Cases

Orders vacating notices for examination before trial unanimously affirmed, without costs, but without prejudice to an application by defendant to the trial court when the cases are actually reached for trial for such examinations during the course of the trial as justice may require pursuant to the provisions of section 293 of the Civil Practice Act. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Bastow, JJ.

Per Curiam. It is entirely apparent to this court that the defendant, a competitor of plaintiff, has adopted its corporate name with a view of profiting from the long-established and successful business of plaintiff. No person of the name of “ Cobbs ” is connected with the defendant corporation and no excuse is offered for the adoption of such name, and the use of the name “ Cobbs ” by the defendant will, in our opinion, result

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on March '4, 1980, conditionally granting plaintiffs’ motion to strike the answer herein, unanimously modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with costs to appellants, so as to add the further condition that defendant pay costs of $500 to plaintiffs within 20 days after service of a copy of this court’s order with notice of entry thereof. Upon defendant’s failure to comply with the conditions i

This case comes before us on a petition for certiorari filed by Philip Wolfe, Haberdasher (employer) to review a final decree issued by the Appellate Division of the Workers' Compensation Court (Appellate Division). The Appellate Division affirmed the trial judge's decision to grant certain petitions on behalf of the claimant, Stuart Perlman (Perlman), for workers' compensation benefits and for reimbursement of medical expenses. We granted the petition for the issuance of the writ and

DECISION ON TRUSTEE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HOWARD SCHWARTZBERG, Bankruptcy Judge. The disposition of funds by an auctioneer, whose corporation was thrown into bankruptcy by three estates whose funds were squandered, has led to litigation between the trustee in bankruptcy of the corporate auctioneer and various entities for whom the auctioneer conducted sales. In the two cases which are the subject

No opinion. Concur — Peck, ¡P. J., Botein, Rabin, Cox and Bergan, JJ.

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge GARLAND. GARLAND, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff Paul Burke, a former British soldier, was severely wounded in an ambush in Afghanistan, where he was working for a private security contractor. Burke sued the transport company that furnished the helicopter he flew in on and the construction company that contracted wi

Wait, J. This was an action for libel. The declaration alleged that the plaintiff had a large mercantile trade and up to about December 10, 1925, had enjoyed good financial reputation, was able to procure a fair amount of credit and had a good volume of business at Taunton, Massachusetts; that about December 10,1925, the defendant, whose business it is to disseminate information to subscribers with some of whom the plaintiff did

102 F.Supp.2d 44 (2000) Mary Claire BALL, Thomas Ames Ball, Plaintiffs, v. WAL-MART, INC., Defendant. No. Civ.A. 98-11887-RBC.[1] United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 23, 2000. *45 *46 Janice O. Fahey, Craig & Macauley, P.C., Boston, MA, for defendants. Wi

Martin, J. In this equity action the plaintiff seeks an injunction restraining the defendants from using the word “ Niles ” because of its similarity to the plaintiff’s trade name “ Miles.” The plaintiff, Miles Shoes of New York, Inc., owns and operates a chain of more than fifty retail shoe Stores in the States of New York and New Jersey; twelve of these stores are in the borough of Manhattan and five in the

353 Mass. 112 (1967) 228 N.E.2d 700 MARY M. PERRY vs. E. ANTHONY & SONS, INCORPORATED. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Bristol. May 3, 1967. July 6, 1967. Present: WILKINS, C.J., SPALDING, KIRK, SPIEGEL, & REARDON, JJ. Christopher H. Worthington for the plaintiff. William H. Carey for the defendant

603 F.Supp. 1305 (1985) Thomas MORRELL, Plaintiff, v. FORBES, INC., Defendant. Civ. A. No. 83-1099-N. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. March 11, 1985. *1306 Leonard Rose, Falmouth, Mass., for plaintiff. John T. Williams, Victor Bass, John T. Harding, Palmer & Dodge, Boston, Mass., for defendant. <

959 F.Supp. 623 (1997) INTERNATIONAL STAR CLASS YACHT RACING ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff, v. TOMMY HILFIGER U.S.A., INC., Defendant. No. 94 Civil 2663 (RPP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 4, 1997. Ross & Hardies, New York City, by J. Joseph Bainton, John G. McCarthy, Chike I. Chukwulozie, for Plaintiff. *624</

63 F.Supp.2d 110 (1999) Victor E. SIMAS, Plaintiff, v. FIRST CITIZENS' FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Barbara Silva, and Lisa Grace, Defendants. Civil Action No. 96-10073-RBC. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. August 30, 1999. *111 *112 Philip N. Beauregard, Beauregard & Burke, New Be

POSNER, Circuit Judge. The district judge granted summary judgment for the defendant, Consolidation Coal Company, in this diversity breach of contract suit brought by Central Illinois Light Company (CILCO). 285 F.Supp.2d 916 (C.D.Ill.2002). The judge’s ground was that CILCO had failed to comply with the Uniform Commercial Code’s statute of frauds (codified in Illinois as 810 ILC

MEMORANDUM & ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge Plaintiff Tracey Tooker (“Tooker”), a hat-maker, brings this suit against her former colleague Barbara Whitworth (“Whit-worth”), and Whitworth’s employee Chandra Ransamie (“Ransamie”). Tooker hired Whitworth to make hats, but their relationship deteriorated. Tooker alleges that Whitworth made defective hats, refused to return her hat blocks

19-2461 Saleh v. Sulka Trading United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM, 2019 Argued: February 24, 2020 Decided, April 30, 2020 Docket No. 19-2461 ABDUL REHMAN KARIM SALEH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

374 Mass. 528 (1978) 373 N.E.2d 215 BONNIE LEE SMITH vs. SUBURBAN RESTAURANTS, INC. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Norfolk. December 5, 1977. March 3, 1978. Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., QUIRICO, BRAUCHER, WILKINS, & LIACOS, JJ. Alexander Whiteside, II, for the plaintiff. Reginald L. Marden for the defend

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 03-1208 CENTRAL ILLINOIS LIGHT COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

11 Mass. App. Ct. 602 (1981) 417 N.E.2d 1238 RONALD M. MIHALIK vs. LAWRENCE W. DUPREY[1] & others. Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Hampden. January 12, 1981. March 25, 1981. Present: GRANT, CUTTER, & DREBEN, JJ. Maurice M. Cahillane, Jr., for the defendants. Patricia Angel Best for the plaintiff.