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.
20 opinions for “Meyer v. Fink”
Fink v. Amoco Corp.public domain
55 F.Supp.2d 350 (1999) Charles R. FINK, John C. Resetar, Anthony Mazzarini, Jr., John Mauro, David Mauro, Michael Meyer, Edward Pletz, Henry E. Szewczyk, Mark H. Szewczyk, Harvey Stickler, Peggy A. Cotugno, Timothy B. Shell, Mark Marshall, and Edwin A. Marshall, Plaintiffs, v. AMOCO CORPORATION, an Indiana corporation, Amoco Oil Company, a Maryland Corporation, British Petroleum Company, p.l.c., a foreign corporation, and BP Amoco Corporation, a
Fink v. 218 Hamilton, LLCpublic domain
Fink v 218 Hamilton, LLC (2024 NY Slip Op 06026) Fink v 218 Hamilton, LLC 2024 NY Slip Op 06026 Decided on December 4, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 4
In the Marriage of Meyer v. Meyerpublic domain
ORDER PER CURIAM. Tina Marie Meyer, Wife, appeals custody and property division provisions of dissolution decree. The trial court awarded joint legal custody of two children bom of the marriage, now six and nine years old. It awarded primary physical custody to Husband, subject to rights of visitation and temporary custody to Wife. The court awarded approximately 50% of the marital property to
Fink v. Allenpublic domain
Rees, J.: This is a wrongful attachment action brought against the principal and surety on a statutory bond. Plaintiff Ron P. Fink seeks to recover on an attachment bond the damages he sustained when his property was seized pursuant to an order of attachment issued at the direction of defendant Jerry Allen in an underlying action brought by Allen against one Robert Gray and to which Fink was not a party. The district court grante
Meyer v. Magaliospublic domain
Meyer v Magalios (2019 NY Slip Op 02336) Meyer v Magalios 2019 NY Slip Op 02336 Decided on March 27, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law
Matter of Meyer v. Town of Hempsteadpublic domain
Matter of Meyer v Town of Hempstead (2025 NY Slip Op 01930) Matter of Meyer v Town of Hempstead 2025 NY Slip Op 01930 Decided on April 2, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant t
Decker v. Finkpublic domain
47 Md. App. 202 (1980) 422 A.2d 389 MARCIA S. DECKER v. GERALD H. FINK. No. 246, September Term, 1980. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. Decided November 12, 1980. The cause was argued before THOMPSON, MOORE and LISS, JJ. Donald P. McLaughlin, with whom were Powers & McLaughlin on the brief, for appellant.
Baccala Realty, Inc. v. Fink (In Re Fink)public domain
351 B.R. 511 (2006) In re Robert James FINK, Debtor. Baccala Realty, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Robert James Fink, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 05 B 42371, Adversary No. 06 A 00903. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. September 5, 2006. *512 *513
Meyer Goldberg, Inc. v. Fisher Foods, Inc.public domain
WELLFORD, Circuit Judge. In March of 1979 Meyer Goldberg, Inc., of Lorain (Goldberg) as plaintiff brought an antitrust action against defendants, Fisher Foods, Inc. and First National Supermarkets, Inc. (FNS), charging a conspiracy between the latter supermarket operations in Lorain County, Ohio to fix prices in violation of both federal and Ohio laws. Generally, it was alleged that defendants had set prices below cost in or
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ———————————— No. 08-25-00194-CV ———————————— In re Roberto Renato Gardea Ruiz; International Pecans Limited Liability Co. d/b/a West Texas Pecans, Fink Real Estate, LLC; Fink Development, LLC; Fink Home Builders, LLC; Fink Sky, LLC; and Westside Financ
Meyer Goldberg, Inc. Of Lorain v. Meyer Goldberg and Frances Goldberg, Intervenors-Appellants v. Fisher Foods, Inc.public domain
KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from an Order of the District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, which denied the motion of appellants, Meyer and Frances Goldberg (the Goldbergs), husband and wife, to intervene in a pending private antitrust action. A review of the record below discloses the following facts. On March 28, 1979, five corp
Fink v. New York State Tax Commissionpublic domain
Judgment affirmed, without costs; no opinion. Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Wachtler. Taking no part: Judges Rabin and Stevens.
Fink v. Marcovitzpublic domain
Motion by plaintiffs-respondents to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, and appeal dismissed. Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
Meyer v. Berkshire Life Insurancepublic domain
250 F.Supp.2d 544 (2003) Alan MEYER, Trustee for Paul D. Meyer, M.D., P.A. Money Purchase Pension Plan and Trust, et al. v. BERKSHIRE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY No. CIV.A. CCB-99-1432. United States District Court, D. Maryland. March 31, 2003. *547 Barrett W. Freedlander, Saul Ewing, LLP, Baltimore, MD, Nicholas T. Christakos, David
Meyer v. Berkshire Life Insurancepublic domain
128 F.Supp.2d 831 (2001) Paul D. MEYER, M.D., Trustee for Paul D. Meyer, M.D., P.A. Money Purchase Pension Plan and Trust, et al. v. BERKSHIRE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY No. CIV. CCB-99-1432. United States District Court, D. Maryland. January 22, 2001. *832 Mark Menton Dumler, Brian C. Parker, Parker Dumler Kiely LLP, Baltimore, MD,
Short v. Finkpublic domain
SAMUEL, Judge. This is an appeal by the husband from a judgment awarding his wife permanent alimony in the sum of $120 per month following a divorce granted in his favor on the ground of living separate and apart for a period of two years.1 *706In this court appellant contends: 1) The wife was
Fink v. Lefkowitzpublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT Chief Judge Cooke. Petitioner commenced this proceeding to compel release of the office manual of the Deputy Attorney-General and Special Prosecutor for Nursing Homes pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (Public Officers Law, art 6). The issue posed is whether certain portions of the manual that reveal confidential methods used for investigating nursing home fraud are exempt from d
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity v. George C. Meyer, Margaret Meyer & Edwin A. Meyerpublic domain
COFFEY, Circuit Judge. The defendants appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in the favor of the plaintiff, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), and ask that the Decree of Foreclosure and that the judgment on a Guaranty be set aside. We affirm. I On September 17, 1975, George Meyer executed and delivered
Fink-Roselieve Co. v. Elkay Photo Products, Inc.public domain
SMITH, District Judge. This is a suit for the infringement of Patent No. 2,151,907, issued to the plaintiff on the application of Lawrence R. Fink, who, prior to the issuance thereof, assigned all right, title and interest therein to the said plaintiff. The suit is directed to two products of the defendant: the first, a device manufactured and sold by the defendant between March 28, 1939 and July 27, 1939; the second, a simi
Meyer v. McKenziepublic domain
STATEMENT BY THE COURT. Mrs. Carrie B. Meyer, the plaintiff in this action, bought a farm consisting of about 496 acres, known as the "Collier Place," which her husband intended to cultivate for the year 1932, but it was later decided by her to rent the farm to H. A. McKenzie for that year. Joe C. Meyer, her husband, acting as her agent, went to the Hotel Pines to make the lease. Ben J. Altheimer was at the hotel with McKenzie, seemingly in the role of adviser. After some conver