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.
10 opinions for “Brookfield Property Group, LLC - US v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company”
2023 WI 21 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2020AP1078-FT COMPLETE TITLE: Secura Supreme Insurance Company, Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. The Estate of Daniel Keith Huck, Defendant-Respondent. REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL
Emirat AG v. High Point Printing LLCpublic domain
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING EMIRAT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY' JUDGMENT (DOC. 71) AND GRANTING WS PACKAGING’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 68) C. N. CLEVERT, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In this diversity action, Emirat AG sues WS Packaging Group; Inc. and High Point *916Printing LLC over the allegedly defective printing of combination g
ACCEPTED 03-15-00348-CV 6616789 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court of Kern Cnty.public domain
LIU, J. In Aas v. Superior Court (2000) 24 Cal.4th 627 , 632, 101 Cal.Rptr.2d 718 ,
2013 WI 78 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2007AP221 & 2007AP1440 COMPLETE TITLE: Bostco LLC and Parisian, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross- Respondents-Petitioners, v. Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District
BRISCOE, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company of Pittsburg, Kansas (Pittsburg Pepsi) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants PepsiCo, Inc. (PepsiCo) and its wholly owned subsidiary, Bottling Group, LLC (Bottling Group). While Pittsburg Pepsi asserts claims sounding both in tort and in contract, its overriding contenti
Stonefire Grill, Inc. v. FGF Brands, Inc.public domain
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT JESUS G. BERNAL, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendant FGF Brands, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (“Motion,” Doc. No. 71.) After considering the papers timely filed and the arguments presented at the July 29, 2013 hearing, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion. I. BACKGROUND A. Procedural
Nafta Traders, Inc. v. Quinnpublic domain
*87Justice HECHT delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice JEFFERSON, Justice WAINWRIGHT, Justice MEDINA, Justice GREEN, Justice JOHNSON, Justice WILLETT, Justice GUZMAN, and Justice LEHRMANN joined. “The answer to most questions regarding arbitration ‘flow inexorably from the fact that arbitration is simply a ma
MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND JUDGMENT FINDINGS OF FACT AND LAW WEINSTEIN, Senior District Judge. Table of Contents PART ONE Summary of Case 446 I. Contentions of Parties.446 II. Factual Background.447 III. Law 448 IV. Procedures. rfX ZO V. Conclusions of Fact and Law. ^ 4^
Matter of Attorneys Who are in Violation of Judiciary Law Section 468-a for Failing to Registerpublic domain
Matter of Attorneys Who are in Violation of Judiciary Law Section 468-a for Failing to Register (2025 NY Slip Op 01717) Matter of Attorneys Who are in Violation of Judiciary Law Section 468-a for Failing to Register 2025 NY Slip Op 01717 Decided on March 20, 2025 Appellate Di