Cases

Prince George’s County Council, et al. v. Concerned Citizens of Prince George’s County, et al., No. 23, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Gould, J. LAND USE – ZONING – STANDARD OF REVIEW Maryland courts review amendments to the text of a zoning ordinance as legislative actions. Md. Overpak Corp. v. Mayor of Balt., 395 Md. 16, 35 (2006); MBC Realty, LLC v. Mayor of Balt., 192 Md. App. 218, 234 (2010). In Prince George’s County, amendments to the zoning ordinance are considered “final decision[s]

Prince George’s County Council, et al. v. Concerned Citizens of Prince George’s County, et al., No. 23, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Gould, J. LAND USE – ZONING – STANDARD OF REVIEW Maryland courts review amendments to the text of a zoning ordinance as legislative actions. Md. Overpak Corp. v. Mayor of Balt., 395 Md. 16, 35 (2006); MBC Realty, LLC v. Mayor of Balt., 192 Md. App. 218, 234 (2010). In Prince George’s County, amendments to the zoning ordinance are considered “final decision[s]

Prince George’s County Council, et al. v. Concerned Citizens of Prince George’s County, et al., No. 23, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Gould, J. LAND USE – ZONING – STANDARD OF REVIEW Maryland courts review amendments to the text of a zoning ordinance as legislative actions. Md. Overpak Corp. v. Mayor of Balt., 395 Md. 16, 35 (2006); MBC Realty, LLC v. Mayor of Balt., 192 Md. App. 218, 234 (2010). In Prince George’s County, amendments to the zoning ordinance are considered “final decision[s]

Prince George’s County Council, et al. v. Concerned Citizens of Prince George’s County, et al., No. 23, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Gould, J. LAND USE – ZONING – STANDARD OF REVIEW Maryland courts review amendments to the text of a zoning ordinance as legislative actions. Md. Overpak Corp. v. Mayor of Balt., 395 Md. 16, 35 (2006); MBC Realty, LLC v. Mayor of Balt., 192 Md. App. 218, 234 (2010). In Prince George’s County, amendments to the zoning ordinance are considered “final decision[s]

COLEMAN, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT: ¶ 1. Edward Lavonne Love (“Love”) filed a complaint against Wesley Health System, LLC (“Wesley”) alleging negligence, medical malpractice, and wrongful death of his wife, Jackie Katherine Love (“Mrs. Love”). 1 A default judgment was entered against Wesley. The trial

673 F.Supp.2d 1287 (2009) KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, and K-State Athletics, Inc, formerly known as The Intercollegiate Athletic Council of Kansas State University, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. Ronald D. PRINCE, and IPP, L.L.C., Defendants. No. 09-4112-SAC. United States District Court, D. Kansas. December 8, 2009. *1290 George A. Hanson, S

OPINION BY SHOGAN, J.: Appellant, Raymond Seels, administrator of the estate of Terri Seels-Davila (“Seels-Davila”), deceased, and Raymond Seels, 1 in his own right, appeal from the judgment entered on July 22, 2015, in favor of Tenet Health System Hahnemann, LLC, d/b/a Hahnemann University Hospital

427 F.Supp.2d 372 (2006) Courtney PRINCE, Plaintiff, v. MADISON SQUARE GARDEN, a corporation; Jason Vogel, an individual; and Ryan Halkett, an individual, Defendants. No. 04 Civ.8151 RWS. United States District Court, S.D. New York. April 10, 2006. *373 *374 Outten & Golden, New York, NY (

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT INTERNATIONAL UNION OF No. 23-124 OPERATING ENGINEERS, NLRB No. STATIONARY ENGINEERS, 20-CA-270047 LOCAL 39, OPINION Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent, ---------------------------------

NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. *1027This matter arises from a Distribution Agreement between Plaintiff Lawmen Supply Company of New Jersey, Inc. and Defendant Glock, Inc. Before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant in part and deny in part Defendant's motion. The Court will grant Plaintiff

436 F.Supp. 907 (1977) Complaint of TUG OCEAN PRINCE, INC. and Red Star Towing & Transportation Company, as Owner and Charterer of the TUG OCEAN PRINCE, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability, Plaintiffs and Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Third-Party Defendant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. PITTSTON MARINE TRANSPORT CORPORATION, Red Star Towing & Transportation Company, Tug Ocean Prince

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 598 U. S. Part 2 Pages 508–593 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT May 18, 2023 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 requ

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER SPATT, District Judge: This action arises out of allegations by the Plaintiff Johnny Seemann (the “Plaintiff’) that he suffered injuries due to the unseaworthiness of a barge on which he worked, and the alleged negligence of the Defendant Coastal Environmental Group, Inc. (the “Defendant Coastal”), in violation of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104 (the “Jones Act”) and ge

ORDER J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge. Plaintiffs Johnny Brantley and Robert M. Pou brought this action against their former employer, Ferrell Electric Inc., and its owner and president, James N. Ferrell, to recover unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA” or “the Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. Defendants now move for summary judgment and to strike evidence submitted by P

PHILIP P. SIMON, JUDGE This is a products liability case where Barbara Kaiser claimed to have been substantially and permanently injured by a mesh product that was implanted in her vagina to treat her pelvic organ prolapse. The mesh product was designed and manufactured by defendants Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, Inc. After a two week trial, the jury agreed with Mrs. Kaiser and found in her favor on her failure to warn and desi

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT INTERNATIONAL UNION OF No. 23-124 OPERATING ENGINEERS, NLRB No. STATIONARY ENGINEERS, 20-CA-270047 LOCAL 39, ORDER AND Petitioner, AMENDED v. OPINION NATIONAL LABOR RELAT

*1328OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the Court on Defendant Wright Medical Technology, Inc. ’s (“Defendant” or “Wright Medical”)1 Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, or in the Alternative, Motion for-New Trial and to Amend the Judgment [241] (“Ren

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 600 U. S. Part 1 Pages 181–411 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 29, 2023 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 requ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER MATSUMOTO, District Judge. Mich & Mich. TGR, Inc. (“plaintiff’) commenced this action alleging that defendant Brazabra, Corp. (“defendant” or “Brazabra”) are infringing upon plaintiffs “Bra Strap Retainer,” U.S. Reissue Patent No. 43,766 by, inter alia, knowingly and willingly importing into the United States, selling, and causing to be sold, and offering for sale