Cases

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge. This is a diversity action brought by the trustees of the Leonard Van Lew Living Trust — which is alleged to be a perfected secured creditor — to recover for the wrongful termination of the Trust’s financing statement and for the fraudulent misappropriation of the proceeds of the sale of its collateral. (Filing 1, Complaint ¶ 1.) Defendant and l

930 A.2d 144 (2007) In re Ann Cooper PENNING; Ugo Gramegna, Appellant, and George J. Hughes, Elizabeth Hughes, and Hughes & Bentzen, PLLC, Appellants. Nos. 05-PR-455, 05-PR-457. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued January 18, 2007. Decided July 12, 2007. As Amended August 16, 2007. *145

888 F.Supp. 959 (1995) Robert B. DePUGH, Plaintiff, v. Rick D. PENNING, Sheriff of Grundy County, Iowa, In his Personal and Official Capacities, John L. McCarter, In His Personal Capacity, Todd A. Geer, In His Personal Capacity, et al. No. C 93-0226. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division. May 26, 1995. *960

If recovery of attorney's fees is limited to prevailing plaintiffs under California Penal Code § 502(e), Defendants are not permitted to recover their attorneys' fees as Defendants. See Swearingen , 2010 WL 1495204, at *2 ; Facebook, Inc. ,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION; GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS EDWARD J. DAVILA, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Richard Noll (“Noll”) and Rhythm Motor Sports, LLC (“Rhythm”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this is a putative class action against Defendant eBay, Inc., (“Defendant”) regarding the recurring fees for the Good ’Til Cancelled (“GTC”) listings

Cynthia L. Martin, Judge This case requires us to address whether section 452.375.5(5) 1 permits a person asserting third-party custody rights to intervene as a matter of right in an adoption proceeding. K.L. appeals from the trial court’s order and judgment which, based on standing, (i) dismissed K.L.’s petition seekin

22 B.R. 616 (1982) In the Matter of Robert Richard PENNING, d/b/a Campers Corral, Debtor. BOMBARDIER CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Robert Richard PENNING, d/b/a Campers Corral, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 81-00329-B, Adv. No. 81-0985. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D. August 12, 1982. *617 Marilyn Jean Kelly, Bir

DYK, Circuit Judge. These appeals arise from two takings suits related to the 2009 bankruptcies of General Motors Corporation (“GM”) and Chrysler LLC (“Chrysler”). The plaintiffs are former dealers of those companies whose franchises were terminated in the bankruptcies. The plaintiffs allege that these terminations constituted a taking because the government required them as a condition of its providing financial assistance

POOLER, Circuit Judge: This petition for review comes before us on remand from the Supreme Court. Previously we held, with Judge Leval dissenting, that the indecency policy of the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC” or “Commission”) was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). See Fox Television Stations, Inc.

Case: 24-1177 Document: 41 Page: 1 Filed: 08/11/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ POWERBLOCK HOLDINGS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. IFIT, INC., Defendant-Appellee ______________________ 2024-1177 ______________________ Appeal from the United States Di

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. This case grows out of an employment agreement Patrick Manion had with Boat Dealers’ Alliance, Inc. (BDA), a buying *537 cooperative of independent retail marine dealers. After Manion was terminated as executive director, he brought this action against BDA and its general coun

Case: 22-2036 Document: 49 Page: 1 Filed: 10/08/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ALEXSAM, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. AETNA, INC., Defendant-Appellee ______________________ 2022-2036 ______________________ Appeal from the United States D

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT QUINTARA BIOSCIENCES, INC., No. 23-16093 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:20-cv-04808- v. WHA RUIFENG BIZTECH, INC.; GANGYOU WANG; ALAN LI; RF OPINION BIOTECH LLC, Defendants-Appellees, and ALEX WONG; RUI SHAO, Defendants. Appe

Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion in Limine to Preclude Defendants from Offering Expert Testimony on an Issue from Any Witness Not Identified as an Expert on that Issue or Who Did Not Submit a Report [Doc. #762-6] ARTERTON, District Judge. Plaintiffs renew them motion in limine pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37, to preclude defendants MJ Research, Inc., Michael Finney and John Finney (collectively “MJ”) from offer

494 F.Supp.2d 54 (2007) AMGEN, INC., Plaintiff, v. F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD., a Swiss Company, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, a German Company and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., a New Jersey Corporation Defendants. No. CIV.A. 05-12237-WGY. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. July 3, 2007. *55 *56

Case: 20-2011 Document: 61 Page: 1 Filed: 02/04/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ APPLE INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. WI-LAN INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellant ______________________ 2020-2011, 2020-2094 ______________________ Appeals from the

Case: 20-2011 Document: 61 Page: 1 Filed: 02/04/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ APPLE INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. WI-LAN INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellant ______________________ 2020-2011, 2020-2094 ______________________ Appeals from the

Pen v Wheels, Inc. (2024 NY Slip Op 04974) Pen v Wheels, Inc. 2024 NY Slip Op 04974 Decided on October 9, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 606 U. S. Part 2 Pages 831–941 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 27, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit