Cases

THACKER, Circuit Judge: This appeal arises from the dismissal of three consumer actions based on Virginia state law claims. The actions focus on a series of misrepresentations made by Hyundai Motor America ("Hyundai") regarding the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") estimated fuel economy for the 2011, 2012, and 2013 models of the Hyundai Elantra. A Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") consolidated dozens of si

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2022 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1582 JIHAD ADBUL-MUMIT; MATTHEW ABEDI; MONICA ADAIR SARGENT; MARK AGEE; ALIZ AGOSTON; YVONNE ALSTON; DAN AMATRUDA; KRISTY AMBROSE; KIMBERLEY AMICK; WANDA G. AMOS; CHRISTOPHER ARAUZA; CARL ARSENAULT; BROOKE ASHER; MICHELLE ATKINS; RAYMOND O. ATKINS; MATTHEW ATWELL; DAVID AUB; SOHA AYYASH; ASIF AZIZ; SUSAN BAILEY; KAREN BAKER; HAB BA

ACCEPTED 04-15-00469-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 9/3

In evaluating the plausibility of plaintiff's pleading, the court must treat all "non-conclusory factual allegations ... as true, even if seemingly incredible." Ocasio-Hernandez v. Fortuno-Burset , 640 F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 2011). While a "paucity of direct evidence is not fatal in the plausibility inquiry", the court may infer a lack of

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER (Fed.R.Civ.P. 56) BRUCE S. JENKINS, Senior District Judge. On June 10, 2010, plaintiff Cincinnati Insurance Company (“Cincinnati”) commenced this action seeking a declaratory judgment that Cincinnati has no duty to defend or indemnify AMSCO under the terms of its commercial general liability insurance policies and commercial umbrella liability policies with r

(2008) PAPYRUS TECHNOLOGY CORP., Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE, INC., Defendant. No. 04 CV 00625(JMB). United States District Court, S.D. New York. September 11, 2008. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JUDITH M. BARZILAY, District Judge[*]. I. Background .................................................................

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES 0. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MLATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification of a Collective Action Under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and Certification of a Class Action Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(3) and Memorandum in Support, filed September 30, 2014 (Doc. 33) (“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on November 21, 2014. The prim

USCA11 Case: 23-10385 Document: 112-1 Date Filed: 03/12/2025 Page: 1 of 169 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-10385 ____________________ JANUARY LITTLEJOHN, JEFFREY LITTL

ACCEPTED 12-14-00220-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 9/4/2015 3:01:53 PM

ACCEPTED 03-14-00510-CV 4243321 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

OPINION AND ORDER RAKOFF, District Judge. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint for failure to show causation is denied; their motion to exclude the opinions of Wesley Dennis, M.D. is granted in part and denied in part; and their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to individual defendant Michnal for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied.