Cases

256 F.Supp.2d 505 (2003) HHC ASSOCIATES, Plaintiff, v. ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant. No. 202CV804. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. April 17, 2003. *506 Jeffrey F. Brooke, Esquire, Timothy M. Richardson, Esquire, John R. Braley, IV, Esquire, Huff, Poole & Mahoney PC, Virginia Beach, VA

WATERMAN, Justice. In this appeal, we must decide whether the district court erred by rejecting an insurance appraisal award for hail damage to roofing shingles. This case presents a question of first impression in Iowa that has divided the courts of other jurisdictions: whether the appraisers may determine the cause of the loss. The insured townhome association was

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 16–0121 Filed June 1, 2018 WALNUT CREEK TOWNHOME ASSOCIATION, Appellant, vs. DEPOSITORS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. On review from the Iowa Court of Appeals. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Robert B. Hanson, Judge. Property insurer seeks further review of court of appeals decision that reversed district court judgment

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER MATSUMOTO, District Judge. Plaintiff Halina Wojcik (“Plaintiff’) is a dietician who was formerly employed by defendant New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (“HHC”) at the Bellevue Hospital Center (“Bellevue”) Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (“WIC Program”). (See generally ECF. No. 18, Second Amended Complaint (“Am.

*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND THE PACIFIC REPORTER *** Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAP-XX-XXXXXXX 30-MAY-2024 07:51 AM

By Judge Michael P. McWeeny This matter came before the Court on the parties’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. The Court heard argument on October 16,2009. At the conclusion of oral argument, the Court took this matter under advisement. The Court has fully considered the briefs submitted as well as the oral arguments of both parties and, for the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ Mot

*458 MEMORANDUM PRATTER, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION In this case of alleged copyright infringement, the Defendants, moving for summary judgment, have asked the Court to determine that as a matter of law, Defendant Spectrum Health Services, Inc. (“Spectrum”), had an implied license to use, for its construction the New

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT TQM MATSUDA, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS A DIRECTOR AND/OR OFFICER OF HAWAII HEALTH CONNECTOR’S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FILED OCTOBER 28, 2016 AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS CLIFF ALAKAI AND ' JEFFREY KISSEL’S PRE-AN-SWER MOTION TO DISMISS FILED ON OCTOBER 28, 2016 Alan C. Kay, Sr., United States .District Judge For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendant Tom Matsuda, Ind

OPINION OF THE COURT Abdus-Salaam, J. The issue before us is whether, on a motion for summary judgment disposing of an employee’s disability discrimination claims under the New York City Human Rights Law (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-107) and the New York State Human Rights Law (see Executive Law § 296), an employer’s failure to consider the reasonableness of a proposed accommo

ORDER JAMES G. CARR, Senior District Judge. This is a suit by a employee ERISA welfare plan beneficiary and his dependent against the plan. Plaintiffs Jeffrey J. Christoff and K.C., his dependant, seek reversal of a decision by the Plan Administrator 1 refusing to: 1) provide neuropsychological testing of; and 2) continue treatment for K.C. Pending are cross-motions for summar

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JER HUDSON GP XXI LLC and ) HUDSON HOUSING TAX CREDIT ) FUND XXI LP, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2021-0478-MTZ ) DLE INVESTORS, LP, )

554 F.3d 870 (2009) Dale GROSS; James Bagwill; Laveta Barker; Billy Barnes; Jim Bennett; Roy Bergeron; Kenneth Bevenue; Cody Calico; Helen Capehart; Alma Cheshewalla; Raymond Cody; O W Collins; Chris Couch; Samuel Dobson; Gina Doss; Jason Drake; Allen Farrier; Kelly Fetzer; Eugene Fitzpatrick; Billy Gambling; Eros Garcia; Christopher Green; Wade Green; Mikey Grider; James Grisham; Tim Hansen; Darrin Hargis; Anthony Hayes; Paul Henry; Mark Hicks; Rhonda H

297 S.W.3d 878 (2009) Guy SNODGRASS, Appellant, v. Lisa SNODGRASS, Appellee. No. 2007-CA-001974-MR. Court of Appeals of Kentucky. October 16, 2009. *880 Jonathan S. Ricketts, Louisville, KY, for appellant. Melinda A. Murphy, Richmond, KY, for appellee. Before ACREE, CLAYTON and KELLER, Judges. OPI

290 S.W.3d 886 (2009) STATE FARM LLOYDS, Petitioner, v. Becky Ann JOHNSON, Respondent. No. 06-1071. Supreme Court of Texas. Argued January 15, 2008. Decided July 3, 2009. Rehearing Denied August 28, 2009. *887 John Christopher Nickelson, Joseph W. Spence, Julia Ann Dobbins, Michael W. Huddleston,

2006 OK 90 DETRA L. BRUNER, as next of kin of LEOLA BRUNER (DEPP), deceased, Appellee, v. TIMBERLANE MANOR LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, and its successor in interest, TIMBERLANE MANOR LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, d/b/a GRACE LIVING CENTER, Appellants. No. 103028 Supreme Court of Oklahoma December 12, 2006 David K. McPhail, Steve J. Johnson, Foliart, Huff, Ottaway & Bottom

OPINION1 BRENDAN LINEHAN SHANNON, Bankruptcy Judge. Before the Court is a motion for summary judgment on claims arising under the WARN Act.2 Casimir Czyzewski, Melvin L. Myers, Jeffrey Oehlers, Arthur E. Perigard, and Daniel C. Richards, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated (collectively, the “Class Plaintiffs”) initiated this adv

396 F.Supp.2d 1262 (2005) HEALTH CARE AND RETIREMENT CORPORATION OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. HEARTLAND HOME CARE, INC., Defendant. Heartland Home Care, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Heartland Home Care, Inc. a/k/a HCR-ManorCare, Defendant. Nos. Civ.A.03-2663-KHV, Civ.A.04-4126-KHV. United States District Court, D. Kansas. November 2, 2005.

923 F.Supp. 1424 (1996) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Michael D. HEALY, Scott F. Harder and Warren G. Craig, Jr., Defendants. Michael D. HEALY, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. COUNTRY HILL BANK n/k/a Premier Bank, Third-Party Defendant. Civil Action No. 95-2099-GTV. United States District Court, D. Kansas. April 25, 1996.

(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

JAMES O. BROWNING, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 13, 2017 (Doc. 32)("Health Connection's Motion"); and (ii) the Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, filed June 1, 2017 (Doc. 34)("Defendants' Motion"). The Court held a hearing on January 22, 2018. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Administrative Procedur