Cases

Opinion issued December 10, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-12-00443-CV ——————————— THE HOUSTON AERONAUTICAL HERITAGE SOCIETY, INC., Appellant V. JOHN L. GRAVES, HARPER TRAMMELL, OSC

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON MEMORANDUM ORDER Appellate case name: v. Houston Aeronautical Heritage Society v. John L. Graves, et al. Appellate case number: 01-12-00443-CV Trial court case number: 1163921 Trial court: 334th District Court of Harris County, Texas -and- Appellate case name: I

ORDER Theresa Graves, a black, 59-year-old female, appeals from the dismissal at summary judgment of her lawsuit claiming employment discrimination and retaliation by her former employer, the health department of St. Joseph County, Indiana. The district court concluded that Graves did not establish a prima facie case of race or age discrimination, retaliation, or hostile work environment. We affirm the judgment of the district court.<

J-A12038-19 2019 PA Super 320 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : LEE ANDREW MOORE :

J-A12038-19 2019 PA Super 320 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : LEE ANDREW MOORE :

32 Cal.Rptr.3d 5 (2005) 36 Cal.4th 944 116 P.3d 479 GRAFTON PARTNERS L.P., et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Alameda County, Respondent; PriceWaterhouseCoopers L.L.P., Real Party in Interest. No. S123344. Supreme Court of California. August 4, 2005. Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady, Falk & Rabkin, Jero

EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR., CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In Civil Case No. 2:18-cv-238 ("Case A"), Defendant Caremark, L.L.C. ("Caremark") has filed a motion to dismiss (Caremark MTD, Case A , ECF No. 43), as have Defendants Fiserv, Inc., and Fiserv Solutions, LLC (collectively, "Fiserv") (Fiserve MTD, Case A, ECF No. 44), to which Plaintiffs have filed an opposing brief (Pl. Mem. Opp., Case A, ECF No. 4

772 A.2d 1225 (2001) 364 Md. 329 Garnell GRAVES v. STATE of Maryland. No. 84, Sept. Term, 2000. Court of Appeals of Maryland. June 4, 2001. *1226 Claudia A. Cortese, Asst. Public Defender (Stephen E. Harris, Public Defender, on brief) Baltimore, for petitioner. Gary E. Bair, Asst. Atty. Gen. (J. Jos

JAMES E. GRAVES, JR., Circuit Judge: The defendant Anthony Valdez, a psychiatrist, challenges multiple aspects of his trial and sentence in this money laundering and health care fraud case. He argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction for money laundering; that the district court erred in applying various enhancements to his sentence; that the jury sho

172 S.W.3d 375 (2005) Megan BENTLEY; and American International South Insurance Company, Appellants, v. David BENTLEY, Appellee. No. 2003-SC-1051-DG. Supreme Court of Kentucky. September 22, 2005. *376 Robert L. Steinmetz, Diane Rose Conley, Frost, Brown, Todd, LLC, Edward H. Stopher, Darryl S. Lavery, Boehl, Stopher & Graves

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs January 15, 2010 IN THE MATTER OF: EMILY A., MEGAN A., and LINDSEY A. Direct Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Maury County No. 71748-71750 George L. Lovell, Judge No. M2009-01710-COA-R3-PT - Filed February 16, 2010 This is an appeal in a termination of parental rights case.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE TOPTAL, LLC ) ) C.A. No.: N25C-01-266 FJJ ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ) BLOOMBERG L.P. ) ) )

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2101 Doc: 125 Filed: 02/26/2024 Pg: 1 of 13 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-2082 ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. BP P.L.C.; BP AMERICA, INC.; BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; CROWN CEN

BROWN, Chief Judge. | plaintiffs, Carolyn Scranton, Christine Odom and Rachelle Jones, appeal a trial court decision dismissing their reconven-tional demand alleging acts of legal malpractice as being perempted against their former attorney, defendant in reconvention, H.F. Sockrider Jr. For the reasons set forth herein, we reverse. Facts and Procedural History Plaintiffs, Caro

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2082 Doc: 146 Filed: 02/26/2024 Pg: 1 of 13 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-2082 ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. BP P.L.C.; BP AMERICA, INC.; BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; CROWN CEN

794 F.Supp.2d 517 (2011) In re CYCLOBENZAPRINE HYDROCHLORIDE EXTENDED-RELEASE CAPSULE PATENT LITIGATION. Civ. No. 09-2118-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. May 12, 2011. *522 William J. Marsden, Jr., Esquire, Susan M. Coletti, Esquire, and Jennifer L. Hall, Esquire, of Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE, of Counsel:

J-A08005-16 J-A08006-16 2017 PA Super 29 M.G., IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. L.D., No. 2845 EDA 2015 APPEAL OF: C.B.D., INTERVENOR Appeal from the Order August 19, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Ci

PER CURIAM: Treating the petition for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing, the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. The court having been polled at the request of one of its members, and a majority of the judges who are in regular active service and not disqualified not having voted in favor (Fed. RApp. P. 35 and 5th Cir. R. 35), the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. In the en b

*********************************************** 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

ANDREWS, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Presently before the Court are Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Based on Patent Ineligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (D.I. 290) and related briefing (D.I. 291, 366, 385) and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity Based on Broadworks (D.I. 304) and related br