Cases

Rose, J. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Rumsey, J.), entered December 22, 2014 in Tompkins County, which, in an action pursuant to RPAPL article 9, among other things, partially granted defendant’s cross motion declaring that the parties formed a joint venture that was subsequently dissolved. Plaintiff and defendant purchased a six-unit apartmen

676 F.Supp.2d 780 (2009) Michael SCHULTZ, John Scala, Huub Van Roosmalen, Kip Kircher, Robert H. Wake and Louis Spanberger, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. TOMOTHERAPY INCORPORATED, Frederick A. Robertson, T. Rockwell Mackie, Stephen C. Hathaway, Paul Reckwerdt, Michael J. Cudahy, John J. McDonough, John Neis, Cary C. Nolan, Carlos A. Perez, M.D., Sam R. Leno, and Frances Taylor, Defendants.

308 F.Supp.2d 289 (2004) Alton C. SCHULTZ, Jr., Elaine B. Jackson, Gladys Criddle, and Harold Weber, Plaintiffs, v. Janet L. STONER, Defendant. No. 00 Civ. 0439(LTS)(MDF). United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 8, 2004. *290 *291 *292 Herman, He

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, with costs to *727defendant Harold R. Schultz, by reversing so much thereof as granted plaintiffs cross motion; cross motion denied; and, as so modified, affirmed.

—Peters, J. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Perradino, J.), entered February 6, 1998 in Saratoga County, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs cross motion for partial summary judgment. Plaintiff contracted with defendant Harold R. Schultz (hereinafter Schultz) to construct a warehouse and office building in the Town of Ballston, Saratoga County, for the sum of $576,835. The provisions of the

127 F.Supp.2d 443 (2001) Alton C. SCHULTZ, Jr., Elaine B. Jackson, Gladys Criddle, and Harold J. Weber, Jr., individually and on behalf of a class of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. TEXACO INC., Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc., the Retirement Plan of Texaco, Inc., the Employee Thrift Plan of Texaco, Inc., Texaco Comprehensive Medical Plan, Texaco Dental Assistance Plan, Short-Term Disability Plan of Texaco, Inc., Long-Term Disab

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-97-00142-CV Harold L. Piatt, Jr., Appellant v. Lisa Mae Schultz and Office of the Attorney Gen

Schultz v Sayada (2018 NY Slip Op 05247) Schultz v Sayada 2018 NY Slip Op 05247 Decided on July 12, 2018 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law §

358 N.W.2d 136 (1984) In re The Marriage of Gary D. SCHULTZ, Petitioner, Respondent, v. Rita S. SCHULTZ, Appellant. No. C5-84-293. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. November 20, 1984. *137 Harold R. Wingerd, St. Paul, for respondent. James G. Paulos, St. Paul, for appellant. Heard, considered, and decided by LANSING, P

487 U.S. 474 (1988) FRISBY ET AL. v. SCHULTZ ET AL. No. 87-168. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 20, 1988 Decided June 27, 1988 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT *475 Harold H. Fuhrman argued the cause and filed briefs for appellants. Steven Freder

Petition for certification denied.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment against the plaintiff in a co-employee lawsuit. Plaintiff's complaint contained three claims. Plaintiff's first claim is that he was injured and rendered totally disabled while working for Gurney Industries, Inc., on June 15, 1980. He alleged that the individual defendants, who were employees of Gurney Industries, Inc., had wantonly or recklessly failed to furnish him with a reasonably safe place to work. This is true, according to the plainti

OPINION SETO, Judge: In this inverse condemnation action, plaintiff seeks recovery, based on the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, for a taking of his properly, and asserts that the passage of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1287, in 1968, effected a taking of his property. Moreover, plaintiff contends that repeated and continuous acts by various government officials hav

GARRARD, Judge. Susan Schultz, as administratrix of the estate of Harold R. Schultz (Schultz) and Welsh Bros. Motor Service (Welsh Bros.) appeal from an adverse judgment entered upon a jury verdict awarding $85,000 to Ray Valle. Valle's complaint arose out of an accident involving Valle's motorcycle ' and a tractor-trailer operated by Harold Schultz for his employer, Welsh Bros.1

DOWD, Judge. This appeal is from the trial court’s summary judgment upon a cross-claim, designated as final and appealable pursuant to Rule 81.06. Appellant and respondent are co-defendants in a negligence action brought by the Schultzes arising from an automobile accident on April 24,1976. Respondent was the driver of a vehicle which the Schultzes claim collided with the rear of a vehicle driven by their de

Opinion by Judge Blatt, Dorothy D. Schultz (petitioner) appeals here an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County dismissing her appeal from a six month revocation of her driver’s license by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Department). On July 24, 1978, the petitioner was convicted for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, Section 3731(a)(1) of

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 287 Syllabus by the Court Where all matters were for determination by the trial court but were submitted to a jury, the jury verdict must be advisory only and the trial court must make its own findings independent of those of the jury. OPINION Respondent Alfred

OPINION EDWARD WEINFELD, District Judge. Plaintiffs seek reconsideration pursuant to 28 U.S.C., section 636(b)(1)(A),1 of an order of Magistrate Kent Sinclair dated *142May 22, 1980 denying their motion to compel the production by the defendant Solomon Sperling of certain accountants’ work papers. For the reasons stated

EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge. The Town of Brookfield, Wisconsin, has an ordinance curtailing picketing in residential areas. Relying on the assurance of the Town’s counsel that this ordinance prohibits only picketing “directed at a single residence”, the Supreme Court held that the ban satisfies the first amendment. Frisby v. Schultz, — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 2495, 25

Syllabus by the Court Aggravating factors justified 50% upward departure in sentencing defendant convicted of attempted second degree murder. OPINION This is a sentencing appeal. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant, age 19, pled *Page 673 guilty in district court to attempted second degree murder, Minn.Stat. §§ 609.19, 609.17