Cases

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, FOR PUBLICATION January 23, 2020 Plaintiff-Appellant,

MEMORANDUM OPINION Royce C. Lamberth, U.S. District Judge Applicants Patrick R. Leret and Luis Ernesto Gonzalez (“applicants”) have brought before the Court a ’number of objections [24] to an Order [17] issued by Magistrate Judge Facciola. Applicants, as litigants before a foreign tribunal, sought an order from the Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) that would direct Alvaro Roche Cisneros (“Roche”) t

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Steve Russo, : Petitioner : : v. : No. 1093 C.D. 2024 : Upper Darby Township (Workers’ : Compensation Appeal Board), : Respondent : Submitted: June 3, 2025 BE

JORDAN, Circuit Judge. Wayne Land and Mineral Group, LLC, a company that wants to obtain natural *515gas by fracking reserves in Pennsylvania,1 appeals from the dismissal of its complaint for failure to state a claim. Wayne sought a ruling in the District Court under the Declaratory Judgment Act that an interstate

MEMORANDUM JAMES M. MUNLEY, United States District Judge Before the court is Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company’s (here*292inafter “State Farm”) motion for summary-judgment on the sole remaining claim in this case-insurance bad faith under Pennsylvania law. (Doc. 27). For the reasons that follow, the court will grant State Farm’s motion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ********************* DONNA GORDON, as legal * representative of the estate of * No. 18-40V RAY A. GORDON, decedent, * Special Master Christian J. Moran * Petitioner, * Filed: April 16, 2021 * v. *

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, FOR PUBLICATION May 6, 2021 Plaintiff-Appellant,

977 A.2d 941 (2009) SOLERS, INC., Appellant, v. John DOE. Software & Information Industry Association, Appellee. No. 07-CV-159. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued June 19, 2008. Decided August 13, 2009. *944 Daniel J. Tobin for appellant. Charles D. Tobin, Washington, with whom Leo G. Rydzew

MEMORANDUM OPINION Robert D. Mariani, United States District Judge . Presently before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant Delaware River Basin Commission (the “Commission” Or “DRBC”). (Doc. 12). For the reasons that‘follow, Defendant’s Motion will be granted. On the face of Plaintiffs Complaint, it is apparent that its proposed activities within the Delaware River Basin constitute a “project”

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT LISA CAVANAUGH, as the Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF WILLIAM CAVANAUGH, deceased, Appellant, v. STRYKER CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, et al., Appellees. No. 4D19-523 [October 7, 2020] Appeal from the Circui

Justice SOTOMAYOR delivered the opinion of the Court. * *371 The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act), 100 Stat. 3

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS ********************** MATHEW HENNINGS, * * No. 18-1336V Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran * v. * * Filed: July 8, 2021 SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

538 U.S. 188 (2003) CITY OF CUYAHOGA FALLS, OHIO, ET AL. v. BUCKEYE COMMUNITY HOPE FOUNDATION ET AL. No. 01-1269. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 21, 2003. Decided March 25, 2003. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. *189 *190

DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-Appellants (“Plaintiffs”), black-car drivers in the greater New York City area, brought this action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, asserting claims against Defendants-Appellees (“Defendants”), owners of black-car “base licenses” and affiliat

72 S.W.3d 549 (2002) 77 Ark.App. 232 JAG CONSULTING a/k/a Glad Industries, Inc. v. Gerald EUBANKS. No. CA 01-1183. Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division II. April 24, 2002. *551 Streetman, Meels, & McMillan, by: Thomas S. Streetman, Crossett, for appellant. The Harper Law Office, P.L.L.C., by:

536 U.S. 129 (2002) FRANCONIA ASSOCIATES et al. v. UNITED STATES No. 01-455. United States Supreme Court. Argued April 15, 2002. Decided June 10, 2002.[*] CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT *131 *131

ORDER ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ALLEGRA, Judge. Bruce Thomas Savin, by his mother, seeks review of a decision awarding him less than the amount of attorneys’ fees and costs claimed in this vaccine case. For the reasons that follow, the court affirms the award. I. On July 29, 1999, attorney Clifford J. Shoemaker filed a petition for compensation on behalf of Bruce Thomas Sa

Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary’s County, Maryland v. Barbara and Christopher Aiken, et al., No. 28, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Hotten, J. REAL PROPERTY – DEED CONSTRUCTION – FEE SIMPLE TITLE CONVEYED BY DEED We apply “basic principles of contract interpretation” when “construing the language of a deed[.]” Md. Agric. Land Pres. Found. v. Claggett, 412 Md. 45, 62, 985 A.2d 565, 575 (2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). When the language of the deed “is plain an

OPINION Justice McCAFFERY. Allowance of appeal was granted so that this Court could determine whether the-Commonwealth Court erred by affirming the reversal by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (“WCAB”) of the decision of a workers’ compensation judge (“WCJ”) that granted the claim petition of Appellant, Philip Payes. The WCJ had determined that Appellant was entitled to workers’ compensat

KEMP, P.J., *574PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS Plaintiff filed a complaint on June 28, 1991, against 15 physicians and other health care entities. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that all of the 15 defendants committed acts or omissions of medical negligence. The essence of plaintiff’s voluminous complaint seems to be that defendants failed to adequately