Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GREGORY H. WOODS, District Judge: Plaintiff Nathaniel Henderson brought this action against National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a Amtrak (“Amtrak”) under the Federal Employers Liability Act (“FELA”), 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., alleging that, while working for Amtrak as a signal foreman, he was struck by a train and injured as a result of Amtrak’s neglige

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1359 IN THE MATTER OF G&J FISHERIES, INC. AS OWNER OF F/V GEORGES BANKS, PLAINTIFF, FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY, G&J FISHERIES, INC., as Owner of F/V Georges Banks, O.N. 10925237, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. EDUINO COSTA,

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

RODERICK MCKENZIE * NO. 2023-CA-0333 VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL CHURCHILL DOWNS * LOUISIANA HORSERACING FOURTH CIRCUIT COMPANY, LLC D/B/A FAIR * GROUNDS RACE COURSE & STATE OF LOUISIANA SLOTS AND JSR, LLC ******* CONSOLIDATED WITH: CONSOLIDATED WITH: J

797 A.2d 353 (2002) Robert NIGRA and Kathleen Nigra, Appellants, v. Joseph P. WALSH, Jr., Appellee. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Argued December 11, 2001. Filed April 17, 2002. *355 Gregory L. Nester, Norristown, for appellants. Nathaniel P. D'Amico, Norristown, for appellee. BEFORE: JOYCE, OLSZEWSKI and MONTEMUR

Judge LYNCH concurs in a separate opinion. SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judge: Microsoft Corporation appeals from orders of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denying its motion to quash á warrant (“Warrant”) issued under § 2703 of the Stored Communications Act (“SCA” or the “Act”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq., and hold

NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, dissenting: Michael Roberts was injured while working as an employee for Custom Ship Interiors, a ship remodeling firm. At the time of his injury, Roberts was working on the remodeling of a Carnival Cruise ship. He filed a claim for disability benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ *516Compensation Act (“LHWCA”), 33 U.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION BETH BLOOM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiffs Sarah Alhassid and Sarah Dren-nen’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion to Certify Class Action, ECF No. [190] (the “Motion”). The Court has reviewed the Motion, all supporting and opposing submissions, the record in this case, and is otherwise fully advised. For the reasons set forth be

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO SEVER BETH BLOOM, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs Sarah Alhassid and Sarah Drennan’s (“Plaintiffs”) Second Amended Class Action Complaint, ECF No. [73] (“SAC”), filed by Defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (“Nationstar” and Nationst

824 F.Supp. 200 (1992) Ina Ruth MILLER, Plaintiff, v. REGENCY MARITIME CORPORATION, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 92-30055/LC. United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Pensacola Division. May 12, 1992. *201 Robert J. Young, Jr., New Orleans, LA, J. Dixon Bridgers, III, Pensacola, FL, for plaintiff. Nathaniel G.W. Pieper, Tampa

300 F.3d 510 CUSTOM SHIP INTERIORS; Fremont Compensation Insurance Group, Petitioners,v.Michael ROBERTS; Benefits Review Board; Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents. No. 01-1880. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued June 3, 2002. Decided August 15, 2002.

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Illinois Official Reports Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity o

849 F.Supp. 1096 (1994) Nathaniel TUCKER, Plaintiff, v. NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 3:93cv841. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. April 21, 1994. *1097 Francis Paul Hajek, Wilson & Hajek, Virginia Beach, VA, for plaintiff. Francis A. Cherry, Jr., Randolph,

632 F.Supp.2d 1219 (2009) VALIDSA, INC. d/b/a Dexton Validsa and Dexton, S.A., a Florida corporation, Plaintiff, v. PDVSA SERVICES INC., a Delaware corporation, and Bariven S.A., an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state, Defendants. Case No. 08-21682-CV. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. July 10, 2009. *1220 Holl

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-Appellant General Electric Co. (“GE”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of its tort and contract claims against Defendant-Appellee G. Siempelkamp GmbH & Co. (“Siempelkamp”) due to a forum selection clause in the parties’ contract stating that the German courts have jurisdiction over all disputes concerning the contract. 809

Ye Mystic Krewe of Gasparilla, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, RespondentYe Mystic Krewe of Gasparilla v. CommissionerDocket No. 20494-80United States Tax Court

Nathaniel T. Helman, J. Petitioners Yonkers Raceway Inc. and Tanbro Fabrics Corporation, a taxpayer, apply to this court for an order (1) enjoining respondent New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation (OTB) from undertaking, arranging or contracting for live television broadcasting of harness racing combined with off-track betting, in disregard of the prior decision of the Harness Racing Commission of November 18, 1971; and (2)

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge. Members of the news media appeal the district court’s denials of permission to copy tape-recordings that were admitted as evidence in a criminal trial, transcripts of these tape-recordings that were used by the jury, and documentary exhibits. They argue that both the Constitution and the common law provide a right to contemporaneous access to co

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge. Defendants Henry Sivils, Jerry Lee Stokes, William Dillard, and Sherrill Jordan appeal their jury convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine (Sivils, Dillard, and Jordan) and conspiracy to convert government property to own use (Stokes and Dillard). Sivils also appeals from his guilty plea to use of a firearm during

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge, dissenting. The majority and I part company on a simple but fundamental point: the meaning of quotations. As I see it, when a writer uses quotation marks in reporting what someone else has said, she is representing that those are the speaker’s own words or something very close to them. The majority views quotations much more amorphously: They are merely an extrapolation of the speaker’