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 “PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC. v. United States”
Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION DAMICH, Chief Judge. I. Introduction Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. (“Parsons”) alleges that the Federal Railroad Administration (“FRA”) breached a contract with it1 when the FRA refused Parsons’ requests for indemnification. There is a provision in the contract, whereby the FRA is required to indemnify Parsons for certain losses exceeding a $1 mi
Shorts v. Parsons Transportation Group, Inc.public domain
679 F.Supp.2d 63 (2010) Timothy SHORTS, Plaintiff, v. PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 09-01571 (HHK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. January 19, 2010. *64 Michael J. Kator, Kator, Parks & Weiser, PLLC, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Frank Charles Morris, Jr., Kathlee
Shorts v. Parsons Transportation Group, Inc.public domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TIMOTHY SHORTS, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action 09-01571 (HHK) PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Timothy Shorts brings this action against Parsons Transportation Group (“Parsons”), asserting c
Metroplexcore, LLC v. Parsons Transportation, Inc.public domain
PER CURIAM: This appeal arises from a contracting dispute between Plaintiff-Appellant Me-troplexCore LLC, a Texas environmental engineering firm, and Defendant-Appellee Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., an Illinois general contracting firm, which contracted with the Harris County, Texas Metropolitan Transit Authority (“METRO”) to design, build, and operate a Houston-area transit
In the United States Court of Federal Claims Nos. 19-1205, 19-1515 (consolidated) Filed: February 20, 2020 Reissued: March 11, 20201 ) PAE-PARSONS GLOBAL LOGISTICS ) SERVICES, LLC, ) ) Plaintiffs,
Parsons v. United States Department of Justicepublic domain
OPINION SARGUS, District Judge. Plaintiffs appeal the district court’s dismissal of this action for lack of standing. We REVERSE and REMAND. OVERVIEW This is a case about fans of the Insane Clown Posse, who call themselves “Jugga-los,” and their ability to bring a lawsuit against government law enforcemen
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2025 Term FILED _____________ March 21, 2025 released at 3:00 p.m. C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK
Parsons v. United States Department of Justicepublic domain
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS ROBERT H. CLELAND, District Judge. Plaintiffs Mark Parsons, Brandon Bradley, Scott Gandy, Robert Hellin, Joseph Bruce, and Joseph Utsler, all self-identified “Juggalos,” challenge Defendants *651United States Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) and Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (“FBI”) use of
BLR Group of America, Inc. v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge. Plaintiff in the above-captioned case alleges that government personnel prepared and disseminated an unfair and inaccurate evaluation of its performance under a contract with the United States Air Force (“Air Force”) and requests appropriate nonmone-tary relief. In a previous decision, the court determined that it possessed jurisdiction over one of plaintiffs c
American Electric Co. v. Parsons RCI, Inc.public domain
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT PARSONS RCI, INC.’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST COVANTA HONOLULU RESOURCE RECOVERY VENTURE ON ITS CLAIMS AND ■ COUNTERCLAIMS FOR LIQUIDATED DAMAGES BARRY M. KURREN, United States Magistrate Judge. Before the Court is Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff Parsons RCI, Ine.’s (“Parsons”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against Covanta Honolulu Resource Recov
Foster Group, Inc. v. City of Elginpublic domain
SERCOMBE, J. This appeal concerns the timeliness of several claims brought by plaintiff, the owner of a mobile home park, against the City of Elgin. Those claims stem from two alleged wrongful acts by the city. First, in support of claims for trespass, negligent interference with real property, ejectment, civil conspiracy to commit fraud, and inverse condemnation, plaintiff alleged that the city, in 2004, constructed a road th
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2018-CA-01272-SCT JACK PARSONS AND PARSONS LAW FIRM v. VERNON WALTERS AND DONYELL WALTERS DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/28/2018 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. CHARLES W. WRIGHT, JR. TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: ROBIN L. ROBERTS JAMES A. WILLIAMS COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LAUDERDALE COUNTY CIRCUIT COU
Fluor Intercontinental, Inc. v. United Statespublic domain
In the United States Court of Federal Claims Nos. 19-1580, 19-1585 (consolidated) Filed: February 20, 2020 Reissued: March 11, 20201 ) FLUOR INTERCONTINENTAL, INC., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) )
The YORK GROUP, INC. v. Horizon Casket Group, Inc.public domain
459 F.Supp.2d 567 (2006) The YORK GROUP, INC., Plaintiff, v. HORIZON CASKET GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. H-05-2181. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. October 13, 2006. *568 *569 Jeffrey Roger Parsons, David Alan Walton, W. Michael Scott, Beirne Ma
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE VOLKSWAGEN “CLEAN DIESEL” No. 19-16361 MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, D.C. No. 3:15-md-02672- CRB NICHOLAS BENIPAYO, Plaintiff, and FARCHIONE MOTORS, INC., Claimant-Appellant, v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERIC
Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammaratapublic domain
688 F.Supp.2d 598 (2010) RIMKUS CONSULTING GROUP, INC., Plaintiff, v. Nickie G. CAMMARATA, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. H-07-0405. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. February 19, 2010. *607 David Allen Ward, Jr., The Ward Law Firm, The Woodlands, TX, for Plaintiff. Larry E. Demmons, Taggart
Victor Parsons v. Charles Ryanpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTOR ANTONIO PARSONS; SHAWN Nos. 16-17282 JENSEN; STEPHEN SWARTZ; SONIA 17-15352 RODRIGUEZ; CHRISTINA VERDUZCO; JACKIE THOMAS; JEREMY SMITH; D.C. No. ROBERT CARRASCO GAMEZ, JR.; 2:12-cv-00601- MARYANNE CHISHOLM; DESIREE DKD LICCI; JOSEPH HEFNER; JOSHUA POLSON; CHARLOTTE WELLS; ARIZONA CENTER FOR DISABILITY LAW,
Loveland Essential Group, LLC v. Grommon Farms, Inc.public domain
Opinion by Judge J. JONES. {1 This appeal concerns the second lawsuit between plaintiff, Loveland Essential Group, LLC (Buyer), and defendants, Grom-mon Farms, Inc., Gary Grommon, and Connie Grommon (collectively, Seller), arising from Buyer's purchase of commercial real property and assets from Seller. Buyer asserts that its claims in this case arose after it filed the first lawsuit but before there was a final
Tillman v. Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc.public domain
(2008) Marlayna G. TILLMAN, Plaintiff, v. The PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, INC., and Teamsters Local Union 830, Defendants. Civ. No. 04-1314-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. March 19, 2008. MEMORANDUM OPINION SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On September 29, 2004, Marlayna Tillman ("plaintiff'), an Afr
In re Columbia Pipeline Group, Merger Litigationpublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE COLUMBIA PIPELINE GROUP, ) CONSOLIDATED MERGER LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 2018-0484-JTL POST-TRIAL OPINION ADDRESSING LIABILITY FOR AIDING AND ABETTING Date Submitted: November 22, 2022 Date Decided: June 30, 2023 Ned Weinberger, Derrick Farrell, Brendan W. Sullivan, LABATON SUCHAROW LLP, Wilmington, Delaware; Gregory V. V