Cases

ORDER PER CURIAM: AND NOW, this 25th day of May, 1999, the order of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED based upon the opinion of the Superior Court. See V.B.T. v. Family Services of Western Pa., 705 A.2d 1325 (Pa.Super.1998) (Beck, J.).

705 A.2d 1325 (1998) V.B.T. and C.E.T., His Wife, In Their Own Right and on Behalf of N.T. v. FAMILY SERVICES OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA and James Pedetella and Linda Pedetella (Two Cases). Appeal of James PEDETELLA and Linda Pedetella (now known as Linda Wagner) (at 1797). Appeal of FAMILY SERVICES OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA (at 402). Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Argued February 27, 1997.

ORDER PER CURIAM: AND NOW, this 25th day of May, 1999, the order of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED based upon the opinion of the Superior Court. See V.B.T. v. Family Services of Western Pa., 705 A.2d 1325 (Pa.Super.1998) (Beck, J.).

PER CURIAM: Plaintiffs-Appellants appeal from the district court’s order of dismissal and from the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ motion to vacate, alter, or amend the order of dismissal. Because the district court erred in abstaining in this case, we are inclined to vacate and remand. But, because uncertainty exists about whether a cause of action exists under state l

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A12-1944 Court of Appeals Anderson, J. Concurring, Stras, J. Seagate Technology, LLC, Respondent, vs. Filed: October 8, 2014

728 A.2d 953 (1999) V.B.T. and C.E.T., His Wife in Their Own Right and on Behalf of N.T., Appellants, v. FAMILY SERVICES OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA and James Pedetella and Linda Pedetella, Appellees. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued March 8, 1999. Decided May 25, 1999. John D. Ceraso, Arnold, Irving M. Green, Kensington, for V.B.T., C.E.T., & N.T. Timot

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of *1024Personal Jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 21) The motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition. Background This action arises out of an intellectual property dispute.

108 P.3d 996 (2005) 141 Idaho 296 William BLAHD and Elizabeth Blahd, husband and wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RICHARD B. SMITH, INC., an Idaho Corporation, now doing business as Windermere Real Estate; Richard B. Smith, d/b/a The Windemere Company; Franklin B. Smith, Jr., Georgene M. Smith, Orin R. Givens and Genevieve Givens, d/b/a North Mountain Development Company; Robert P. Jones, d/b/A Robert P. Jones Company; Dean

PUBLISH IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ------------------------------------------- ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 09/16/99

Walter L. STONE, individually, and as Natural Guardian of S.P.S., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Georgene WALL, Gina Wall Masterson, Brock Green, Defendants-Appellees. No. 96-4884. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Chief Justice JEFFERSON, dissenting in part. At the time this case was submitted to the jury, James Hinton1 had neither re-*506eeived nor been promised any payments to settle his claims. Because the Court nevertheless concludes that Central Texas’ payments to the bankruptcy court’s registry rendered it a “settling person,” I

OPINION STAUBER, Judge. In this discretionary appeal, appellant challenges a district court order vacating in part a trade-secrets arbitration award and ordering a rehearing before a new arbitrator. Appellant argues that the district court erred by (1) determining that the arbitrator exceeded his authority by precluding respondents from defending particular claims as a sanction for respondents’ fabricatio

OPINION ROBERT HOLMES BELL, District Judge. This is an action for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq., the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.903, and Michigan common law. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss, (Dkt. No. 9), under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction. Plaintiff h

DONALD L. CORBIN, Justice. 11 Appellants Yanmar Co., Ltd., d/b/a Yanmar Diesel Engine Co., Ltd. (Yanmar Japan), and Yanmar America Corporation appeal the order of the Jefferson County Circuit Court awarding $2.5 million to Ap-pellee Wanda H. Slater. On appeal, Yan-mar Japan argues at the outset that the order should be reversed and dismissed where the circuit court lacked personal jurisd

MEMORANDUM DECISION ROBERT D. MARTIN, Bankruptcy Judge. This unusual case asks a bankruptcy court to determine whether an assault (possibly a sexual assault or rape) and a wrongful death (possibly a murder) were the willful and intentional acts of the debt- or, and, whether claims arising from the injuries are dischargeable in the debtor’s bankruptcy. Because no liability for the alleged acts has yet been

Affirmed and Opinion Filed March 22, 2023 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00306-CV TYVON C. SMITH AND TAMARA J. SMITH, Appellants V. YELLOWFIN LOAN SERVICING CORP., AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO HOMETRUST MORTGAGE COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the C

HAMILTON, Circuit Judge. This appeal pivots on the procedural requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 for seeking sanctions against a party and its attorney for asserting a frivolous claim or defense. Rule 11(c)(2) requires a party seeking Rule 11 sanctions *882first to serve a proposed motion on the opposing party and to give that party at least 21 days to

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH JR., District Judge. Plaintiffs are landline telephone customers of the defendants. Their claims arise out of and relate to charges on their telephone bills which they allege they were billed for, and paid for, products or services from third parties that they did not order or authorize. Specifically, they allege that they incurred unauthorized prepaid ser

CHAPMAN, Circuit Judge: The appellants, Barbara Blum, Ann Sa-mani and Gene Locks were named as three of the five trustees under the Daikon Shield Claimants’ Trust (“Trust”) which was created as a part of the Plan of Reorganization (“Plan”) of A.H. Robins (“Robins”) under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Plan also created a Claims Resolution Facility (“CRF”) to handle the settlement of claims against Robins resulting f

JUSTICE GREEN delivered the opinion of the court: This case concerns the question of whether the Adjutant General of the State, in his capacity as head of the Military and Naval Department (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 129, par. 220.22(d)), could reorganize the department by abolishing the position of Photographer II pursuant to the Personnel Code (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, c