⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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 “Paul Brian Staples v. General Electric Co.”

Montana Supreme Court · 2009-04-10 · Published · cited 41× · 2009 MT 123; 206 P.3d 919; 350 Mont. 184; 2009 Mont. LEXIS 159
206 P.3d 919 (2009) 2009 MT 123 350 Mont. 184 REVELATION INDUSTRIES, INC., formerly known as Revelation Engineering, Inc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Appellee. No. DA 07-0752. Supreme Court of Montana. Argued and Submitted January 14, 2009. Decided April
California Court of Appeal · 2017-08-25 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 8/25/17 (unmodified opinion attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, D070553 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 30-2008-00078246) v.
California Court of Appeal · 2017-08-04 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 8/4/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, D070553 Plaintiff and Appellant, v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2008-00078246) SABIC INNOVATIVE PLASTICS US, LLC, et al., Defendants and Respondents.
Illinois Supreme Court · 2013-06-28 · Published · cited 123× · 2013 IL 114617
ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Supreme Court Standard Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lay, 2013 IL 114617 Caption in Supreme STANDARD MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee, v. Court: NORMA LAY, Indiv. and as Ex’r of the Estate of Theodore W. Lay, d/b/a Ted Lay Real Estate Agency, et al., Appellants. Docket No. 114617 Filed
District Court, M.D. Florida · 2002-09-19 · Published · cited 1× · 264 F. Supp. 2d 1018; 65 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1876; 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26178; 2002 WL 32063831
264 F.Supp.2d 1018 (2003) DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. MEE INDUSTRIES, a California corporation; and, Florida Power Corporation, a Florida corporation, Defendants. No. 6:00CV437-ORL-31DAB. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division. September 19, 2002. *1020 Michael R. Levin, Baker & Hostetler, LLP, O
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-04-17 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX
District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2018-02-02 · Published · cited 11× · 306 F. Supp. 3d 610
JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge *615In this putative class action, familiarity with which is presumed, Plaintiffs-several *616institutional investors-allege that Defendants, some of the world's largest banks, illegally manipulated the U.S. Dollar ISDAfix ("ISDAfix"),
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2020-09-23 · Published · cited 0×
Judgment rendered September 23, 2020. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 53,565-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA ***** KENNETH LAWRENCE Plai
District Court, District of Columbia · 2018-02-15 · Published · cited 2× · 310 F. Supp. 3d 274
Denise J. Casper, United States District Judge *280I. Introduction Anthony Pagliaroni ("Pagliaroni"), Vicki O'Brien ("O'Brien"), Catherine Lynch ("Lynch") and John Costello ("Costello") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") seek damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief from Defendants Mastic Home Exteriors ("Mastic") and Dec
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2015-09-15 · Published · cited 342× · 801 F.3d 412; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16412; 2015 WL 5334119
WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part: The majority’s view of modern commerce is unfortunate. It takes an isolationist approach in which each business must all but lock itself in semi-solitary or risk the taint of antitrust claims. Whatever validity the isolationist approach may once have had, it is profoundly injurious in an increasingly interconne
Norman v. Rosspublic domain
California Court of Appeal · 2024-04-23 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 4/23/24 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION * IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR HAYLEY MARIE NORMAN, B316971 consolidated with B326626 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County v. Super. Ct. No. 20STCV35711)
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2012-01-09 · Published · cited 26× · 844 F. Supp. 2d 611; 2012 WL 45418; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2190
MEMORANDUM OPINION NORA BARRY FISCHER, District Judge. I. Introduction This matter comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Docket Nos. 47 & 49. For the reasons that follow, the Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Docket No. 47) will be denied, and the Defendants’ mo
District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2013-04-05 · Published · cited 3× · 938 F. Supp. 2d 724; 2013 WL 1399344; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49526
MEMORANDUM KEVIN H. SHARP, District Judge. This qui tam action brought by Relator Marc Osheroff attacks certain inducements offered by medical clinics to Medicare beneficiaries in the Miami area. Defendants HealthSpring, Inc., HealthSpring of Florida, Inc., Leon Medical Centers, Inc., and Benjamin Leon, Jr., have filed Motions to Dismiss (Docket Nos. 56 & 57). Those Motions have be
District Court, S.D. New York · 2014-03-27 · Published · cited 4× · 14 F. Supp. 3d 120; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41359; 2014 WL 1257765
OPINION AND ORDER J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge: This is a case about the sale of merchandise relating to the movie Office Space, a 1999 cult classic about the soul-crushing experience of working under incompetent management. The merchandise at issue is the Office Space “Box of Flair,” a product that was sold to consumers beginning in 2007. “Flair” refers to buttons that wait
District Court, S.D. New York · 2006-08-29 · Published · cited 13× · 450 F. Supp. 2d 243; 81 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1642; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61321; 2006 WL 2516568
450 F.Supp.2d 243 (2006) CANON INC., Plaintiff, v. GCC INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, GCC Management Limited, Gatehill International Limited, Q-Imaging (USA) Inc., and Tallygenicom LP, Defendants. No. 06 Civ. 3324(PKC). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 29, 2006. *244 *245
District Court, E.D. New York · 2018-10-04 · Published · cited 32× · 350 F. Supp. 3d 143
KIYO A. MATSUMOTO, United States District Judge *153Plaintiff Uni-Systems, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company ("Uni-Systems") commenced this action on January 11, 2017 against defendants United States Tennis Association, Inc., a not-for-profit incorporated in New York ("USTA"); Rossetti Inc., a Michigan Corporation, ("Rossetti"); Hunt Construction Group, Inc., a
District Court, N.D. California · 2008-12-30 · Published · cited 1× · 591 F. Supp. 2d 1113; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105841; 2008 WL 5422890
(2008) Lois RODDEN, Plaintiff, v. JEFFERSON PILOT FINANCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. C 07-6489 SI. United States District Court, N.D. California. December 30, 2008. ORDER RE: PARTIES' CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge. On December 12, 2008, the Court heard argument on the parties' cross-motions
District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2014-08-28 · Published · cited 0× · 45 F. Supp. 3d 881; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120134; 2014 WL 4265847
OPINION AND ORDER BARBARA B. CRABB, District Judge. In this civil action, plaintiffs Ultratec, Inc. and CapTel, Inc., contend that defendants Sorenson Communications, Inc. and CaptionCall, LLC have infringed the following eight patents related to a telephone relay system between deaf and hearing users: United States Patents Nos. 5,909,-482, 6,233,314, 6,594,346, 6,603,835, 7,319,-
District Court, E.D. Texas · 2007-08-14 · Published · cited 1× · 509 F. Supp. 2d 593; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59381; 2007 WL 2350644
509 F.Supp.2d 593 (2007) ADVANCEME INC., Plaintiff v. RAPIDPAY, LLC, et al., Defendant. No. 6:05 CV 424. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Tyler Division. August 14, 2007. *594 *595 *596 *597
California Court of Appeal, 5th District · 2017-08-04 · Published · cited 68× · 222 Cal. Rptr. 3d 83; 14 Cal. App. 5th 343; 47 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20099; 2017 WL 3326959; 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 680
HALLER, J. *354The Orange County Water District (District) was created by the California Legislature to protect and manage groundwater supplies within its territory, which covers most of Orange County, California. The District and other regulatory agencies have long been aware of localized groundwater contamination caused by hazardous substan