⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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 “CT Drives, LLC”

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · 2018-11-01 · Published · cited 0× · 593 B.R. 14
Wendy L. Hagenau U.S., Bankruptcy Court Judge This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by Westplan Investors Acquisitions, LLC ("Westplan") and Accent Cumberland Apartments, LP ("Accent") (collectively, "Defendants") [Docket No. 4]. The Court has jurisdiction of this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1334
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2018-11-14 · Published · cited 0× · 259 So. 3d 1077
Conclusion The judgment of the district court order is affirmed. AFFIRMED
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2012-06-21 · Published · cited 2× · 310 P.3d 185; 2012 COA 103; 2012 Colo. App. LEXIS 1001; 2012 WL 2353847
Opinion by Judge TERRY. € 1 Plaintiff, Slater Numismaties, LLC, appeals the trial court's summary judgment in favor of defendant, Driving Force, LLC, doing business as ANACS (ANACS). The court granted summary judgment for ANACS on Plaintiffs claims for intentional interference with contractual relations and unjust enrichment. It also entered an order awarding costs to ANACS. We reverse and remand for further pr
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019-03-26 · Published · cited 0× · 266 So. 3d 1186
AFFIRMED.
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2017-10-04 · Published · cited 3× · 229 So. 3d 539
PERRET, Judge. lain this workers’ compensation case, plaintiff/appellee, Jackie White, was injured when boiling water and toxic cleaning chemicals spilled on her feet. She was working for defendant employer, Fuel Plus Too, LLC (“Fuel Plus”). Thereafter, Ms. White’s treating physician requested authorization for a surgery involving a bilateral trans metatarsal amputation of her feet, with flaps, inpatien
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019-03-26 · Published · cited 0× · 266 So. 3d 1186
AFFIRMED.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019-04-26 · Published · cited 32× · 923 F.3d 113
KRAUSE, Circuit Judge. I. Introduction In this appeal, we must determine whether certain restrictive covenants, which high-performing employees enter into as a condition of a stock award, constitute an impermissible restraint on trade under New Jersey law. We conclude that these restrictive covenants are not unenforceable in their entirety be
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019-05-15 · Published · cited 0× · 273 So. 3d 988
Dismissed.
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019-05-15 · Published · cited 0× · 273 So. 3d 988
Dismissed.
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016-06-30 · Published · cited 0× · 212 So. 3d 373
Aff. Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)
Missouri Court of Appeals · 2018-11-13 · Published · cited 0× · 567 S.W.3d 206
Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., Judge Introduction At issue in this case is whether under Section 443.055, RSMo. (2000), a future advance security instrument secures both principal up to the face amount of the loan as well as any excess interest generated on that principal. SB RE Properties, LLC (SB RE) appeals the judgment of the trial court on an interpleader action that awarded $20,000 in the trial court's registr
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016-09-20 · Published · cited 0× · 211 So. 3d 1049
App.dism. Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)
Missouri Court of Appeals · 2017-06-20 · Published · cited 0× · 521 S.W.3d 289; 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 609; 2017 WL 2644038
ORDER PER CURIAM Alan and Sharon Jackson appeal the trial court’s judgment in favor of their neighbor, Mersin, in this land dispute. Finding no error, we affirm. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for
Connecticut Appellate Court · 2019-09-10 · Published · cited 0×
*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014-01-07 · Published · cited 0× · 113 A.D.3d 407; 978 N.Y.2d 152
The provision of the agreement at issue states, “[A]dvances shall be fully reimbursed by [plaintiff] from the Commissions paid by [defendant] ... at a rate of twenty percent ... of [plaintiff]’s portion ... of each Commission . . . until [defendant] is fully reimbursed.” The motion court properly found that the requirement that defendants be “fully reimbursed” was qualified by the clause “from the Commissions ... at a rate of twenty percent ... of [plaint
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014-01-07 · Published · cited 0× · 113 A.D.3d 407; 978 N.Y.2d 152
The provision of the agreement at issue states, “[A]dvances shall be fully reimbursed by [plaintiff] from the Commissions paid by [defendant] ... at a rate of twenty percent ... of [plaintiff]’s portion ... of each Commission . . . until [defendant] is fully reimbursed.” The motion court properly found that the requirement that defendants be “fully reimbursed” was qualified by the clause “from the Commissions ... at a rate of twenty percent ... of [plaint
Court of Appeals of Texas · 2018-03-27 · Published · cited 0× · 546 S.W.3d 893
Michael Massengale, Justice This is a lawsuit over a bar fight. The parties' brawl continues in the form of an interlocutory appeal authorized by the Texas Citizens Participation Act. After the plaintiff, Gary Baker, pleaded statutory nuisance claims, the owners of the premises moved to dismiss those claims on the theory that they were based on, related to, or in response to their exercise of the "right of association."
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016-02-24 · Published · cited 32× · 816 F.3d 1; 76 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 34; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3229; 62 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 65; 2016 WL 732207
KAYATTA, Circuit Judge. We hold in this case that a claim to payment that 50 Thomas Patton Drive, LLC (“Patton Drive”) holds against Steven Fustolo (“Fustolo”) “is not contingent as to liability or the subject of a bona fide dispute as to liability or amount” within the meaning of section 303(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 303(b)(1). We therefore affirm the decision o
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2016-09-28 · Published · cited 0× · 201 So. 3d 962; 16 La.App. 3 Cir. 286; 2016 La. App. LEXIS 1781
EZELL, Judge. liThe Plaintiffs, Garage Solutions, LLC and Monkey Bars Shelving of Greater Baton Rouge, LLC appeal a trial court judgment which dismissed their claims against the Defendant, Monty J. Person, for reimbursement of training expenses. Mr. Person signed two contracts agreeing that he would reimburse the plaintiffs for training at two locations if he failed to remain employed for one year. The plaintiffs claim that
Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2023-12-19 · Published · cited 1× · 348 Conn. 350
*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr