Cases

FIRST DIVISION BARNES, P. J., LAND and WATKINS, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules September 1, 2023

DECISION & ORDER Bucki, U.S.B.J. The Chapter 7 trustee has moved for authority to recover various costs and expenses from the exempt portion of proceeds derived from a sale of the debtor's homestead. The central issue involves whether the decision of the Supreme Court in Law v. Siegel , 571 U.S. 415,

OPINION BY BOWES, J.: ¶ 1 Appellant, Jason Morgan, appeals from the judgment of sentence of nine to eighteen months imprisonment imposed after a jury convicted him of 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318, unlawful contact with a minor. Appellant challenges the jury verdict as being against the weight of the evidence or based on insufficient evidence and also contends that 18 Pa.C.S. § 6318 is unconstitutional. After review, we

Karen King Mitchell, Presiding Judge Relator, the Missouri Secretary of State, seeks a writ prohibiting Respondent, the Honorable Daniel Green, Circuit Judge of Cole County, from ordering the Secretary to respond to numerous discovery requests in the underlying action. We issued a preliminary writ. Because the vast majority of the requested discovery is not relevant to the subje

HON. ELIZABETH S. STONG, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Introduction Before the Court is a motion to compel arbitration by defendant Firstmark Services ("Firstmark"). Firstmark seeks an order referring the parties to arbitration with respect to the claims set forth in Tashanna Golden's complaint, and argues that the Federal Arbitration Act requires that this Court compel arbitration pursu

HON. ELIZABETH S. STONG, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Introduction Before the Court are the motions to dismiss of defendants Firstmark Services ("Firstmark"), Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency ("PHEAA"), and jointly, defendants National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2005-3, National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-4, and Goal Structure Solutions Trust 2016-A (the "Trust

BLACK, Judge. Atomic Tattoos, LLC (“Atomic Tattoos”) seeks timely review of the non-final order denying its motion for temporary injunction seeking to enforce a covenant not to compete included in an independent contractor employment agreement (“agreement”). Because the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion, we reverse and remand with instructions. Atomic Tattoos owned and operated a tattoo

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 197 KA 13-01468 PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JASON B. MORGAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (LINDA M. CAMPBELL OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHES

PRADO, Circuit Judge: This consolidated appeal arises out of an alleged multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme perpetrated by R. Allen Stanford through his various corporate entities. These three cases deal with the scope of the preclusion provision of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (“SLUSA”). That provision states: “No covered class action based upon the statutory o

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase National Corporate Services, Inc.’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for a More Definite Statement and Memorandum of Law (Doc. 73; Motion to Dismiss), filed on April 30, 2014. Plaintiffs Alonzo and Joanne Beepot (the Beepots) filed a response in opposition to the Mo

Carley, Justice, dissenting. I dissent from the denial of this habeas corpus matter on the merits because petitioner did not “file a written application for a cer*878tificate of probable cause to appeal with the clerk of the Supreme Court within 30 days from the entry of the order denying him relief,” as required by OCGA § 9-14-52 (b). Accordingly, I w

KRAVITCH, Circuit Judge: Jason Whitaker, a former employee of American Airlines (“American”), and his union, Allied Pilots Association (“APA”), appeal the district court’s dismissal of their claim, pursuant to the Railway Labor Act (the “RLA”), to compel arbitration of Whitaker’s termination before a system board of adjustment. This appeal presents the issue of whether a system

OPINION OF THE COURT Bernard J. Fried, J. In these two shareholder derivative actions, motions seeking dismissal of the complaint based on documentary evidence and *891for failure to state a cause of action under CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7), have been held in abeyance pending the resolution of plaintiffs’ request for further discovery. Supplemental b

WINTER, Circuit Judge: The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System (“PSERS”) and Commerzbank AG (“Commerzbank”) appeal from Judge Scheindlin’s order of final judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). That judgment encompassed several previous orders that, as relevant to this appeal: (i) denied class certification under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 b

183 Cal.App.4th 238 (2010) LANDMARK SCREENS, LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP, et al., Defendants and Respondents. No. H033285. Court of Appeals of California, Sixth District. March 29, 2010. *240 Rosen, Bien & Galvan, Sanford Jay Rosen, Sarah Zimmerman, Lisa Ells, Michael W. Bien; Haynes and

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Defendants challenge this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 13321 on the ground that joinder of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System *160(“PSERS”) and the State

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION , AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. In this securities fraud civil action, the Plaintiffs Robert Levitt, for himself and as custodian for Richard Levitt and Monica Levitt; Stephen G. Siben; Philip C. Vitan-za, for himself and Elizabeth Vitanza and Luke Vitanza; John T. White; Guy V. Wood; and Ted M. and Kathryn N. Jones, as Trustees (collectively the “Plaintiffs”) assert four causes

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRAA. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I.INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs are institutional investors asserting claims of fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, and negligent misrepresentation against Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Morgan Stanley & Co. International Limited (together, “Morgan Stanley”)— the arranger/placement agent of the Structured Inve

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge: Table of Contents Page I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................439 II. BACKGROUND........................................................440 A. Undisputed Facts..................................................

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge: I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs are institutional investors asserting claims of fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, and negligent misrepresentation arising from the 2007 collapse of the Cheyne structured investment vehicle (“SIV”). Defendants are Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and Morgan Stanley & Co. International Li