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 “American Eagle Energy Corporation”
Garcia, D. v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.public domain
J-A18006-22 2023 PA SUPER 41 DANIEL GARCIA, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN THE SUPERIOR COURT BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SITUATED. Appellee v. AMERICAN EAGLE OUTFITTERS, INC., CARTER'S INC., CHICO'S FAS, INC., EXPRESS, INC., GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC., GENESCO INC., HOT TOPIC, INC., J. CREW GROUP, INC., KOHL'S CORPORATION, TAPESTRY, INC., THE GAP, INC., VERA BRADLEY,
TAYLOR, J., {1 The questions before this Court are whether a clause in an agreement giving a liinited liability company the right to participate in all future wells on unleased property violates Article II, Section 32 of the OKla-homa Constitution prohibiting perpetuities and whether a limited lability company is a life in being for purposes of Article II, Seetion 32 of the Oklaho
OSCN Found Document:AMERICAN NATURAL RESOURCES, LLC v. EAGLE ROCK ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P. OSCN navigation Home Courts
664 S.E.2d 683 (2008) STATE of West Virginia ex rel. BLUE EAGLE LAND, LLC, a West Virginia Limited Liability Company, Coalquest Development, LLC, a foreign limited Liability Company, Consolidation Coal Company, a foreign corporation, Horse Creek Land and Mining Company, a West Virginia Corporation, National Council of Coal Lessors, Inc., a West Virginia Corporation, Penn Virginia Operating Company, LLC, a foreign Limited Liability Company, Pocahontas Lan
[Cite as American Eagle Invests., Inc. v. Marco’s Franchising, L.L.C., 2024-Ohio-3038.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY American Eagle Investments, Inc. Court of Appeals No. L-23-1182 Appellant Trial Court No. CI0202201831 v. Marco’s Franchising, LLC
Abushalieh v. American Eagle Express, Inc.public domain
716 F.Supp.2d 361 (2010) Mohamed ABUSHALIEH and Frank Samuels on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN EAGLE EXPRESS, Inc. d/b/a AEX Group, Defendant. Civil Action No. 10-211 (JBS/AMD). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. June 7, 2010. *362 Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq., Philip Stephe
Hassebrock v. Deep Rock Energy Corporationpublic domain
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Hassebrock v. Deep Rock Energy Corp., 2015 IL App (5th) 140105 Appellate Court DUANE HASSEBROCK and EVELYN HASSEBROCK, Plaintiffs- Caption Appellants, v. DEEP ROCK ENERGY CORPORATION, Defendant- Appellee. District & No. Fifth District Docket No. 5-14-0105 Rul
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED Spring 2024 Term January 30, 2024 _____________________ released at 3:00 p.m. C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA September 2019 Term _______________ FILED November 19, 2019 No. 18-0384 released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK _______________
Kevin W. Addis v. Eagle CDI, Inc.public domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE FILED September 17, 2024 Session NOV 26 2024 Clerk of the Appellate Courts REc'd By KEVIN W. ADDIS ET AL. v. EAGLE CDI, INC. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Knox County No. 202505-1 John F. Weaver, Chancellor No. E2023-01190-COA-R3-CV In this contract dispute, the trial court dismissed the petitioners’ claims of fraudulent inducement and misrepresentation predicated on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court also awarded a
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 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
AMERICAN ENERGY -- PERMIAN BASIN, LLC v. ETS OILFIELD SERVICES, LP Skip to Main Content Accessibility Statement Help Contact Us <
PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 605 U. S. Part 1 Pages 168–203 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT May 29, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are r
Marcellus Energy Servs. LLC v Tompkins Ins. Agencies, Inc. (2025 NY Slip Op 02980) Marcellus Energy Servs. LLC v Tompkins Ins. Agencies, Inc. 2025 NY Slip Op 02980 Decided on May 15, 2025 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by Ne
Huff Energy Fund, L.P. v. Longview Energy Co.public domain
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice, dissenting. Longview Energy Corporation’s live pleadings gave fair notice that a basic issue to be resolved at trial was whether Bill Huff and Rick D’Angelo, engaged in competition with Longview by forming and operating Riley-Huff Energy Group without the informed approval of Longview’s board of directors. In addressing the corporate opportunity issues, the majority and concurrence
Filed 5/30/24 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION* IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT EAGLE FIRE AND WATER RESTORATION, INC., F086052 Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. VCU285656) v. OPINION
Supreme Court of Texas ══════════ No. 20-0904 ══════════ Devon Energy Production Company, L.P., f/k/a GeoSouthern DeWitt Properties, LLC, BPX Properties (NA) LP, GeoSouthern Energy Corporation, and BPX Production Company, Petitioners, v. Michael A. Sheppard, et al., Respondents ════
Affirm in part, Reverse and Remand in part Opinion Filed March 2, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00271-CV WEH-SLMP INVESTMENTS, LLC, WEHII-SRPOII INVESTMENTS, LLC, AND WRANGLER ENERGY HOLDINGS II, LLC, Appellants V. WRANGLER ENERGY, LLC AND WRANGLER ENER
PetroQuest Energy, LLC v. Bankspublic domain
AMY, Judge. _JjThis concursus proceeding questions the appropriate royalty to be paid a mineral lessor from a well operated by the plaintiff in the concursus. Both the lessor and an overriding royalty interest owner were named as defendants. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment seeking a determination of the appropriate royalty due from the well in light of an amendment to the original lease. The trial court
NO. 07-99-0090-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B NOVEMBER 7, 2001 ______________________________ S & J INVESTMENTS, Appellan