Cases

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 21-2028 DIANNE M. DONALDSON and DALE A. DONALDSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON and ETHICON, INC., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

The controversy here is between E.W. Engle and Celia Poinsett, opposing interpleaders, each claiming title to certain shares of stock of a corporation and accrued dividends thereon, under the will of John Joseph Grier, deceased, and held by George S. Hovey as trustee under said will. It was agreed that the shares in controversy have a value in excess of $14,600. The will of Mr. Grier was executed on November 9, 1916, and his death occurred on July 19, 1919. At his death the testator owned all

Bell, Presiding Justice. (After stating the foregoing facts.) Mrs. Williams instituted an action against Thomas Grier and Columbia Baking Company, to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by negligence of the defendants. Each defendant filed a general tod special demurrer to the petition, which demurrers were overruled by the trial court. The Court of Appeals held that the petition did

1. Where a municipal ordinance prohibiting the parking of any automobile or other vehicle upon any paved street or sidewalk "overnight" was violated by the parking of a motor-truck on a paved street at or near an intersection of streets overnight, the fact that the truck was allowed to remain during a portion of the following day in the same place where it had been so illegally parked during the nighttime would not constitute a continuing or a new violation of such ordinance, since it merely

Elliott, C. J. — The appellee was served with summons in an ordinary civil action. He pleaded in abatement these facts: That he then was and had been for more than eighteen years a citizen and resident of the State of Kentucky; that during the April term of the Montgomery Circuit Court he left his home in the State of Kentucky for the sole purpose of defending an action pending against him in that court, and testifying as a witn

Matthews, Justice. These two libels were consolidated in the district court, and dismissed on the hearing. A decree for the libel-ants was prayed for on. two grounds: First, for a loss of the barges by the fault of the propeller in towing the barges on a voyage from Buffalo to Saginaw. Second, in case no fault in towing was proven, then for a proportion of the value of the barges lost, upon the principles of a g

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge: The plaintiff, Anthony Pratt, a prisoner currently incarcerated in the Watertown Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking damages and injunctive relief for claims arising from his alleged exposure to asbestos while being held in the Anna M. Koss Center (“AMKC”) on Rikers Island. The plaintiff

BATTAGLIA, J. This case presents us with questions regarding the use of certain technology about which we have not had occasion to opine before, in the context of the Fourth Amendment.1 The primary issue before us is whether the use by Baltimore City police of a Taser2 that fired two metal darts into the back of David Reid, the Appellant, affected a Terry

171 Cal.App.4th 805 (2009) THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PORFIRIO ALBERT MEDINA, Defendant and Appellant. No. A120517. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division One. February 25, 2009. As modified March 10, 2009. CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION[*] *810 Rudy

9 A.3d 123 (2010) 196 Md. App. 254 Bryan SIVELLS v. STATE of Maryland. No. 1480, Sept. Term, 2009. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. December 2, 2010. *127 Vidya A. Mirmira (Williams & Connolley LLP, Washington DC, Paul B. DeWolfe, Public Defender, Baltimore, MD), on the brief, for appellant. <

627 S.E.2d 382 (2006) 277 Ga. App. 621 NORMAN v. JONES LANG LASALLE AMERICAS, INC. Lend Lease Real Estate Investments, Inc. v. Norman. Nos. A05A2097, A05A2218. Court of Appeals of Georgia. February 15, 2006. *384 Cash, Kurgler & Fredericks, Andrew B. Cash, Alwyn R. Fredericks, Atlanta, for

612 F.Supp.2d 1026 (2009) William Eugene LEVENTHAL, Plaintiff, v. Sgt. Daniel SCHAFFER, Lt. Jeff Ritzman, and Unknown Employees in the Iowa State Patrol, Possibly Additionally Involved, Defendants. No. C 07-4059-MWB. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division. March 24, 2009. *1029 William Eugene Leventhal, El Segu

OPINION AND ORDER SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Although this case is included in the coordinated In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation proceedings, it arises from a very different set of allegations. Plaintiffs’ allegations are set forth at length in my Opinion of June 8, 2004.1 Familiarity with that Opinion is assu

754 A.2d 254 (1999) Vivian H. FIKE and Robert Wilson, Plaintiffs, v. Thomas L. RUGER, Eris Marie Scott, as Administratrix of the Estate of Virgil Scott, Jr., Descomp, Inc., Data Controls North, Inc., and Del-Chapel Associates, Defendants. C.A. No. 16791. Court of Chancery of Delaware, New Castle County. Submitted: August 19, 1999. Decided: November 19, 1999.

SECOND AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, a group of investors, allege that Defendants, comprising a number of companies and the investment bank Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. (“CSFBC”), engaged in a concerted scheme to defraud the market by publishing artificially deflated revenue projections for the companies in which Plaint

556 S.W.2d 589 (1977) George Leopold GUTHRIE, Appellant, v. Valerie Mae (Guthrie) RAY, Appellee. No. 19258. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Dallas. September 15, 1977. Herbert H. Landau, Dallas, for appellant. Grier H. Raggio, Raggio & Raggio, Inc., Dallas, for appellee. GUITTARD, Chief Justice. This suit was brought by the father of a five

317 S.E.2d 391 (1984) STATE of North Carolina v. James Harold CAMPBELL. No. 40A84. Supreme Court of North Carolina. July 6, 1984. Rufus L. Edmisten, Atty. Gen. by James Peeler Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raleigh, for the State. Robert L. Gunn, Pittsboro, for defendant-appellant. MITCHELL, Justice. The sole issue raised on this appeal is whether the

49 F.Supp.2d 467 (1999) David KOCAN and Maryanne C. Kocan, Plaintiffs, v. ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC., Arkansas Best Corporation, WorldWay Corporation, and Carolina Freight Carriers Corporation, Defendants. Richard E.F. Valitutto and R. Julene Valitutto, Plaintiffs, v. ABF Freight System, Inc., Arkansas Best Corporation, Worldway Corporation, and Carolina Freight Carriers Corporation, Defendants. Kenneth L. Long, Plaintiff, v.

Beasley, Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. 1. The majority has decided this case upon an issue not within the contemplation of the parties or the trial court, which in any case should not have been decided as a matter of law and the issues upon which a determination was made below were properly for a jury. *463

961 F.Supp. 1524 (1997) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Ana B. RUIZ, Defendant. No. 96-CR-227 S. United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division. April 3, 1997. *1525 Leshia M. Lee-Dixon, Assistant United States Attorney, District of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiff. Gregory Brent Smith, Salt Lake Ci