Cases

373 S.W.2d 22 (1963) Mrs. Erin REIS, Caroline C. Hoelzer, Pauf Randall and Leo Lau, Appellants, v. The METROPOLITAN ST. LOUIS SEWER DISTRICT, Respondent. No. 49875. Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2. December 9, 1963. *23 Charles M. Shaw, Clayton, for appellants. Thompson, Mitchell, Douglas & Neill, James M. Do

240 Minn. 434 (1953) MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL SANITARY DISTRICT v. CITY OF ST. PAUL AND ANOTHER. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, APPELLANT.[1] No. 35,926. Supreme Court of Minnesota. December 11, 1953. *435 John F. Bonner, City Attorney, and Charles A. Sawyer and Carsten L. Jacobson, Assistant City Attorneys,

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 23-1572 ___________________________ Center for Biological Diversity Plaintiff - Appellee v. Sarah Strommen, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Minnesota

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 20-2282 ___________________________ Continental Indemnity Company, an Iowa Corporation lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. IPFS of New York, LLC, a Limited Liability Company; IPFS Corporation

ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, Presiding Judge C.B. Engineering, Inc. (“Appellant”) appeals the judgment entered upon a jury verdict awarding Beris Construction, L.L.C.. (“Respondent”) $51,500 on Respondent’s claims for professional negligence and contribution. Respondent cross-appeals the jury’s damages award. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a hew trial on damages. I. BACKGROUND

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge. This is an action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief pursuant to the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq. and the Administrative Procedure Act *336(“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 500 et seq. Plaintiffs in this matter are two nonprofit organizations—WaterL

OPINION HUDSON, Judge. In these consolidated appeals involving a certified question, a notice of related appeal (A14-0027), and a separate appeal (A14-0123), we consider whether Minn. Stat. § 504B.215 prohibits a landlord from billing tenants for fees in connection with a tenant’s utility bill; whether the statute imposes a requirement that those fees be equitable in comparison to the cost of the utility

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1278 ___________________________ Heights Apartments, LLC Plaintiff - Appellant Walnut Trails, LLLP Plaintiff

711 F.Supp.2d 991 (2010) FAIR ISAAC CORPORATION and myFico Consumer Services, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC.; Trans Union, LLC; VantageScore Solutions, LLC; and Does I through X, Defendants. Civil No. 06-4112 ADM/JSM. United States District Court, D. Minnesota. May 10, 2010. *995 Ronald J. Schutz, Esq.,

563 F.3d 329 (2009) CEDAR HILL HARDWARE AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY, INC., a Missouri Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INSURANCE CORPORATION OF HANNOVER, Defendant-Appellee. No. 07-1026. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: March 10, 2008. Filed: April 17, 2009. *332 Jeffrey B. Hunt, argued,

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 24-3444 ___________________________ Rhonda Burnett; Jerod Breit; Jeremy Keel; Frances Harvey; Hollee Ellis Plaintiffs - Appellees v. National Association of Realtors; Home Services of America Defendants

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A14-0027 A14-0123 Jeff Persigehl and Samone Bodley, individually and on behalf of the putative classes, Respondents (A14-0027), Appellants (A14-0123), vs. Ridgebrook In

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _______________ No. 06-6068NE ________________ In re: * * Western Iowa Limestone, Inc., * * Debtor. *

375 B.R. 518 (2007) In re WESTERN IOWA LIMESTONE, INC., Debtor. United Bank of Iowa, Appellant, v. Independent Inputs, et al., Appellees. No. 06-6068NE. United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Eighth Circuit. Submitted: February 9, 2007. Filed: March 19, 2007. *519 James J. Niemeier, Omaha, NE, Robert

Per Curiam. Through this appeal, the court is confronted with the standard choice-of-law dilemma. We must initially determine whether Kentucky or Ohio law should be applied to the facts as presented. Then we must proceed to the merits of appellant’s case under the appropriate state standards. I The principles of choice-of-law have been subject to much reevaluation in many jurisdict

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 07-1026 ___________ Cedar Hill Hardware and Construction * Supply, Inc., a Missouri Corporation, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States

541 F.Supp. 1120 (1982) Daniel ADAIR, Plaintiff, v. The KOPPERS COMPANY, INC., Defendant. Civ. A. No. C81-2482-Y. United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D. May 28, 1982. *1121 Thomas Mester, Daniel J. White, Komito, Nurenberg, Plevin, Jacobson, Heller & McCarthy Co., L.P.A., Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff. Albert

513 U.S. 30 (1994) HESS et al. v. PORT AUTHORITY TRANS-HUDSON CORPORATION No. 93-1197. United States Supreme Court. Argued October 3, 1994. Decided November 14, 1994. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT *32 Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Kenn

962 F.2d 77 60 USLW 2635 CPC INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff, Appellant,v.NORTHBROOK EXCESS & SURPLUS INSURANCE CO., Defendant, Appellee. Nos. 91-1580, 91-1734. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard Dec. 3, 1991.Decided March 24, 1992.Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied April 15, 1992.Memorandum on Deni

653 F.Supp. 152 (1986) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. CONSERVATION CHEMICAL COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. 82-0983-CV-W-5. United States District Court, W.D. Missouri, W.D. September 2, 1986. On Request for Clarification September 17, 1986. Special Master's Recommendations June 27, 1986. *153