Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
4 opinions for “LUIS ADRIAN RIVERA POMALES”
Aponte Santini v. Rivera Pomalespublic domain
TEXTO COMPLETO DE LA SENTENCIA La parte apelante, Luis Adrián Rivera Pomales, procura la revocación de una sentencia emitida por el Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Sala Superior de Guayama, (en adelante, “TPF) de 2 de junio de 2004. Mediante la misma, y como resultado de la acción de alimentos que originó el presente pleito, el TPI determinó que el único contrato existente entre las partes y reconocido por dicho foro respecto a
Rivera Pomales v. Bridgestone Firestone, Inc.public domain
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER PIERAS, Senior District Judge. I. Introduction The Plaintiffs filed the current Complaint on August 20, 2002, invoking this Court’s diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 13321. Plaintiffs Dr. Luis Rivera-Pomales and Marisell Sierra, his wife, brought a product liability action against Defendant2
Pomales v. Bridgestone Firestone, Inc.public domain
*51 OPINION AND ORDER PIERAS, Senior District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it “Firestone’s Motion to Amend or Alter Judgment” (docket No. 100) and Plaintiffs’ opposition (docket No. 101). The Court’s “Final Judgment” (docket No. 99) dismissed with prejudice Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant
Pomales v. Bridgestone Firestone, Inc.public domain
OPINION AND ORDER PIERAS, Senior District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it Plaintiffs’ “Motion for New Trial” (docket No. 109) and “Bridgestone/Firestone Inc.’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for New Trial” (docket No. 115). The Court’s “Final Judgment” (docket No. 99) dismissed with prejudice Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant without the