Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Adam Lewis and Avie Lewis”
Lewis v. Revellopublic domain
Lewis v Revello (2019 NY Slip Op 03730) Lewis v Revello 2019 NY Slip Op 03730 Decided on May 14, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431
In Re Lehman Bros. Securities and Erisa Litigationpublic domain
681 F.Supp.2d 495 (2010) In re LEHMAN BROTHERS SECURITIES AND ERISA LITIGATION. This document applies to: In re Lehman Brothers Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation, No. 08 Civ. 6762(LAK). No. 09 MD 2017(LAK). United States District Court, S.D. New York. February 1, 2010. *496 Joel P. Laitman, Christopher Lometti, Daniel B. Rehns, K
Terrance L. Erisman and David Fouts v. Peter Zaitsev and Thomas Basil and Percona, LLC, Nominalpublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE TERRANCE L. ERISMAN and ) DAVID FOUTS, individually and on ) behalf of PERCONA, LLC, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2020-0903-JRS ) PETER ZAITSEV and ) THOMAS
AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. SMITH Et Al.public domain
McFADDEN, Presiding Judge. This appeal is from a trial court order denying summary judgment to an insurer in its declaratory judgment action. The insurer claims that various defendants were not covered by an insurance policy. As to the named insured, the sole owner of the named insured, and an additional insured named in an endorsement to the policy, there are genuine issues of
Browdame v. Candurapublic domain
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurkin-Torres, J.), dated August 19, 2004, which granted the defendants’ separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against each of them on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Ordered that the order is reversed, on the
Opinion issued July 25, 2024 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00258-CV ——————————— CHRISTINA SCHULTZ, Appellant V. FARMERS TEXAS COUNTY INSURANCE COM
In Re: Lehman Bros. Sec. and ERISA Litig.public domain
15‐2229 In Re: Lehman Bros. Sec. and ERISA Litig. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ______________ August Term, 2015 (Argued: January 14, 2016 Decided: March 18, 2016) Docket No. 15‐2229 ____________
David Gordan Schmidt (d/B/A ABC Bonding Company) and Greenbrier Equities, LLC v. Brenda Crawfordpublic domain
Opinion issued August 20, 2019 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00846-CV ——————————— DAVID GORDON SCHMIDT D/B/A ABC BONDING COMPANY AND GREENBRIER EQUITIES, LLC, Appellants V. BRENDA CRAWFORD, CARLOS PERE
In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Propertiespublic domain
14‐2027 In re 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ______________ August Term 2015 (Argued: November 18, 2015 Decided: July 20, 2016)
ACCEPTED 15-25-00012-cv FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 3:13 PM No. 15-25-00012-CV
Check v. Gacevkpublic domain
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lewis, J.), dated April 23, 2004, as denied his cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed
Greene Ave. Restoration Corp. v. Green Throop LLC (In re Greene Ave. Restoration II Corp.)public domain
JURISDICTION This Court has jurisdiction of this proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b), and the Eastern District of New York standing order of reference dated August 28, 1986, as amended by order dated December 5, 2012. This matter is a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C § 157(b)(2)(A), (B), (K), (O). See
Dickson v. Rucho, 366 NC 332public domain
MARGARET DICKSON, ALICIA CHISOLM, ETHEL CLARK, MATTHEW A. McLEAN, MELISSA LEE ROLLIZO, C. DAVID GANTT, VALERIA TRUITT, ALICE GRAHAM UNDERHILL, ARMIN JANCIS, REBECCA JUDGE, ZETTIE WILLIAMS, TRACEY BURNS-VANN, LAWRENCE CAMPBELL, ROBINSON O. EVERETT, JR., LINDA GARROU, HAYES McNEILL, JIM SHAW, SIDNEY E. DUNSTON, ALMA ADAMS, R. STEVE BOWDEN, JASON EDWARD COLEY, KARL BERTRAND FIELDS, PAMLYN STUBBS, DON VAUGHAN, BOB ETHERIDGE, GEORGE GRAHAM, JR., THOMAS M. CHUMLEY, AISHA DEW, G
Buchanan v. Consolidated Stores Corp.public domain
125 F.Supp.2d 730 (2001) Avis E. BUCHANAN, et al. v. CONSOLIDATED STORES CORP. No. CIV.A. 99-3736. United States District Court, D. Maryland. January 4, 2001. *731 *732 Edward J. Reed, Baach, Robinson & Lewis, Washington, DC, for Avis E. Buchanan, Carolyn Kornegay-Belton. John P. Re
Capinski v. Upper Pottsgrove Townshippublic domain
OPINION BY PRESIDENT JUDGE LEAVITT James Capinski appeals the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County (trial court) denying his petition to compel compliance with two final determinations of the Office of Open Records directing Upper Pottsgrove Township to produce public records requested by Ca-pinski. The trial court denied the petition because it concluded that the Township had provided Capi
Marlow Henry v. Wilmington Trust NApublic domain
PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 21-2801 _____________ MARLOW HENRY, on behalf of the BSC Ventures Holdings, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan, and on behalf of a class of all other persons similarly situated v. WILMINGTON TRUST NA; BRIAN SASS; E. STOCKTON CR
Mercer v. PHH Corp.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM D. QUARLES, JR., District Judge. Vincent T. Mercer, an African-American, sued PHH Corporation for discriminatory termination under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2, and retaliatory termination under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3. Pending is PHH’s motion for summary judgment. No hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D.Md. 2011). For the following reasons, the motion will be granted.
ACCEPTED 15-25-00013-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 12:26 PM No. 15-25-00013-CV
PER CURIAM. The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases (Committee) has submitted proposed changes to the standard jury instructions pertaining to products liability cases, and asks that the Court authorize the amended standard instructions. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. BACKGROUND
Dickson v. Ruchopublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 201PA12-3 Filed 18 December 2015 MARGARET DICKSON, ALICIA CHISOLM, ETHEL CLARK, MATTHEW A. McLEAN, MELISSA LEE ROLLIZO, C. DAVID GANTT, VALERIA TRUITT, ALICE GRAHAM UNDERHILL, ARMIN JANCIS, REBECCA JUDGE, ZETTIE WILLIAMS, TRACEY BURNS-VANN, LAWRENCE CAMPBELL, ROBINSON O. EVERETT, JR., LINDA GARROU, HAYES McNEILL, JIM SHAW, SIDNEY E. DUNSTON, ALMA ADAMS, R. STEVE BOWDEN, JASO