Cases

This case involves the application of the sales tax to a manufacturer which installs its products outside Alabama. The circuit court and the Court of Civil Appeals, 455 So.2d 846, upheld an assessment of state and county sales taxes against petitioner, Disco Aluminum Products Company, Inc. Disco petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari. Two companies which have been subjected to tax assessments similar to that against Disco have filed amicus br

This is a sales tax case governed by § 40-23-1, Code of Alabama 1975. Disco Aluminum Products Company (Disco) manufactures custom-ordered blinds, window units and door units, using aluminum tubing and glass purchased at wholesale in the fabricating process. The State Department of Revenue made a final sales tax assessment against Disco on July 31, 1979, in the amount of $32,621.14 (including penalties and interest). The final assessment includ

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE BREMERTON CELLULAR ) CONSOLIDATED TELEPHONE COMPANY LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 5949-VCL IN RE SALEM CELLULAR ) CONSOLIDATED TELEPHONE COMPANY LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 6886-VCL IN RE PROVO CELLULAR ) C.A. No. 6887-VCL TELEPHONE COMPANY LITIGATION ) IN RE BLOOMINGTON CELLULAR ) C.A. No. 6888-VCL TELEPHONE COMPANY LITIGATION ) IN RE SARASOTA CELLULAR ) C.A. No. 6889-VCL TELEPHONE COMPANY LI

35 F.3d 1371 39 ERC 1486, 24 Envtl. L. Rep. 21,516 NORTHWEST RESOURCE INFORMATION CENTER, INC.; TroutUnlimited; Oregon Natural Resources Council,Inc.; Idaho Steelhead and SalmonUnlimited; The WildernessSociety; Petitioners,andPuget Sound Power & Light Company; Northwest IrrigationUtilities, Inc. ("NIU"); Columbia/Snake River IrrigatorsAssociation, Inc. ("CSRIA"); Port of Lewis

PELL, Circuit Judge. Wolens appeals from the district court’s judgment, following a full hearing, that two models of popcorn poppers manufactured by Wear-Ever Aluminum, Inc. and sold by the other named defendants do not infringe his patented hot-air popper. The defendants cross-appeal from the district court’s holding that the Wole

HEDRICK, Judge. The one question raised by the plaintiff on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. When the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff¿ it tends to show the following: Plaintiff had a motel constructed in Icard, North Carolina, and in connection therewith negotiated with the defendant for

</

FINAL COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-05-315-CV ASTORIA INDUSTRIES OF IOWA, INC. APPELLANT V.

Ed. F. MoFaddin, Associate Justice. The issue here posed is, the effect of escalator clauses being included in a petition for rate increase. A somewhat similar question was presented in the recent case of Monsanto Chemical Co. v. Robinson, 225 Ark. 1006, 290 S. W. 2d 6 (opinion delivered February 20, 1956). In the present case the appellant is the Aluminum Company of America; and A. B. Green Fire Brick Co

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 18-1602V ************************* * ANDRES NIEVES, * Chief Special Master Corcoran * * Petitioner, * Filed: April 17, 2023

ACCEPTED 07-14-00405-CV SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS 2/18/2015 4:43:44 PM

ORDER AND REASONS CARL J. BARBIER, District Judge. Before the Court is a 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Rec. Doc. 10), filed by Defendants, the City of Slidell and six of its employees (collectively “the City Defendants”). Plaintiff has filed an opposition (Rec. Doc. 12), to which the City Defendants have replied. (Rec. Doc. 25) Both the Plaintiff and the City Defendan

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE August 26, 2015 Session DUFF BRUMLEY v. THE CITY OF CLEVELAND Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradley County No. V11616 Hon. W. Neil Thomas, Judge1 No. E2014-02213-COA-R3-CV-FILED-OCTOBER 15, 2015 A former police officer with the City of Cleveland brought this re

84 F.3d 560 64 USLW 2769 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.ROBERTSON-CECO CORP., Defendant-Appellee,UNITED DOMINION INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant. No. 663, Docket 95-7370. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Dec. 20, 1995.Decided May 22, 1996.

3 A.3d 390 (2010) 2010 ME 89 John W. SEARLE v. TOWN OF BUCKSPORT et al. Docket: Kno-09-319 Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Argued: October 28, 2009. Decided: August 31, 2010. *392 Steven D. Silin, Esq., Robert H. Furbish, Esq. (orally), Berman & Simmons, Lewiston, ME, for John W. Sear

</

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-06-418-CV DOLORES ZARNOW, AS APPELLANT ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF

Affirmed and Majority and Dissenting Opinions filed September 27, 2007 Affirmed and Majority and Dissenting Opinions filed September 27, 2007. In The Fourteenth Court of App

454 S.W.2d 540 (1970) CARBOLINE COMPANY, Respondent, v. E. Dean JARBOE, William R. Keithler and Plas-Chem Corporation, a Missouri Corporation, Appellants. No. 53566. Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2. May 4, 1970. As Modified on Motion for Rehearing or for Transfer Denied June 8, 1970. *541 Sommers &

Tavitas, Judge. Case Summary [1] River Ridge Development Authority ("River Ridge") appeals the trial court's order granting attorney fees to Outfront Media, LLC ("Outfront"), David Watkins, No Moore, Inc. ("No Moore"), the Schlosser Family Limited Partnership ("the Schlosser Family"), the Town of Utica, and the Utica Board of Zoning Appeals ("U