Cases

NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557- 1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 23-P-178 Appeals Court LOUISE CONNOR & others1

FIFTH DIVISION MCFADDEN, P. J., RAY and RICKMAN, 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. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules June 28, 2

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

Digitally signed by Illinois Official Reports Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

*965ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS MARGARET M. MORROW, UNITEÍ) STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Mary Gonzales filed this action on May 1, 2015, against Marriott International, Inc., and Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.,' doing business as Los Angeles Airport Marriott (collectively “Marriott”).1 Gonzales received notice o

MANION, Circuit Judge. Marjorie Friedman Scherr, an elderly woman who required the use of a walker, booked a room at the Courtyard Marriott Hotel in Overland Park, Kansas, in March 2006. She requested a room that complied with the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The hotel had recently undergone a renovation and had installed spring-hinged door closers on the bathroom

MEMORANDUM OPINION Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion For Sanctions Against Defendant Marriott RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This case involves a tort action brought by plaintiffs, James W. Mahaffey and his wife Marie Mahaffey, against Marriott International, Inc. (“Marriott”) and Sch

OPINION Opinion by Justice EVANS. This is an appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of Marriott International, Inc. and Marriott Hotel Services, Inc. (collectively “Marriott.”). Miller Global Properties, LLC, Miller Global Fund V, LLC, SA Real Estate LLLP, and SA Resort LLLP (collectively “Miller”), bring five issues contend

520 F.Supp.2d 748 (2007) Terry S. KING, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. C.A. No. 9:05-1774-PMD-RSC. United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Beaufort Division. August 7, 2007. *749 A. Christopher Potts, Hitchcock and Potts, Charleston, SC, Ray Pratt McClain, Ray McClain Law Firm, for Plaintiff.

POSNER, Circuit Judge. This appeal from the dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim presents a question of conflict of laws that is very similar to the one we resolved in Spinozzi v. ITT Sheraton Corp., 174 F.3d 842 (7th Cir.1999). In response to a Sheraton advertisement in Illinois, Spinozzi had made a reservation at a resort hotel that Sheraton

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE FIREMEN’S RETIREMENT SYSTEM ) OF ST. LOUIS, derivatively on behalf of ) Marriott International, Inc., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2019-0965-LWW ) ARNE M. SORENSON, J.W. ) MARRIOTT

368 F.Supp.2d 461 (2005) Robert BRIGGS, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. AW-04-3427. United States District Court, D. Maryland, Southern Division. May 6, 2005. *462 *463 John Marshall, Moldawer and Marshall PC, Rockville, MD, for Plaintiff. Henr

305 F.Supp.2d 544 (2004) Nick POURZAL, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. No. CIV.2001-140. District Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John. February 25, 2004. *545 A. Jeffrey Weiss, Esq., St. Thomas, VI, for the plaintiff. Marie A. Thomas, Esq., St. Thomas, VI, for the defenda

416 F.Supp.2d 480 (2006) William Glenn KIRKLAND v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL INC., et al. Nos. CIV.A. 04-0910, 04-0911, 04-0933. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. February 21, 2006. *481 Randolph C. Slone, Randolph C. Slone, Attorney at Law, Slidell, LA, for William Glen Kirkland. Christopher Joseph Aubert, The Au

258 F.Supp.2d 1249 (2003) Deborah GREENHORN, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Marriott International Administrative Services, Inc., Fairfield FMC Corporation, and Larry Cox, Defendants. No. 02-2081-JWL. United States District Court, D. Kansas. April 28, 2003. *1251 John B. Gage, II, The Gage Law Firm, P.C., Overland Pa

855 So.2d 624 (2003) MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Zaria PEREZ-MELENDEZ, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. No. 5D02-1624. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. July 25, 2003. Opinion Denying Rehearing, Clarification and Certification September 26, 2003. *625 Marie A. Borland of

134 F.Supp.2d 328 (2001) Maria O. RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. No. 99 CIV 9408 WCC. United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 14, 2001. *329 *330 *331 *332

75 F.Supp.2d 1052 (1999) Ralph P. OLSEN, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, d/b/a/ Marriott's Camelback Inn, Defendant. No. CIV97-1506PHX-ROS. United States District Court, D. Arizona. November 22, 1999. *1053 *1054 *1055

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 18-1453 Filed November 27, 2019 BRENDA J. ALCALA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. and COURTYARD MANAGEMENT CORPORATION d/b/a QUAD CITIES COURTYARD MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, Defendants-Appellants. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Patrick A. McElyea, J

DENIAL OF MOTION FOR REHEARING PER CURIAM. Jerry Lane Joseph, et al., appealed the trial court’s decision dismissing their action against Marriott International, Inc. Mr. Joseph contended on appeal that the trial court erred in (1) finding Marriott did not owe a duty to Mr. Joseph; and (2) holding section 876 of the Restatement of Torts (Second) does not apply to this case and, hence, Marriott c