Cases

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-2813 ELIZABETH A. ACEVEDO, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PROFESSIONAL TRANSPORTATION, INCORPORATED, and RONALD D. ROMAIN, Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United St

2024 IL App (1st) 230481 Fourth Division Filed May 23, 2024 No. 1-23-0481 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT ANNETTE SANDERS

13 Cal.App.4th 585 (1993) 16 Cal. Rptr.2d 599 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION et al., Defendants and Respondents; CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION VENTURES, INC., et al., Real Parties in Interest. Docket No. A057897. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Four.

858 A.2d 1025 (2004) 159 Md.App. 123 CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. Donald E. MILLER. No. 1142, Sept. Term, 2003. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. October 1, 2004. *1028 Stephen B. Caplis (Amy E. Askew, Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP on the brief), Baltimore, for Appellant. C. Richard Cranwe

895 P.2d 755 (1995) 321 Or. 118 STATE of Oregon, By and Through its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent v. HEWETT PROFESSIONAL GROUP, a joint venture comprised of John B. Brams, Thomas S. Miller, M.D., Corinne D. Miller, and Peter Lyon, M.D., Petitioner on Review, and Capital Consultants, Inc., an Oregon corporation, Defendant. CC 9108-05286; CA A77301; SC S41575. Supre

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kurtz, J.), dated June 4, 2010, which granted the motion of the defendant Professional Transportation Corp., inter alia, to vacate an order of the same court (R. Miller, J.), dated October 27, 2008, granting their motion for a default judgment and directing an inquest on damages, and to vacate a judgment of the same court (M

MINTON, C.J., Dissenting. I dissent from the majority opinion because I cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in concluding that expert testimony was necessary for Caniff to prove his prima facie negligence case. Expert testimony may be required when the trial court determines that the subject matter of litigation is not within the common knowledge of lay jurors.

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER GARY L. SHARPE, Chief Judge. I. Introduction Plaintiff Eric Bowman commenced this action under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)1 against defendant CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT), seeking damages related to his employment with CSXT. (Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) Bowman contends that CSXT interfered, restraine

OPINION Gary R. Wade, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Sharon G. Lee, C.J., and Cornelia A. Clark, Jeffrey S. Bivins, and Holly Kirby, JJ., joined. A railroad employee who was diagnosed with lung cancer filed suit against the railroad under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, alleging tha

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND MOTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC THOMAS, J. We deny Appellees’ Motion for Rehearing and Motion for Rehearing En Banc, withdraw our original opinion dated April 24, 2013, and substitute this opinion in its place. In this workers’ compensation appeal, Claimant challenges an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) that denies in part his claims for workers’ co

DECISION and ORDER GLENN T. SUDDABY, District Judge. Currently before the Court, in this personal injury action filed by M.B. and Maureen Scott, individually and as parent and natural guardian of M.B. (“Plaintiffs”) against CSX Transportation, Inc. (“Defendant”), are Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and Defendant’s motion to preclude the use of the opinions of Plaintiffs’ liability expert,

BARNES, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. This negligence action arose out of a collision between a freight train and a truck hauling a lowboy trailer. The train was operated by James Winner and Joe *480Brakefield, who filed complaints1 against Defendants CSX Transportation (CSXT) and Precision Construction Group, Inc. (Precision).

ORDER JAMES C. FOX, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the court on the following motions: Claimant Tammy *661Strickland’s Motion for Summary Judgment [DE-65]; Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss Claimant Bonnie Cockrell’s Claim for Punitive Damages [DE-69]; Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Claimants’ Punitive Damag

NATHANIEL M. GORTON, District Judge. ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting Report and Recommendations re [29] Report and Recommendations. Action on motion: denying [9] Motion to Dismiss. “Report and Recommendation accepted and adopted.” REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (#9) COLLINGS, United States Magistrate Judge. <

OPINION OF THE COURT (January 13, 2016) Hodge, Chief Justice. The Department of Human Services (“DHS”) appeals from the Superior Court’s May 20, 2015 opinion, which denied its request to vacate an arbitrator’s award directing that Marie Danielson, a DHS employee, receive $101,775.96 in back pay. For the reasons that follow, we reverse. I. BACKGROUND

978 A.2d 760 (2009) 187 Md. App. 187 CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. Richard BICKERSTAFF, et al. No. 770, September Term, 2007. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. August 26, 2009. *767 Evan M. Tager (Andrew J. Pincus, Carl J. Summers, Mayer Brown, LLP on the brief of Washington D.C.) (James E. Gilson, Casey

********** The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Glenn and the briefs and arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, and upon reconsideration, the Full Commission affirms in part and modifies in part the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

686 S.E.2d 455 (2009) GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION v. MILLER et al. No. A09A1031. Court of Appeals of Georgia. November 10, 2009. *458 Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General; Davis, Pickren & Seydel, Paul R. Jordan, Donald P. Boyle, Jr., William G. Bertram, Atlanta, for appellant. Pasley & Nuce, Derek C. Nuce,

370 S.C. 362 (2006) 635 S.E.2d 97 J.T. BAGGERLY, Appellant, v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., National Railroad Passenger Corporation, d/b/a Amtrak, Southern Companies of South Carolina, Inc., and Ervin Lavern Lucky, Defendants, Of Whom CSX Transportation, Inc. and National Railroad Passenger Corporation, d/b/a Amtrak are Respondents. No. 26208. Supreme Court of South Carolina.</

BEASON v. I. E. MILLER SERVICES, INC. Skip to Main Content Accessibility Statement Help Contact Us