Cases

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

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE JERRID ALLEN and JADE ALLEN, husband and wife, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. TOWN OF PRESCOTT VALLEY a Municipal Corporation of Arizona, Defendant/Appellee. No. 1 CA-CV 16-0728 FILED 3-13-2018 Appeal from t

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NIKITA S. PRESCOTT-HARRIS, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 15-1716 (RC) : v. : Re Document No.: 22 :

02/24/2022 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 8, 2021 Session HCTEC PARTNERS, LLC v. JAMES PRESCOTT CRAWFORD ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Williamson County No. 48722B Michael Binkley, Judge _________________________

OPINION KESSLER, Presiding Judge: ¶ 1 In 2012, White Mountain Health Center, Inc. (“White Mountain”) sought county zoning approval to establish a medical marijuana dispensary (“MMD”) pursuant to the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (“AMMA”), Arizona Revised Statutes (“AR.S.”) sections 36-2801 to -2819 (2014 and Supp. 2015).2 Maricopa County refused to issue the necessary zoning d

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN, PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS .AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STAY Barry Téd Moskowitz, Chief Judge Before the Court are Defendant Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego’s (“RCHSD”) motion to dismiss and motion to stay. (ECF. No. 9, 15.) The Court discusses each below. I. BACKGROUND

Opinion and Ordek Granting Dependants’ Motion to Dismiss [15] HON. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN, United States District Court Judge I. Introduction The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan commenced this action, on behalf of their members, on July 23, 2015 against Trinity Health Corporation and Trinity Health-Michigan (“Defendants”). See Dkt. No. 1. On October 1, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION JAMES A. TEILBORG, Senior District Judge. Two sophisticated entities, a wastewater discharger and a sanitary sewer service provider, contract for the ongoing treatment of effluent having a known chemical composition. Their comprehensive agreement includes among its provisions a promise by the wastewater discharger that it will conduct its

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-12-00330-CV DAVID NEAL DUNCAN, APPELLANT V. GARY F. PRESCOTT, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 251st District Court Randall County, Texas

486 F.Supp.2d 802 (2007) Christopher J. DEARBORN, Plaintiff, v. EVERETT J. PRESCOTT, INC., Defendant. No. 1:07-cv-0078-DFH-WTL. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. April 30, 2007. *803 *804 Danny E. Glass, Fine & Hatfield, Evansville, IN, for Plaintiff. <

638 F.Supp.2d 1317 (2009) PRESCOTT ARCHITECTS, INC. and Jeffrey Prescott, Plaintiffs, v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Case No.: 3:08cv532/MCR/EMT. United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Pensacola Division. July 1, 2009. *1318 Jonathan Thomas Holloway, Esq., Holloway Law Firm PA, Crestview, FL, for Plaintiffs.

383 F.Supp.2d 180 (2005) EVERETT J. PRESCOTT, INC., Plaintiff v. Richard D. ROSS, Defendant. No. CV-05-88-B-W. United States District Court, D. Maine. August 5, 2005. *181 *182 Michael A. Hodgins, Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, Augusta, ME, for Everett J Prescott Inc, Plaintiff.

60 P.3d 231 (2002) 204 Ariz. 91 Scott CANADY, an unmarried individual, Ralph and Margaret Canady, husband and wife, and Pamela Garapich, an unmarried individual, Intervening Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRESCOTT CANYON ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Prescott Canyon Estates Homeowners Association Board of Directors, and Don Larson, President, Defendants-Appellees. No. 1 CA-CV 02-0138.

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) LISA LOVELACE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 19-cv-001154 (ESH)

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0290p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT RITA MORRISSEY, an individual, ┐ Plaintiff-Appellant, │

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0304p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT RITA MORRISSEY, an individual, ┐ Plaintiff-Appellant, │

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS * RK KK RK KK KK KK KR KR Rk Ke ANNE ABBOTT, ** on behalf of her minor child, R.A., = * ** No. 14-907V Petitioner, ** Special Master Christian J. Moran Ed V. ** Filed: December 4, 2020 Ed SECRETARY OF HEALTH ** Attomeys’ fees and costs, interim AND HUMAN SERVICES, ** award, expert costs, remand Ed Respondent. ** * eK KK KK KK KK KK KR KR RK KF Andrew Downing, Van Cott & Talamante, PLLC, Phoenix, AZ, for petitioner; Jenni

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

At least one other Western District of Washington decision tracks Murray 's lead in holding that Regulation applies to ERISA-governed plans in effect before its enactment. In Treves v. Union Security Insurance Company, LLC , 2014 WL 325149 (W.D. Wash., Jan. 29, 2014), the district court considered whether the Regulation applied t