Cases

643 F.Supp.2d 123 (2009) ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. AW-08-1335. United States District Court, District of Columbia. August 17, 2009. *124 Edgar Neville James, Steven K. Hoffman, Darin M. Dalmat, Jeff Vockrodt, James & Hoffman, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plainti

857 P.2d 95 (1993) 317 Or. 432 Necole Eve FIELDS, Respondent on Review, v. JANTEC, INC., Respondent, and Edgar C. Brown, Petitioner on Review, and Broughton & Harrell Corporation, an Oregon corporation, Respondent. CC 16-90-06820; CA A71071; SC S39747. Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc. Argued and Submitted May 4, 1993. Reassi

526 U.S. 865 (1999) AMOCO PRODUCTION CO., on behalf of itself and THE CLASS IT REPRESENTS v. SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBE et al. No. 98-830. United States Supreme Court. Argued April 19, 1999. Decided June 7, 1999. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT *866 Kennedy, J., delivered the

Greaney, J. These cases arise under G. L. c. 151B. In each case, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD or commission) entered decisions finding the respondents liable for employment discrimination and awarded relief including damages for emotional distress. The respondents have sought judicial review of the MCAD’s decision pursuant to G. L. c. 151B, § 6, in accordance with standards set forth in G. L. c. 30A,

FLETCHER, Circuit Judge: Plus System, Inc. (“Plus”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Valley Bank of Nevada (“Valley”) on Plus’s claim that a Nevada statute violates the commerce clause of the United States Constitution. 1 Under the statute, ATM networks may not prohibit a Nevada bank from chargi

Opinion MOSK, J. Does the odor of ether and other evidence that an unlawful drug laboratory is in operation constitute exigent circumstances sufficient to justify the warrantless entry and search of a dwelling. As will appear, we conclude that such a determination must be made on a case-by-case basis and that in the case at bar the entry and search were justified. On April 7, 1981, at appro

OPINION & ORDER DENISE COTE, District Judge: Table of Contents PROCEDURAL HISTORY.453 BACKGROUND.458 *450[[Image here]] *451[[Image here]]

KATZMANN, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part: I concur in the majority’s well-reasoned determinations that personal jurisdiction in the Western District of New York does not exist over CORD and the Hospital Defendants, and that venue in the Western District is not supported for ABEM. I respectfully dissent, however, from the conclusion that transfer to anot

Report to the Senate. On motion of the parties, and a stipulation filed by the parties requesting that the facts therein agreed to be found by the court, the court adopted as its special findings of fact the stipulation with the affidavit appended thereto, and rendered a decision in accordance with its opinion in the case of Maud M. Wright and Maxine Roberts, formerly Maxine Mills v. United States, Congressional No. 17850, decided March

ACCEPTED 12-11-00303-cv TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 3/13/2015 4:46:09 PM