Cases

OPINION HILLMAN, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court by way of motion [Doc. No. 10] for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) by Defendants Beam Global Spirits and Wine LLC 1 and Jim Beam Brands Co. (hereinafter, “the Beam Defendants”) seeking the dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiffs’ claim for unjust enrichment as set forth

FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur in the result, but for different reasons. Those reasons avoid undermining our jurisprudence regarding the curing of premature appeals, do not declare that the district court erred in not doing what no party asked it to do,1 and do not unnecessarily convert a direct appeal into a petition for mandamus. I hasten to add, however, th

OPINION SMITH, Senior Judge. The liberty and prosperity that Americans have enjoyed during much of our history has been guaranteed by the brave members of the United States’ armed forces. The military and its members have again and again put themselves in mortal danger so that America and Americans could be safe and free. This has been our blessing since the dawn of our Republic in 1776. It is

OPINION FIRESTONE, Judge. This case arises from a solicitation issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”) for a contract to operate three DLA material *588distribution depots. The solicitation was part of a two-step process aimed at determining whether the services described in the solicitation could be performed more economically by a private

Opinion McConnell, p. j.— INTRODUCTION This action arises from representations made on the JAMS, Inc. (JAMS), Web site regarding the background of the Honorable Sheila Prell Sonenshine (Retired), and JAMS’s operations in offering alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services. Kevin J. Kinsella alleges he relied upon certain repres

415 F.2d 574 Lawrence R. KINSELLA, Stanley Dilley and Duane L. Ault, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.Ralph LEONARD and Quinten Kessler, Defendants-Appellants. No. 243-68. No. 244-68. United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit. August 14, 1969. Rehearing Denied September 25, 1969.

652 F.3d 726 (2011) Milton LUSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee. No. 09-4066. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued November 9, 2010. Decided July 19, 2011. *728 Christopher C. Cooper, Ph. D. (argued), Attorney, Merrillville, IN, for Plaintiff-Ap

OPINION Thomas P. Griesa, U.S. District Judge In this employment discrimination action, the parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment and partial summary judgment on plaintiffs claims under *731the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (2012), and under the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”), N.Y. City Admin.

OPINION & ORDER KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge. Pro se Plaintiff Sheniece Clark (“Plaintiff’ or “Clark”) brings this Action against Defendant Jewish Childcare Association, Inc. (“JCCA” or “Defendant”), alleging that Defendant engaged in discriminatory practices under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. (the “ADA”). Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion For S

13 F.Supp.2d 1085 (1998) Raymond T. KARSIAN, et al., individually, and for and on behalf of themselves and all other annuity holders similarly situated, and their heirs, assigns, subrogees, and representatives, Plaintiffs, v. INTER-REGIONAL FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., n/k/a Interra Financial Incorporated and Dain Bosworth, Incorporated, Defendants. No. CIV.A. 93-D-1806. United States District Court, D. Colo

Mercure, J.P. Cross appeals from an order of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered December 13, 2004 which, inter alia, partially denied plaintiffs motion to modify the child support provisions of the parties’ separation agreement. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Maney, J.), entered August 4, 2005, which, inter alia, dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Fa

The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries may not be cited or relied upon as they are not the official language of the division. Any discrepancy between the language in the summary and in the opinion should be resolved in favor of the language in the opinion.

The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries may not be cited or relied upon as they are not the official language of the division. Any discrepancy between the language in the summary and in the opinion should be resolved in favor of the language in the opinion.

OPINION AND ORDER KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge: Plaintiff Gene Lewis filed the instant Complaint against Defendants Blackman Plumbing Supply L.L.C.; Orange County Plumbing Group, L.L.C.; Ridgewood Corp.; and Jules M. Weinstein, alleging multiple counts under federal and state law arising out of Plaintiffs employment relationship with Defendants. Before the Court is Defendants Blackman Plumbing Su

DYK, Circuit Judge, dissenting. In endorsing a facial challenge to a memorandum, and in holding that the memorandum must be assumed to dictate racial and gender discrimination without a factual hearing, the majority acts contrary to Supreme Court precedent and our own decision in Baker v. United States, 127 F.3d 1081 (Fed.Cir.1997). The majority’s approach is unsupported by any decision of the Supreme

OPINION {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Clint Thomas, appeals from a Jefferson County Common Pleas Court judgment overruling his motion to suppress drugs found on his person after a traffic stop. This appeal follows appellant's conviction on charges of possession of drugs, trafficking in drugs, and resisting arrest after he entered a no contest plea to the charges. {¶ 2} On March 18, 2007, Ohio S

198 F.3d 633 (7th Cir. 1999) Chris Boulahanis, Edward C. Vanduyne, Jamie R. Burton, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Board of Regents, a body politic and corporate, Illinois State University, Thomas Wallace, et al.,Defendants-Appellees. No. 99-1561 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Argued October 27, 1999Decided December 3, 1999

SCHALL, Circuit Judge. The American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1482, William J. Gately, and Michelle Jo Evans (collectively, “Appellants”) appeal the decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims that dismissed their complaint for lack of standing. Am. Fed’n Gov’t Employees, AFL-CIO v. United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 586 (2000) (“AFGE”). The

891 F.Supp. 695 (1995) GREGORY M., BY AND THROUGH his parents and next friends, ERNEST M. and Suzanne M., Plaintiffs, v. The STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the STATE OF CONNECTICUT; Shelton Board of Education; Gerald Tirozzi, in his official capacity as Commissioner of Education, State of Connecticut; Leon Sylvester, in his official capacity as Superintendent of Schools, Shelton, Connecticut; and Mary Lou Cook, in her official capacity as Director o

333 F.3d 1345 Robert W. CLARY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 02-5133. United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. June 24, 2003. William E. Cassara, of Evans, GA, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Patrick T. Murphy, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litiga