 and 1703(d) of the Interstate Land Sales Act (the “ILSA”). We disagree with the district court’s interpretation of the statute. We therefore reverse the district court’s

Suzanne Snaza commenced this action against the City of St. Paul alleging that her constitutional rights to substantive due process, equal protection, and just compensation were violated by denial of her application for a conditional use permit. The district court1 granted the city's motion for summary judgment. Snaza appeals, and we affirm.

In 1999 Snaza's father, Bernard, applied for a co

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Charles Margines, Judge. Affirmed. Kulik, Gottesman, Mouton & Siegel, LLP, Thomas M. Ware II, Sharon Barber; Borton, Petrini & Conron, LLP, Matthew J. Trostler for Defendant and Appellant. Enterprise Counsel Group, David A. Robinson, Benjamin P. Pugh; Jeffrey Lewis for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Marquesa at Monarch Beach (Marqu

Appellant Bill Eves (“Eves”) sold mapping systems and other products as a representative for Appellee American Clearinghouse, Inc. (“ACH”), for a period beginning in 1997 and ending in August 2001. Eves and ACH had a profit-splitting agreement whereby Eves received one-third of the profits, ACH received one-third of the profits, and ACH paid marketing expenses with the remaining one-third

Appellant, Delford B. Mathews, appeals from the trial court=s dismissal with prejudice of his harassment claim against appellees as agents of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (Athe Department@). Appellant contends that the trial court erred by (1) failing to state the grounds for dismissal; and (2) dismissing without affording appellant leave to amend his complaint. We affirm.

Bac

Marquesa at Monarch Beach (Marquesa) is a common interest development governed by the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Civ. Code, § 1350, et. seq.). It is comprised of single family homes in the Monarch Beach development of Dana Point, many of which have ocean and golf course views. The community is managed by the Marquesa at Monarch Beach Homeowners Association (the Association),

Two years ago this Court examined the interplay of two federal statutes that govern the
12 transport of goods from foreign shores to inland delivery points in the United States. See Sompo
13 Japan Ins. Co. of Am. v. Union Pac. R.R., 456 F.3d 54 (2d Cir. 2006). We concluded that, when
14 a rail carrier is charged with damage to the shipment, its liability is defined by the Carmack
1

This case is one of many stemming from the so-called “contingent commission”
4 arrangements between insurers and brokers that were prevalent prior to October 2004.
5 “Contingent commissions” is a euphemism for kickbacks— insurance brokers would receive
6 payments from insurers for steering business their way.
7 Appellants purport to represent all persons who acquired comm

Congress established the Medicare program in 1966 to provide health insurance to the elderly and disabled. See 42 U.S.C. § 1395 et seq. Part A of that program covers, inter alia, expenses related to inpatient hospitalization. The amount Medicare pays for these services is generally determined under the prospective payment system (PPS). See Robert Wood Johnson Univ. Hosp. v. Thompson, 297 F.3d 273

Appellant, English Marine Agency, Inc. ("English Marine"), appeals a judgment rendered on a jury verdict in favor of appellees, Border Shipyards, Inc. ("Border") and its shareholders, Jorge Gonzalez, Carl Gayman, and Ruben Barrera. By several issues, English Marine argues that (1) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the jury's verdict, (2) the appellees were precluded by