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 “CHRISTOPHER AARON PARNELL”
Thomas v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLCpublic domain
Brian S. Miller, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Defendant Hennessy Industries, LLC's ("Hennessy") motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 232] is granted, and Hennessy is dismissed. *801Ronald Thomas worked as a brake mechanic and manager at auto repair shops for approximately twelve years. Thomas Dep. 8:9-25, 17:13-21, Doc. No. 24
Thomas v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLCpublic domain
BRIAN S. MILLER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The motions for summary judgment [Doc. Nos. 196, 201, 206] are granted as to the breach of warranty claims, granted in part as to the market share liability theory, and denied as to all other claims. The notices of adoption [219, 228] are recognized. The motions for summary judgment on the issue of punitive damages and motions to bifurcate [Doc. Nos. 204, 211, 221, 223] are denied. The
Faddish v. Buffalo Pumpspublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DANIEL T.K. HURLEY, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the court on motions for summary judgment filed by defendants Warren Pumps, LLC (“Warren Pumps”), Crane Company (“Crane”) and Westinghouse Company (n/k/a CBS Corporation)(‘Westinghouse”)[ECF Nos. 105, 108 and 109]. For reasons outlined below, the court has determined to grant the motions.
Thomas v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLCpublic domain
Brian S. Miller, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *757Defendant DCo LLC's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 197] is granted, and DCo is dismissed. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P
Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l Inc.public domain
CURRIER, J.A.D. *579*1096In this products liability case arising out of exposure to asbestos, we consider anew whether a manufacturer has a duty to warn about the risk of harm from exposure to asbestos-containing replacement parts integral to the func
In Re Jefferson County, Ala.public domain
469 B.R. 92 (2012) In re JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA, a political subdivision of the State of Alabama Debtor. No. 11-05736-TBB. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division. March 4, 2012. *94 Ann E. Acker, Chicago, IL, Laura E. Appleby, New York, NY, Stephen B. Porterfield, Birmingham, AL, James Spiotto, Chicago, IL, fo
ARTHUR G. WHELAN VS. ARMSTRONG INTERNATIONAL INC. (L-7161-12, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)public domain
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3520-13T4 ARTHUR G. WHELAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION ARMSTRONG INTERNATIONAL INC.; BURNHAM LLC; CARRIER CORP., individually, August 6, 2
Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds International Corp.public domain
548 F.3d 85 (2008) STOLT-NIELSEN SA, Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group Ltd., a Odfjell ASA, Odfjell Seachem AS, Odfjell USA, Inc., Jo Tankers BV, Jo Tankers, Inc., and Tokyo Marine Co. Ltd., Petitioners-Appellees, v. ANIMALFEEDS INTERNATIONAL CORP., Respondent-Appellant, KP Chemical Corp., Respondent.[*] Docket No. 06-3474-cv. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
People v. Hendersonpublic domain
Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Illinois Official Reports Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds Int'l Corp.public domain
06-3474-cv Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds Int'l Corp. 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 August Term, 2007 4 (Argued: May 30, 2008 Decided: November 4, 2008) 5 Docket No. 06-3474-cv 6 ------------------------------------ 7 STOLT-NIELSEN SA, 8 Stolt-Nielsen T
Gration v. Islamic Republic of Iranpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JONATHAN SCOTT GRATION, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 21-cv-1859 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This action arises out of the bombing on June 25,
State v. Saintcallepublic domain
González, J. ¶71 (concurring) — This splintered court is unanimous about one thing: Racial bias in jury selection is still a problem — “Solutions to the Problem, Of Course, wait.” Langston Hughes, Dinner Guest: Me, in 3 The Collected Works of Langston Hughes 173 (Arnold Rampersad ed., 2001). Batson challenges have not ended racial bias in jury selection. Only once has a race-based Batson challenge re
In Re Owens Corningpublic domain
305 B.R. 175 (2004) In re OWENS CORNING, et al., Debtors. In re W.R. Grace & Co., et al., Debtors. In re USG Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, et al., Debtors. No. 00-3837, No. 00-3838, No. 00-3839, No. 00-3840, No. 00-3841, No. 00-3842, No. 00-3843, No. 00-3844, No. 00-3845, No. 00-3846, No. 00-3847, No. 00-3848, No. 00-3849, No. 00-3850, No. 00-3851, No. 00-3852, No. 00-3853, No. 00-3854, No. 01-1139, No. 01-1140, N
Obergefell v. Hodgespublic domain
Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court. The Constitution promises libertyto all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity. The petitioners in these cases seek to find that liberty by marrying someone of the same sex and having their marriages deemed lawful on the same te
Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court
Daniel Campbell v. City of Los Angelespublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANIEL CAMPBELL; et al, * No. 15-56990 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. 2:04-cv-08592- AG-AJW CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-Appellee. CESAR MATA,
Dennis Speerly v. General Motors, LLCpublic domain
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0170p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DENNIS SPEERLY; JOSEPH SIERCHIO; DARRIN │ DEGRAND; DANIEL DRAIN; WAVERS SMITH; RICHARD
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr
State v. Saintcallepublic domain
Fl L E IN CLERKS OFFICE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WASHINGTON AUG 01 2013 UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) ) Respondent, ) No. 86257-5 ) v.
Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (2019 NY Slip Op 03883) Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. 2019 NY Slip Op 03883 Decided on May 16, 2019 Appellate Division, Third Department