Cases

948 N.E.2d 1108 (2011) 409 Ill. App. 3d 106 350 Ill. Dec. 601 Jerrold GOLDBERG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eleanor BROOKS, Karen Bradley, and Evanston/Skokie School District 65, Defendants-Appellees. No. 1-09-2578. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Third Division. April 20, 2011. *

Markman, C.J. (for affirmance). **156 *329 At issue is whether the rebuttable presumption of undue influence is applicable when the decedent's attorney breaches Michigan Rule of Professional Co

281 F.Supp.2d 476 (2003) Elaine OLSON, Plaintiff, v. Brian J. WING, as Commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance of the New York State Department of Family Assistance, Antonia C. Novello, M.D., as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, and Verna Eggleston, as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Social Services, Defendants. No. 02 CV 5873 NG (CLP). U

SUMMARY ORDER THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. At a stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,

74 Cal.Rptr.3d 81 (2008) 42 Cal.4th 1142 179 P.3d 882 Carl OLSON et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Appellant. No. S143999. Supreme Court of California. February 28, 2008. *82 Law Office of Thomas K. Bourke, Thomas K. Bourke,

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 25-1395 THOMAS R. NARRIGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. DEBORAH B. GOLDBERG, in her official capacity as Treasurer and Receiver General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Defendant, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTR

482 S.E.2d 176 (1996) 198 W.Va. 559 GO-MART, INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. Penny K. OLSON, Defendant Below, Appellee. Penny K. OLSON, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. GO-MART, INC., Defendant Below, Appellee, Robertson-Hinkle, Inc., aka Robertson and Hinkle, Inc. and Robertson & Hinkle, Inc., Defendant Below, Appellant. No. 23306. Supreme Court of Appeals

MEMORANDUM DECISION ROBERT E. GROSSMAN, Bankruptcy Judge. Before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment by the Plaintiff, Mary Rocco (“Plaintiff”), and the Debtor-Defendant (“Debtor”), Jeffrey L. Goldberg, in this adversary proceeding seeking a determination of dischargeability pursuant to section 523(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Plaintiff and the Debtor each recognize that the c

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LYDIA OLSON; MIGUEL PEREZ; No. 21-55757 POSTMATES, INC., (Successor Postmates LLC); UBER D.C. No. TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 2:19-cv-10956- Plaintiffs-Appellants, DMG-RAO v. OPINION STATE OF CALIFORNIA; ROB BONTA, in his capacity as Attorney General of the State of California,

628 N.W.2d 142 (2001) Judith M. OLSON, Petitioner, Appellant, v. SYNERGISTIC TECHNOLOGIES BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Respondents. Nos. C0-99-769, C8-99-776. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 28, 2001. *145 Lawrence P. Schaefer, Lisa C. Stratton, Sprenger & Lang, PLLC, Minneapolis, Paul C. Sprenger, Michael Lieder, Sprenge

643 N.W.2d 338 (2002) TWINCO ROMAX AUTOMOTIVE WAREHOUSE, INC., Appellant, v. OLSON GENERAL CONTRACTORS, INC., Five Star Welding and Fabricating, Inc., Lucas Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Respondent. No. C2-01-1763. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. May 7, 2002. *339 Paul V. Esposito, pro hac vice, Clausen Miller, P.C., Chicago, IL

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

PAUL A. BONIN, Judge. |,The administratrix of the succession of Queen Esther Smith Bonner, the client, on December 30, 2005, filed a legal malpractice suit against her former attorney and her insurers.1 The former attorney, Jacqueline Goldberg, filed a third party demand against another attorney, Roderick Morris.2 Mr. Morris, it seems, must have filed an exception of

787 F.Supp.2d 1013 (2011) Neil B. GOLDBERG, Plaintiff, v. James CAMERON, Gale Ann Hurd, et al., Defendants. No. C-05-03534 RMW. United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division. April 4, 2011. *1016 Donald Charles Schwartz, Law Offices Of Donald C. Schwartz, Aptos, CA, for Plaintiff. Charles Nathan Shephard

OPINION NETTESHEIM, Judge. This case comes before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Argument has been held. FACTS Marian L. Olson (“plaintiff”) appeals a decision of the Director of the Department of Energy (the “DOE”) denying her severance pay under the Federal Employee’s Salary Act of 1965, 5 U.S.C. § 5595 (1982) (the “FESA”), and a companion regula

760 N.W.2d 116 (2009) 2009 ND 16 Melanie HENDRICKSON, Appellant v. Carol K. OLSON, Director North Dakota Department of Human Services, Appellee. No. 20080164. Supreme Court of North Dakota. February 3, 2009. *117 Edwin W.F. Dyer III, Dyer & Summers, P.C., Bismarck, N.D., for appellant. Jean R. M

Alvin W. Thompson, United States District Judge James Berman, the Chapter 7 Trustee (the "Trustee") for the substantively consolidated bankruptcy estate of Michael S. Goldberg, LLC and Michael S. Goldberg (collectively, the "Debtors"), has filed a motion seeking an order compelling third-parties Cummings & Lockwood LLC ("C & L"), Charter Oak Law, P.C., as successor to Levy and Droney PC ("Charter Oak"), and CohnReznick LLP

Opinion by Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE GOLDBERG.

JUSTICE GOLDBERG delivered the opinion of the court: Summary judgment was entered in favor of the Village of Oak Lawn (defendant) and against Charles E. Olson (plaintiff), a minor who appears by Janet E. Olson, his mother and next friend. Plaintiff has appealed. Plaintiff was seriously injured on February 24, 1977, by a fall while

THISSEN, Justice. *598In this case, we address the constitutionality of a provision of Minnesota's vehicle forfeiture statute found in Minn. Stat. § 169A.63 (2018). Specifically, we are asked to determine whether Minn. Stat. § 169A.63, subd. 9(d) -which sets forth the procedural requirements for judicial hearings related to vehicle forfeiture f