Cases

155 T.C. No. 10 UNITED STATES TAX COURT THE COCA-COLA COMPANY & SUBSIDIARIES, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 31183-15. Filed November 18, 2020. P, a U.S. corporation, was the legal owner of the intellectual property (IP) necessary to manufacture, distribute, and sell some of the best-known beverage brands in the world. This IP included trade- marks, product names, lo

FILED IN NO. 13-212 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 09/11/15 11:24:40 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk TAMI L. WOLE'F, C.S.R. PHONE: (830) 331-8286 NO. 13-212 ROBERTSON ELECTRIC, INC. ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT ) VS . ) 216TH JUD

CARNES, Circuit Judge: People who compete against each other in the same business or profession don’t have to dislike one another. A few years back there was even a song lyricizing *1215 about “Lawyers in Love.” But no one has ever written a song about “Car Dealers in Love,” and if this case is a

Nestenborg v Standard Intl. Mgt. LLC (2021 NY Slip Op 01144) Nestenborg v Standard Intl. Mgt. LLC 2021 NY Slip Op 01144 Decided on February 23, 2021 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law R

Nestenborg v Standard Intl. Mgt. LLC (2021 NY Slip Op 01144) Nestenborg v Standard Intl. Mgt. LLC 2021 NY Slip Op 01144 Decided on February 23, 2021 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law R

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 722 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 723 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE N

Opinion issued August 30, 2018 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00847-CV ——————————— ADAN G. ADAME, ROBERT H. ARISPE, HARVEY EDWARD ARNOLD, HERMON HARVEY ARNOLD, LUCIANO BARRIENTEZ, HOMER L. BATCHELOR, TOMAS BENITEZ, DELBERT RAY BLUNDELL, MELVIN BRION

Pastor David BACON, Patricia Hepner, Ruth Dold, Sharon Hvam, individually and as representative of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Retirement Plan and the ELCA Retirement Plan for the Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, Appellants, v. BOARD OF PENSIONS OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA d/b/a Portico Benefit Services, Respondent.REYES, Judge

20-1081-cv SEC v. Fowler 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 4 August Term, 2020 5 6 (Argued: June 3, 2021 Decided: July 22, 2021) 7 8 Docket No. 20-1081-cv 9 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 13 14

QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judge, concurring: *305Modern class actions are an important innovation in our legal system. They are a rare departure from "a principle of general application in Anglo-American jurisprudence that one is not bound by a judgment in personam in a litigation in which he is not designated as a party or to which he has no

02-11-092-CV

500 Argued and submitted December 14, 2017, affirmed February 26, 2020 Sally PHILLIPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent. Yamhill County Circuit Court 15CV08801; A163831 461 P3d 1008 Plaintiff filed a claim with State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State

OPINION BILL MEIER, Justice. I.INTRODUCTION Appellant and Cross-Appellee H.E.B., L.L.C. appeals the final judgment awarding Appellee and Cross-Appellant Horace T. Ardinger, Jr. $1,300,405.04. Ardinger appeals the trial court’s denial of his requests for declaratory relief and for attorneys’ fees. We will affirm the trial court’s j

Case: 10-15761 Date Filed: 06/21/2012 Page: 1 of 42 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED ________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

AMENDED MEMORANDUM JONES, II, District Judge. In Civil Action No. 10-4374, Relators Stephen A. Krahling and Joan A. Wlo-chowski (“Plaintiffs”) bring this qui tam action in accordance with the False Claims Act (“FCA”), pursuant to -31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-33. Relators allege that their former employer, Defendant Merck & Co., Inc. (“Merck”) fraudulently misled the government and omitted, c

565 N.W.2d 16 (1997) MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Texas Petitioner, v. NISHIKA LTD., LenTec Corporation, American 3D Ltd., and Nishika Manufacturing (H.K.) Ltd., Texas Respondents. No. C2-96-2542. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 12, 1997. Rehearing Denied July 8, 1997. *18 Maslon Edelman Borman &a;

Opinion issued August 22, 2019 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00847-CV ——————————— ADAN G. ADAME, ROBERT H. ARISPE, HARVEY EDWARD ARNOLD, HERMON HARVEY ARNOLD, LUCIANO BARRIENTEZ, HOMER L. BATCHELOR, TOMAS BENITEZ, DELBERT RAY BLUNDELL, MELVIN BRION

OPINION AND ORDER SALVADOR E. CASELLAS, Senior District Judge. Before the Court are the defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket # 6), the plaintiffs opposition thereto (Docket # 9), and the defendants’ reply. Docket # 14. After reviewing the filings and the applicable law, the defendants’ motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Factual and Procedural Background This

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ WI-FI ONE, LLC, Appellant v. BROADCOM CORPORATION, Appellee JOSEPH MATAL, PERFORMING THE FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Inter

397 F.Supp.2d 1025 (2005) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiffs, State of New York, State of New Jersey, State of Connecticut, Hoosier Environmental Council, Plaintiff-Intervenors, v. CINERGY CORP., Psi Energy, Inc., and the Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, Defendants. No. 1:99 CV 1693 LJM VSS. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. November