Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELAINE ABBOTT, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 22-2717 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell SHELLEY FINLAYSON, Acting Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics, Defendant. MEMORA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELAINE ABBOTT, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 22-2717 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell JAMIESON GREER, Acting Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics, Defend

JAMES L. DENNIS, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I respectfully but emphatically dissent from the court’s refusal to rehear this case en banc. In upholding Texas’s unconstitutional admitting-privileges requirement for abortion providers and medication-abortion restrictions, the panel opinion flouts the Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 8

XAVIER RODRIGUEZ, District Judge: On this date, having heard extensive oral argument on May 2, 2019, the Court considered the Plaintiffs' request for bail-in relief under Section 3(c) of the Voting Rights Act ("VRA"). Although the Court's findings of intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment with regard to the 2011 plans are sufficient to trigger bail-in, and although the Court has serious concerns

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

ORDER ON PLAN H283 XAVIER RODRIGUEZ, District Judge and ORLANDO L. GARCIA, District Judge: This Order addresses Plaintiffs’ claims concerning Plan H283, enacted by the 82nd Legislature in 2011. Plaintiffs assert “results” claims under § 2 of the Voting Rights Act (“VRA”), intentional vote dilution claims under § 2 of the VRA and the Fourteenth Amendment, and Shaw-type racial gerrymandering claims

OPINION ACREE,-JUDGE: Stanley Chesley appeals the Boone Circuit Court’s October 22, 2014 summary judgment in favor of Appellees on their breach of fiduciary duty claims arising from his involvement with the 1998 “Fen-Phen” litigation and settlement.1 The judgment additionally holds Cliesley jointly and severally liable with his co-defendants, William J. Gallion, Shirley Cünn

Robert M. Dow, Jr., United States District Judge Plaintiff Terry Paulsen brings this action against Defendants Abbott Laboratories *1161("Abbott"), AbbVie Inc. ("AbbVie"), Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. Inc. ("TPUSA"), and TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. ("TAP") (collectively "Defendants") alleging strict products liability, strict products

HAYNES, Circuit Judge: In 2011, Texas (“the State”) passed Senate Bill 14 (“SB 14”), which requires individuals to present one of several forms of photo identification in order to vote. See Act of May 16, 2011, 82d Leg., R.S., ch. 123, 2011 Tex. Gen. Laws 619. Plaintiffs filed suit challenging the constitutionality and legality of the law. The district court held that SB 14 was enacted with a racially discriminatory

HADLOCK, J. Defendant, who concedes that he was properly convicted of first-degree theft, challenges his convictions for first-degree robbery, unlawful use of a weapon (UUW), menacing, and second-degree robbery. The charges that led to those latter convictions were premised on allegations that defendant used or threatened to use force in conjunction with committing the theft. Defendant raises eight assignments of error on appe

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND VERDICT OF THE COURT Janis Graham Jack, Senior United States District Judge Named Plaintiffs brought this class action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against officials of the State of Texas. Plaintiffs claim that Texas violates their Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process rights, including “the right to be reasonably safe from harm while in government custody and the right to receive

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-23-00541-CV Wylie Cavin and Lillian Cavin, Appellants v. William Abbott, Appellee FROM THE 98TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-GN-16-000201, THE HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION For m

Opinion of the Court by Justice VENTERS. This case arose in the aftermath of the settlement of Darla S. Guard, et' ál. v. American Home Products, Inc. (Guard).1 The Guard case, which is also known as “Jonetta Moore, et al. v. American Home Products, Inc.,” or the “Moore ” case, was brought by Kentucky residents who had taken th

01/11/2022 THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 19, 2021 DEWEY ABBOTT III v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. F-74606 David Bragg, Judge No. M2020-00500-CCA-R3-PC The

971 A.2d 989 (2009) 199 N.J. 140 Raymond Arthur ABBOTT, a minor, by his Guardian Ad Litem, Frances ABBOTT; Arlene Figueroa, Frances Figueroa, Hector Figueroa, Orlando Figueroa and Vivian Figueroa, minors, by their Guardian Ad Litem, Blanca Figueroa; Michael Hadley, a minor, by his Guardian Ad Litem, Lola Moore; Henry Stevens, Jr., a minor, by his Guardian Ad Litem, Henry Stevens, Sr.; Caroline James and Jermaine James, minors, by

HAYNES, Circuit Judge, joined by STEWART, Chief Judge, and DAVIS, PRADO, SOUTHWICK, GRAVES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges, in full; DENNIS and COSTA, Circuit Judges, joining in all but Part II.A.1 and *225concurring in the judgment.1 In 2011, Texas (“the State”) passed Senate Bill 14 (“SB 14”), which requires individuals to pre

41 So.3d 984 (2010) Kenneth ABBOTT and Westway Towing, Inc., Appellants, v. Esther DORLEANS, Rachelle Dorleans, and Leonard Dorleans, Appellees. No. 4D08-3572. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. August 4, 2010. *985 John J. Shahady and Carol A. Gart of Adorno & Yoss LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

OPINION AND ORDER BESOSA, District Judge. Plaintiffs Kizzy Morales-Vazquez1 (“Morales”) and Fernando Guzman-Merly (“Guzman”) bring this diversity action on their own behalf and on behalf of their minor child F.J.G.M. against Abbott Laboratories, Inc. (“Abbott” or “defendant”) for strict product liability and negligence. (Docket No. 1.) Pending before the Court

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS * RK KK RK KK KK KK KR KR Rk Ke ANNE ABBOTT, ** on behalf of her minor child, R.A., = * ** No. 14-907V Petitioner, ** Special Master Christian J. Moran Ed V. ** Filed: December 4, 2020 Ed SECRETARY OF HEALTH ** Attomeys’ fees and costs, interim AND HUMAN SERVICES, ** award, expert costs, remand Ed Respondent. ** * eK KK KK KK KK KK KR KR RK KF Andrew Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner; Jenni

EDWARD J. DAVILA, United States District Judge In this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132, Plaintiff Olga Gorbacheva ("Plaintiff") seeks long-term disability ("LTD") payments from Defendant Abbott Laboratories Extended Disability Plan ("the Plan" or "Defenda