Cases

NOTICE: The attorneys on the attached list have the opportunity to comply with outstanding requirements prior to the effective date of the Supreme Court Order and not be administratively suspended. DATE: 11/14/2023 PENNSYLVANIA CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PAGE: 1 TIME: 14:.42:19 NON- COMPLIANT LAWYERS USER ID: jilgenfr

878 N.E.2d 1152 (2007) The STATE ex rel. BEELER SCHAD AND DIAMOND, P.C., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. RITZ CAMERA CENTERS, INC., and Ritz Interactive, Inc., and Wolf Camera, Inc., dELiA*s Corp., NBTY, Inc., and Vitamin World, Inc., and Vitamin World Online, Inc., Anthropologie, Inc., Anthropologie Direct, LLC, and Urban Outfitters Direct, LLC, MTS Incorporated, and Tower Direct LLC, Pacific Sunware of California, Inc., and Pacsun.Com, PetsMart, Inc.,

Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge KEENAN wrote the opinion, in which Judge DAVIS and Judge FLOYD joined. BARBARA MILANO KEENAN, Circuit Judge: In this appeal, we primarily consider whether certain short-term and long-term *163 disability benefits plans provide

HOLLAND, Justice: This is an appeal from a final judgment entered by the Court of Chancery in a proceeding that arises from a 2011 acquisition by MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. (“M & F” or “MacAndrews & Forbes”) — a 43% stockholder in M & F Worldwide Corp. (“MFW”) — of the remaining common stock of MFW (the “Merger”). From the outset, M & F’s proposal to take MFW private was made contingent upon two s

Adams v 161 Ct. St., LLC (2025 NY Slip Op 00837) Adams v 161 Ct. St., LLC 2025 NY Slip Op 00837 Decided on February 13, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law §

SIPA LIQUIDATION (Substantively Consolidated) MEMORANDUM DECISION AFFIRMING APPLICATION OF THE TRUSTEE’S INTER-ACCOUNT METHOD TO THE DETERMINATION OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN BLMIS ACCOUNTS STUART M. BERNSTEIN, United States Bankruptcy Judge: The motion before the Court (the “Motion ”) concerns the appropriate methodology for computing the “net equity” in a customer accou

17‐114‐cv(L) Frommert v. Conkright 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 4 August Term, 2017 5 6 (Argued: April 18, 2018 Decided: January 14, 2019 ) 7 8 Docket Nos. 17‐114‐cv(L), 17‐738‐cv(CON) 9 10 _____________________________________ 11

OPINION & ORDER LORETTA A. PRESKA, Chief Judge: Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), filed this action against Defendant Bloomberg L.P. (“Bloomberg”) after several current and former employees had filed charges with the EEOC alleging sex/pregnancy discrimination and retaliation1 in violation of Title

August 5 2014 DA 13-0420 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2014 MT 207 LEWIS AND CLARK COUNTY, Petitioner and Appellant, v. GREG L. HAMPTON, Respondent and Appellee. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the First Judicial District,

460 F.Supp.2d 1338 (2006) SICHUAN CHANGHONG ELECTRIC CO., LTD., Plaintiff, and Philips Electronics North America Corp., Apex Digital Inc., Philips Consumer Electronics Co. of Suzhou Ltd., TCL Corp., Plaintiff-Intervenors, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and International Brotherhood Of Electrical Workers, Five Rivers Electronics Innovation, LLC, Konka Group Co., Ltd., Industrial Division of the Communication Workers of America, Prima Technol

138 Nev., Advance Opinion 43 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA DIAMOND NATURAL RESOURCES No. 81224 PROTECTION & CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION; J&T FARMS, LLC; GALLAGHER FARMS LLC; JEFF LOMMORI; M&C HAY; CONLEY LAND & LIVESTOCK, LLC; JAMES FILED ETCHEVERRY; NICK ETCHEVERRY;

Justice THOMAS, dissenting. I join Justice ALITO's dissent in full. I write separately to point out that the foundation on which the Court builds its latest disparate-impact regime-Griggs v. Duke Power Co.,401 U.S. 424, 9

642 F.3d 80 (2011) William FOOTE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TOWN OF BEDFORD et al., Defendants, Appellees. No. 10-2094. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard March 9, 2011. Decided April 21, 2011. Mark A. Stull, for appellant. Charles P. Bauer, with whom Beth A. Deragon and Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, P.C. were on brief,

February 19 2014 OP 13-0430 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2014 MT 45 ROBERT VAN ORDEN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION; USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY; USAA GENERAL INDEMNITY COMPANY; and GARRISON PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE C

496 F.Supp.2d 231 (2007) Mathen GEORGE, Plaintiff, v. The NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Thomas Charles, and Carl Bartelli, Defendants. No. 04 CV 3263(RJD)(MDG). United States District Court, E.D. New York. July 17, 2007. *232 Jason M. Wolf, Wolf & Wolf LLP, Bronx, NY, Mitchell Rutkin, Mitchell Rutkin, Attorney at Law, New

[Cite as Rodriguez v. Catholic Charities Corp., 2025-Ohio-4840.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA MICHELLE RODRIGUEZ, : ADMINISTRATRIX, Plaintiff-Appellant, : No. 114437 v. : CA

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF SPECIAL MASTER’S AUGUST 1, 2011 REPORT RE ESI PRODUCTION (Dkt. No. 924) SUZANNE H. SEGAL, United States Magistrate Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On August 1, 2011, the Honorable Venetta S. Tassopoulos (Ret.), in accordance with her designation as the Special Master in th

26 F.Supp.2d 1022 (1998) WHEELING-PITTSBURGH STEEL CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. MITSUI & COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. C2-98-1122. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. November 16, 1998. *1023 Edward Anthony Matto, Bricker & Eckler, Columbus, OH, for plaintiff. Kenneth G. Weigel, James P. Gil

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: On January 14, 2013, this Court issued an opinion in the above-captioned case granting partial summary judgment to Defendant Daniel Morel (“Morel”) and denying summary judgment to Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Agence France Presse (“AFP”) and Third-Party Counterclaim Defendants Getty Images (US), Inc. (“Getty”), and The Washington Post C

Cite as 2017 Ark. 150 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE SUSPENSION OF opinion Deliveted April 21,, 201'7 ATTORNEYS'WHO FAILED TO PAY 2017 ANNUAL ATTORNEY-LICENSE FEE PER CURIAM The final deadline for attorneys to pay the 201.7 annual attorney-license fee was April !7, 201"7.1 Rule VII(C) of the Rules