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 “Benjamin Lawlor”
First NH Bank v. Lawlorpublic domain
600 A.2d 1120 (1992) FIRST NH BANK v. Benjamin J. LAWLOR. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Argued November 12, 1991. Decided January 3, 1992. John B. Emory (orally), Peter W. Greenleaf, Drummond & Drummond, Portland, for plaintiff. Durward Parkinson (orally), Anthony Perkins, Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, Portland, for defendant. Before McK
Coons, Richard C. v. Lawlor, Robert P.public domain
OPINION OF THE COURT BECKER, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Richard Coons, an Indiana citizen, appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Robert Lawlor, a Pennsylvania citizen, in a diversity action for damages arising out of a one-car accident on a New Jersey highway. This a
Benjamin Lawrence Burton v. Commonwealth of Virginiapublic domain
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA PUBLISHED Present: Chief Judge Decker, Judge Friedman and Senior Judge Clements Argued at Richmond, Virginia BENJAMIN LAWRENCE BURTON OPINION BY v. Record No. 0609-24-2 JUDGE FRANK K. FRIEDMAN
Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Woolerypublic domain
Greene, J. This attorney discipline case traces the protracted plight of one man's estate administration. When Freelove Jefferies died in February 2012, he left behind two executed wills. His longtime friend Ronald Hutchens promptly sought the assistance of Respondent Benjamin Jeremy Woolery (Respondent or "Mr. Woolery") to handle opening an estate on behalf of Mr. Jefferies. Mr. Wooler
United States v. Weypublic domain
MEMORANDUM & ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, United States District Judge Before the Court is a motion by non-party Nasdaq, Inc. (“Nasdaq”) to quash a subpoena duces tecum issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) upon the ex parte application of Defendant Benjamin Wey. For the reasons set forth below, Nasdaq’s motion is DENIED. : I. Background
United States v. Weypublic domain
OPINION & ORDER [CORRECTED] ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: Defendant Benjamin Wey faces an eight-count indictment charging him with securities fraud, wire fraud,-conspiracy to commit securities and wire fraud, money laundering, and failure to disclose beneficial ownership of publicly traded companies. Before the Court is Wey’s motion to suppress evidence seized during Government searches of his res
Williams v. Signature Pools & Spas, Inc.public domain
615 F.Supp.2d 1374 (2009) Theron WILLIAMS, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SIGNATURE POOLS & SPAS, INC., a Florida corporation and Scott A. Taggart, Defendants. Case No. 08-22388-CIV. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. May 19, 2009. *1375 Benjamin Murphey, Lawlor, Winston,
Brown v. NCL (bahamas) LTD.public domain
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT NCL (BAHAMAS) LTD.’S DAU-BERT MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE AND PRECLUDE PLAINTIFF FROM ELICITING EXPERT OPINIONS FROM DR. NICHOLAS SUITE (D.E. 60) JOAN A. LENARD, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant NCL (Bahamas) Ltd.’s Daubert Motion and Motion to Strike and Preclude Plaintiff from Eliciting Expert Opinion
Millan v. Celebration Cruise Operator, Inc.public domain
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Celebration Cruise Operator d/b/a Bahamas Celebration’s motion for summary judgment. (DE 27.) For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I. BACKGROUND This tort action arises from the inj
Lawlor v. National Screen Service Co.public domain
KALODNER, Circuit Judge. Was there, in the cases involved in these appeals, a genuine issue as to a *61material fact which, under well-settled principles, precluded the entry of summary judgments adjudicating the defendant-appellant, National Screen Service Corporation (“National”) to be an unlawful monopoly ? That is the critical issue presented by
J.P. v. Connellpublic domain
*1300 ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs J.P. and R.P.’s Motion to Remand to State Court (Doc. # 13) filed on February 23, 2015. Defendant Boy Scouts of America filed a response in opposition on March 12, 2015. (Doc. # 23). Thereafter,
Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.public domain
STALEY, Circuit Judge. In this long-protracted litigation, plaintiffs Charles Lawlor and Mitchell Pantzer seek injunctive relief and money damages pursuant to Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 15, 26, averring violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1, 2. The plaintiffs, in 1942, instituted a treble-damage suit, also praying an injunction, against National Scree
Brown v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd.public domain
ORDER RE: REQUESTED DISCLOSURE OF WORK PRODUCT Jonathan Goodman, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE “The motive, the measure, the purpose, the pleasure. ” - The Red Hot Chili Peppers, from the song We Believe1 What happens when a cruise ship operator gives a copy of a passenger-drafted statement for which it asserts work
Muzaffarr v. Ross Dress for Less, Inc.public domain
ORDER LURANA S. SNOW, United States Magistrate Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Protective Order Regarding Deposition and to Compel Certain Discovery (DE 40) which was referred to United States Magistrate Judge, Lurana S. Snow. The motion is ripe for consideration. This is a diversity action arising out of a slip and fall which occurred
Veoh Networks, Inc. v. UMG Recordings, Inc.public domain
522 F.Supp.2d 1265 (2007) VEOH NETWORKS, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. UMG RECORDINGS, INC., et. al., Defendants. No. 07-CV-1568 W(BLM). United States District Court, S.D. California. November 14, 2007. *1266 *1267 Rebecca. Lawlor Calkins, Winston and Strawn. LLP, Los Angeles,
Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.public domain
GOODRICH, Circuit Judge. This suit arises upon a matter collateral to the distribution and exhibition of motion picture films. The plaintiffs (“Poster Co.”) are engaged in the business of leasing advertising posters *935 (“standard accessories”) to exhi
Thomas Skold v. Galderma Laboratories LPpublic domain
JORDAN, Circuit Judge. This case proves once again that people will fight for a catchy name. Thomas Sköld sued his former business partner, Galderma Laboratories L.P. ("Galderma"), alleging that its use of the trademark "Restoraderm" constitutes trademark infringement, false advertising, unfair competition, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. In the District Court, only Sköld's
Kertesz v. Net Transactions, Ltd.public domain
635 F.Supp.2d 1339 (2009) Heather KERTESZ, Plaintiff, v. NET TRANSACTIONS, LTD., a Gibraltar limited liability company, d/b/a collegewildparties.com; Ventura Content, AVV, an Aruban corporation, TB Advertising Services, AVV, an Aruban corporation, Westlake Holdings, AVV, an Aruban corporation, Edward James Enterprises, Inc., a Florida corporation, and James Witucki, an individual, Defendants. Case No. 08-80730-CIV.
UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Veoh Networks Inc.public domain
665 F.Supp.2d 1099 (2009) UMG RECORDINGS, INC., et al, v. VEOH NETWORKS INC., et al. Case No. CV 07-5744 AHM (AJWx). United States District Court, C.D. California. September 11, 2009. *1100 Benjamin H. Glatstein, Brian D. Ledahl, Carter Richard Batsell, Elliot N. Brown, Steven A. Marenberg, Irell & Manella, Los Angeles, CA, f
Roc-Lafayette Assoc., LLC v. Reuterpublic domain
Roc-Lafayette Assoc., LLC v Reuter (2020 NY Slip Op 02885) Roc-Lafayette Assoc., LLC v Reuter 2020 NY Slip Op 02885 Decided on May 14, 2020 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting