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 “Brame v. General Motors LLC”
General Motors Corp. v. Sheetspublic domain
OPINION BAKER, Judge. The plaintiffs in this case tried to make lemonade out of our Lemon Law. However, the judgment they received was a little too sweet. Appellants-defendants General Motors Corp. and Stanley Chevrolet/Oldsmobile (collectively GM) appeal the trial court's judgment in favor of Kirby and Becky Sheets (the Sheetses) with regard to their cause of action against GM for breach of
Marlow v. TCS Designspublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA22-862 Filed 02 May 2023 Catawba County, No. 22 CVS 363 JUSTIN MARLOW, as Administrator of the Estate of Michelle Marlow (Deceased), Plaintiff, v. TCS DESIGNS, Inc., JOBIE G. REDMOND, JEFF McKINNEY, and ERIC PARKER, Defendants. Appeal by Defendants from order entered 22 July 2022 by Judge Gregory Hayes in Catawba County Superior Court.
Brenda D. v. Department of Child Safetypublic domain
OPINION McMURDIE, Judge: ¶ 1 In this case, we are asked to determine if a parent has “failed to appear” for a termination adjudication hearing within the meaning of Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 8-863(C) and Arizona Rule of Juvenile Procedure 66(D)(2), if the parent appeared approximately 26 minutes late. We are also asked to determine if the superior court improperly restricted a parent’s c
Pisano v. Thunbergpublic domain
PISANO vs. THUNBERG, MISC 18-000448 CHARLES R. PISANO and GEORGE NADER, Plaintiffs, v. STEVEN THUNBERG, JOHANNES MEINTJES, KEVIN HARDY, and GAIL HANCOCK, as they are Trustees of Bradford Acres Condominium Trust of Provincetown, Defendants MISC 18-000448 JUNE 28, 2021 BARNSTABLE, ss. FOSTER, J. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ALLOWING
Sweeney v. City of Decaturpublic domain
Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to the Illinois Official Reports accuracy and integrity of this
Kim v. Commonwealthpublic domain
OPINION BY JUSTICE CLEO E. POWELL Matthew Alexander Kim ("Kim") appeals the trial court's judgment that he unreasonably refused to submit a breath sample in violation of Code § 18.2-268.3 because, according to Kim, he was on a private road that did not fall within the definition of a "highway" provided by Code § 46.2-100 at the time he was arrested and, therefore, he was not required to
FILED Jul 14 2025, 9:45 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON AMERICAN HOTEL & LODGING No. 77918-4-1 ASSOCIATION, SEATTLE HOTEL cf)CD ASSOCIATION, and WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE HOSPITALITY ASSOCIATION, rfl PUBLISHED OPINION rn Appellants,
Rogers v. Apicellapublic domain
606 F.Supp.2d 272 (2009) Tanisha ROGERS, Plaintiff, v. Edward APICELLA, Timothy Jackson, Lee Levesque, and City of Waterbury, Defendants. Civil No. 3:07cv1199 (JBA). United States District Court, D. Connecticut. March 26, 2009. *276 Jon L. Schoenhorn, Jon L. Schoenhorn & Associates LLC, Hartford, CT, for Plaintiff. Che
Powell v. City of Newtonpublic domain
JACKSON, Judge. James W. Powell, Jr. (“plaintiff’) appeals the 27 May 2008 order requiring him to execute a settlement agreement and quitclaim deed. Defendant City of Newton (“the city”), third-party defendant Shaver Wood Products, Inc. (“Shaver”), and third-party defendant W.K. Dickson Engineering, Inc. (“Dickson”) (collectively “defendants”) appeal the 19 August 2008 order denying their motion to dismiss plaintiff’s appeal.
Sierra Club v. EPApublic domain
Case: 18-60116 Document: 00515144673 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/03/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 3, 2019 No. 18-60116
Love Terminal Partners v. City of Dallas, Tex.public domain
527 F.Supp.2d 538 (2007) LOVE TERMINAL PARTNERS, L.P., et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 3:06-CV-1279-D. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. October 31, 2007 *539 *540 *541
Daimler Chrysler Corp. v. Franklinpublic domain
814 N.E.2d 281 (2004) DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION, Appellant-Defendant, v. Derek FRANKLIN, Appellee-Plaintiff. No. 53A01-0309-CV-346. Court of Appeals of Indiana. August 30, 2004. *283 Jeffrey P. Smith, W. Randall Kammeyer, Hawk, Haynie, Kammeyer & Chickedantz, Fort Wayne, IN, Attorneys for Appellant. John D. Barker,
Conti v. Fid. Bank (In re NC & VA Warranty Co.)public domain
BENJAMIN A. KAHN, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE This Adversary Proceeding is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support, ECF No. 178 ("Fidelity's Brief"), filed by Defendant Fidelity Bank ("Fidelity") and the Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 184 ("Dealers' Motion for Summary Judgment"), filed by Defendant Dealers Assurance Company ("Dealers") (collectively, the "Motions for Summary Judgment"
Enomoto v. Space Adventures, Ltd.public domain
624 F.Supp.2d 443 (2009) Daisuke ENOMOTO, Plaintiff, v. SPACE ADVENTURES, LTD., Defendant. No. 1:08cv861 (JCC). United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. March 3, 2009. *446 Conrad Moss Shumadine, Willcox & Savage PC, Norfolk, VA, Peter J. Carney, White & Case LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.
LifeNet Health v. LifeCell Corp.public domain
OPINION AND ORDER HENRY COKE MORGAN, JR., Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court upon Defendant LifeCell Corporation’s (“Defendant” or “LifeCell”) Motion for New Trial or in the Alternative Remittitur, Doc. 415, and Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, Doc. 419 (hereinafter “Motions”). A hearing was held on Thursday, January 29, 2015. Ruling from the bench, the Court DENIED t
393 B.R. 105 (2008) In re BASELINE SPORTS, INC., Debtor. Suntrust Bank, Plaintiff, v. Gary L. Roberson, David G. Barnes, Baseline Sports, Inc., Baseline Licensing Group, LLC, Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 06-71505-SCS. Adversary No. 07-07105-SCS. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. August 1, 2008. *109
Central Pines Land Co. v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION FIRESTONE, Judge. This decision follows a trial on the plaintiffs’ claims of a Fifth Amendment taking without just compensation of their mineral servitude, known as “Group C,” in Vernon Parish, Louisiana. The mineral servitude involves land owned by the United States, occupied by Fort Polk and the Kisatchie National Forest. Many of the issues regarding ownership of the mineral servitude and the na
Central Pines Land Co. v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION FIRESTONE, Judge. This decision follows a trial on the plaintiffs’ claims of a Fifth Amendment taking without just compensation of their mineral servitude, known as “Group C,” in Vernon Parish, Louisiana. The mineral servitude involves land owned by the United States, occupied by Fort Polk and the Kisatehie National Forest. Many of the issues regarding ownership of the mineral servitude and the na
Ross Stores, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Boardpublic domain
Opinion for the court by Circuit Judge HENDERSON. Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge HENDERSON. Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge RANDOLPH. Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part filed by Circuit Judge GARLAND. KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: Ross Stores, Inc. (Ross) petitions for review of a decision and order of