Cases

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 601 {¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellants, Christina and Michael Bouher, filed a product-liability suit against several defendants, including defendant-appellee, Food Equipment Technologies Company ("FETCO"), after Christina was severely burned while picking up a cup of hot water. The trial court granted su

ROY L. RICHTER, Judge. Aramark Educational Services, Inc. (“Employer”) and Indemnity Insurance Company of North America, Inc. (“Insurer”) appeal from the final order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) awarding Leotha Faulkner (“Claimant”) temporary total disability benefits and 20% permanent partial disability benefits as a result of an injury Claimant sustained while working for Employer. We rev

MEMORANDUM OPINION DEBORAH A. ROBINSON, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff, as relator in a qui tarn action commenced pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, alleged that Defendant Record Press, Inc., overcharged the United States Government Printing Office (hereinafter “government” or “GPO”) for the printing of br

OPINION BY Judge COHN JUBELIRER. Reliance Insurance Company in Liquidation (Liquidator) has petitioned this Court for a declaratory judgment that Aramark Corporation1 (Aramark) must reimburse various state guaranty associations for amounts the guaranty associations paid out on Aramark’s behalf and for which the guaranty associations have now presented proofs of claim to the esta

625 S.E.2d 78 (2005) 276 Ga. App. 793 NAIR v. ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE CORPORATION. No. A05A1813. Court of Appeals of Georgia. December 12, 2005. *79 Jones & Bell, Lloyd N. Bell, Atlanta, for appellant. William P. Tinkler, Jr., Hillary A. Hague, Decatur, for appellee. RUFFIN, Chief Judge.

WINCHESTER, J., dissenting: ¶ 1 I respectfully dissent. It is important to point out what 23 O.S.2011, § 61.2 does not do: (1) it does not cap damages in cases of wrongful death; (2) it does not cap economic damages for lost wages; (3) it does not cap economic damages for medical expenses; and (4) it does not bar the first $350,000 of non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering. With the passage of § 61.2, the Legislature dete

OSCN Found Document:BEASON v. I. E. MILLER SERVICES, INC. BEASON v. I. E. MILLER SERVICES, INC.2019 OK 28Case Number: 114301Decided: 04/23/2019THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA Cite as: 2019 OK 28, __ P.3d __ NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO RE

758 F.Supp.2d 533 (2010) MINNESOTA ELEVATOR, INC., Plaintiff, v. IMPERIAL ELEVATOR SERVICES, INC., d/b/a Barnard Elevator Company, Defendant. No. 08 CV 4662. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. July 1, 2010. *535 Elizabeth Wiet Reutter, Curtis Dean Ripley, Minneapolis, MN, Alan W. Nicgorski, Scandaglia

05/04/2022 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 1, 2022 DAVID SIMPKINS ET AL. v. JOHN MAHER BUILDERS, INC. ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Williamson County No. 20-CV-50050M James G. Martin, III, Chancellor __________________________

Opinion RUSHING, P. J. I. Introduction Defendant Applied Signal Technology, Inc. (Employer), terminated its four-year employment of plaintiff John McGrory (Employee) in June 2009 after an outside investigator retained by Employer concluded that, while Employee had not discriminated against a lesbian subordinate on the basis of her sex or sexual orientation, in other ways Employee had

Filed 8/10/17; Certified for Publication 9/5/17 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE ORLANDO NAKAI, Plaintiff and Appellant, A147966 v. FRIENDSHIP HOUSE ASSOCIATION (San Francisco City & County OF AMERICAN INDIAN

677 F.Supp.2d 1134 (2009) Brandy AUSTIN, individually and as mother and natural guardian of Christa B. Austin, Plaintiff, v. NESTLE USA, INC., Defendant. Civ. No. 09-2675 (RHK/JSM). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. December 28, 2009. *1135 Stephen C. Rathke, Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, PA, Minneapolis, MN

Banke, J. *36INTRODUCTION For over 20 years, plaintiff Orlando Nakai (Orlando1 ) was employed by Friendship House Association of American Indians, Inc. (Friendship House), a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program providing treatment services to Native Americans. His employment was term

651 F.Supp.2d 818 (2008) Rochelle D. BATCHELOR, Plaintiff, v. MERCK & CO., INC., Defendant. No. 3:05 CV 791. United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division. December 10, 2008. *822 Denise K. Larue, Jay Meisenhelder, Haskin Lauter & Larue, Indianapolis, IN, for Plaintiff. Joel H. Kaplan, Phv, Marc R

MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION........................................................152 II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY................................................155 III. STANDARD OF REVIEW................................................156 A. Rule 23 Requirements for Class Certification............................156 <

951 A.2d 428 (2008) STATE of Rhode Island v. LEAD INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION, INC., et al. Nos. 2004-63-M.P., 2006-158-Appeal, 2007-121-Appeal. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. July 1, 2008. *434 Neil Kelly, John McConnell, Fidelma Fitzpatrick, Genevieve Allaire-Johnson, James Lee, Providence, for Plaintiff. John A. MacFadyen, I

903 A.2d 475 (2006) 387 N.J. Super. 160 Antonia VERNI, an infant, by her guardian ad litem, Albert BURSTEIN, and Fazila Baksh Verni, Individually, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. HARRY M. STEVENS, INC. of New Jersey, Aramark Services Management of New Jersey, Inc., Aramark Corporation, and Aramark Sports and Entertainment Group, Inc., Defendants-Appellants, and Daniel R. Lanzaro, Ronald A. Verni, The New Jersey Sports &

EDMONDSON, J. 1 The issue presented for our review on certiorari is whether the trial court was correct in determining in the context of a premises liability lawsuit that a business invitor's claims against a third party and its claim that the third party caused the invitee's infu-ry should be heard by the jury determining the liability of the invitor to the invitee. That issue may not be unequivocally answered in this case.

MEMORANDUM OPINION LAMBERTH, District Judge. Now before the Court are several matters related to the Court’s recent rulings. First, Plaintiff Amfac moves the Court to reconsider various aspects of its May 23, 2001 Opinion.1 Second, Amfac moves the *98Court for a preliminary injunction enjoining the National Pa

MEMORANDUM OPINION LAMBERTH, District Judge. Now before the Court is a group of cases that implicate a variety of issues, all of which are covered in the defendants’ motion to dismiss, and the parties’ cross motions for partial summary judgment. At its heart, the dispute centers on the National Park Service’s (“NPS”) treatment of current and potential concessioners at various national parks. The plai