Cases

*681 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. # 34) GEORGE CARAM STEEH, District Judge. Plaintiff Alanna Marotta alleges that her employer Ford Motor Company and supervisors Michael Wendel, Michael Brud-zinski and Thomas Garrity discriminated and retaliated against her, and sexuall

[Cite as Meranda Nixon Estate Wine, L.L.C. v. Cherry Fork Farm Supply Co., 2024-Ohio-1523.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO BROWN COUNTY MERANDA NIXON ESTATE WINE, LLC, : et al., : CASE NO. CA2023-01-002 Appellants, : OPI

CHEN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-appellants Ethicon Endo-Sur-gery, Inc. and Ethicon Endo-Surgery, LLC (collectively, Ethicon) sued defendants-appellees Covidien, Inc. and Covi-dien LP (collectively, Covidien) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio for alleged infringement of several utility and design patents related to ultrasonic surgical devices. After t

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 08a0195p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Plaintiff-Appellant, - MARCIA B. NANCE,

MEMORANDUM O’NEILL, District Judge. Plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant QVC, Inc. brings an action for breach of contract seeking declaratory relief, equitable relief and damages against its vendor, defendant and counterclaim-plaintiff MJC America, Ltd., d/b/a Soleus International, Inc. Soleus has asserted a counterclaim for breach of contract against QVC. The parties’ claims against each othe

MEMORANDUM OPINION Smith, District Judge This action brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1001-11916 stems from the defendant’s alleged wrongful denial of the plaintiffs claim for long-term disability benefits. The plaintiff worked as a plant controller for a corrugated packaging industry and- sought short-term disability benefits due, among other things

OPINION ON REHEARING BILL MEIER, JUSTICE Appellees George F. Cravens, M.D.; RCC Medical District Facilities, Ltd. (the *875•Partnership); and Center for Neurological Disorders Hospital, LP (CNDH) filed a motion for rehearing of our opinion that issued on October 29, 2015.. We deny the motion, withdraw our opinion and judgment dated October 29, 2015

Breach of Implied-in-Fact Contract; Breach of Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Duty to Protect; Confidential Informant; Violation of Procedures; Multiple Sclerosis; Expectation Damages; Causation; Foreseeability; Reasonable Certainty. OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAMS, Judge. This breaeh-of-contraet action comes before the Court after

Stegall, J., dissenting: This case is not only about abortion policy -the most divisive social issue of our day-it is more elementally about the structure of our republican form of government. Which is to say, this case is about the proper conditions for just rule. At bottom, this case is about finding and drawing the sometimes elusive line between law and arbitrary exercises of power. Here we venture onto a bat

VERONICA L. DUFFY, United States Magistrate Judge TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...831 FACTS...831 A. Procedural History...831 B. Work History...833 C. Ms. Webb's Statements and Testimony...833 D. Medical Evidence-Chronological...841 E. Medical Literature...867 F. Opinion Evidence..

25 F.Supp.2d 301 (1998) DISCOVISION ASSOCIATES, Plaintiff, v. DISC MANUFACTURING, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. Civil Action No. 95-21-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. October 26, 1998. *302 *303 *304

137 F.Supp.2d 147 (2001) Nikitas AMORGIANOS and Donna Amorgianos, Plaintiffs, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION d/b/a Amtrak, Defendant. No. CIV A. CV-96-2745 (DGT). United States District Court, E.D. New York. March 29, 2001. As Corrected April 16, 2001. *148 *149 La

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER MILLER, Judge. This case is before the court after multiple orders, opinions, and trial. Plaintiffs are sureties that completed performance of a contract upon the bankruptcy of J.A. Jones Construction Company (“J.A Jones”), a joint venturer with Guy F. Atkinson Construction Company (“Atkinson” and, together with J.A. Jones, the “Joint Venture”), in the construction of t

ACCEPTED 01-15-00989-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 12/3/2015 1:47:58 PM

FILED IN st 1 COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TX 12/07/2015 CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, NO. CLERK IN THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TE

390 F.Supp. 1193 (1972) UNITED STATES of America for the Use of E & R CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Plaintiff, v. GUY H. JAMES CONSTRUCTION CO. and Federal Insurance Company, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 504. United States District Court, M. D. Tennessee, Northeastern Division. September 5, 1972. *1194 *119

673 F.Supp. 1278 (1987) PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY, Shell Oil Company, Northern Petrochemical Co., El Paso Products Company and Himont U.S.A., Inc., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, Hercules Incorporated and Phillips Petroleum Company, Defendants. Civ. A. Nos. 83-143, 83-148, 83-547, 83-801, 84-79 and 85-255 LON. United States District Court, D. Delaware. October

440 F.Supp. 60 (1977) Charles JONES et al., Plaintiffs, v. Sol WITTENBERG et al., Defendants. Civ. No. C 70-388. United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, W. D. July 29, 1977. *61 *62 *63 Dale Wilker, Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, Toledo, Ohio, Stanle

ACCEPTED 03-14-00510-CV 4243321 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ACCEPTED 05-15-01480-CV 05-15-01480-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12/4/2015 2:42:24 PM