Cases

HULL, Circuit Judge: This is a consolidated appeal of 30 separate lawsuits. Most plaintiffs-appellants are individuals with severe autism. Defendant-appellee is Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc. ("Disney"), a division of The Walt Disney Company. In separate lawsuits, plaintiffs filed claims alleging that Disney, at six of its theme parks, fails to accommodat

USCA11 Case: 20-12720 Date Filed: 10/04/2022 Page: 1 of 30 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-12720 ____________________ A. L., by and through D.L., as Next Friend, Parent, and Natural Guardian,

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESORTS U.S., INC., Petitioner, Case No. 5D22-1375 v. LT Case No. 2020-CA-002845-O

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION DOLLY M. GEE, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court held a hearing on April 15, 2011. Having duly considered the respective positions of the parties, as presented in their briefs and at oral argument, the Court now renders its decision. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs’ Motion

Filed 2/28/18; Certified for Publication 3/26/18 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN WALT DISNEY PARKS AND B284261 RESORTS U.S., INC., (Los Angeles County Petitioner, Super. Ct. No. BC595235) v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Res

ANNE C. CONWAY, United States District Judge *1265This cause comes before the Court on Defendant's, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. ("Defendant"), Motion for Summary Judgment filed on June 1, 2016. (Doc. No. 47). Plaintiff, C.J.J. by and through C.R.J. as Next Friend, Parent, and Natural Guardian ("Plaintiff"), filed a Response in Opposition to Defendant's M

ZELON, Acting P.J. *874Petitioner Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. petitioned this court for relief from an order of the Los Angeles Superior Court denying Disney's motion to transfer venue as untimely. Because we conclude that the court erred in determining the motion was time-barred, we grant the petition for a writ of mandate and di

Filed 7/13/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE KATHLEEN GRACE et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, G061004 v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2019-01116850) THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY et al., OPINION Defe

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE KENNETH T. SIMEONE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2022-1120-LWW ) ) THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY, ) a Delaware corporation, ) )

736 F.Supp.2d 689 (2010) THOIP (A Chorion Limited Company), Plaintiff, v. The WALT DISNEY COMPANY, Disney Consumer Products, Inc., and Disney Destinations, LLC, Defendants. No. 08 Civ. 6823 (SAS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 13, 2010. *692 Abraham Y. Skoff, Esq., Martin Schwimmer, Esq., David Mark Rabinowi

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1109 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1110 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NO

*684ORDER GREGORY A. PRESNELL, District Judge. This matter came before the Court without oral argument upon consideration of the parties’ Second1 Agreed Motion for Leave to Amend Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“Agreed Motion for Leave to Amend”) (Doc. 81) and Joint Motion for Conditional Class Certification and Preli

DUBINA, Chief Judge: This appeal is brought by objectors to the district court’s approval of a class action settlement. The underlying case involves allegations that Appellee Walt Disney World Company (“Disney”) is violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12182, et seq. (“Title III”), by implementing a policy that bans the use

999 So.2d 669 (2008) Jalayna Jones ETHEREDGE and Valerie A. Vana, Appellants. v. WALT DISNEY WORLD CO., a Florida corporation, and Walt Disney World Hospitality & Recreation Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellees. No. 5D07-3581. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. December 5, 2008. Rehearing Denied January 21, 2009.

Filed 10/20/25; certified for publication 11/4/25 (order attached) COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA KAREN L. WILLIS, D084434 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2023- 00040565-CU

907 A.2d 693 (2005) In re THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY DERIVATIVE LITIGATION No. Civ.A. 15452. Court of Chancery of Delaware. Submitted April 28, 2005. Decided August 9, 2005. *695 Joseph A. Rosenthal, Norman M. Monhait and Carmella P. Keener of Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware; Seth D. Rigr

Case: 17-41268 Document: 00515205353 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/19/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-41268 FILED

906 A.2d 27 (2006) In re the WALT DISNEY COMPANY DERIVATIVE LITIGATION. William Brehm and Geraldine Brehm, as Trustees and Custodians; Michael Grening; Richard Kaplan and David Kaplan, as Trustees; Thomas M. Malloy; Richard J. Kager and Carol R. Kager, as Joint Tenants; Michael Caesar, as Trustee for Howard Gunty, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan; Robert S. *28 Goldberg, I.R.A.; Michael Shore; Michele DeBendictis; Peter L

727 So.2d 363 (1999) ALL PRO SPORTS CAMP, INC., etc., et al., Appellants, v. WALT DISNEY COMPANY, etc., et al., Appellees. No. 97-1012. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. February 26, 1999. *364 Willie E. Gary of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Finney, Lewis, McManus, Watson & Sperando, P.A., Stuart and Edna L. Car

The opinion of the court was delivered by SHEBELL, P.J.A.D. Plaintiffs appeal from the dismissal of their negligence complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over defendant. We reverse and remand for further discovery. On February 14, 1997, plaintiff, Rochelle Jacobs, individually and as guardian ad litem of her minor daughter, Heather Jacobs, filed a complaint against Walt