Cases

671 S.E.2d 14 (2009) Ronald REAVES, Deceased, Employee, Plaintiff, v. INDUSTRIAL PUMP SERVICE, Employer, American Interstate Insurance Company, Carrier, Defendants. No. COA07-1244. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. January 20, 2009. *16 Shipman & Wright, LLP, by Gary K. Shipman and William G. Wright, Wilmington, for pla

WALLACE, Judge. Fish Tale Sales and Service, Inc., petitions for certiorari review of an order denying its motion to file a third-party complaint in the underlying action. Because we conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of the law *59in denying Fish Tale’s motion, resulting in material harm that cannot be remedied on plenary appeal,

*830In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, inter alia, based upon strict products liability, the plaintiff appeals (1), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated April 24, 2006, as granted those branches of the separate motions of the defendant Presto Sales and Service, Inc., and the defendant Tuff Manufacturing, Inc.,

CASTEL, U.S.D.J. Plaintiffs are 108 individual automobile dealerships. They are located throughout the United States and sell cars made by a range of different manufacturers, including Audi, Buick, Chrysler, Ford, Hyundai, Porsche, Subaru, Toyota and others. Each plaintiff asserts that it was injured when defendant TrueCar, Inc. ("TrueCar") ran advertisements that falsely promised consumers a "no-haggle," no-negotiation car-buying e

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 120 Greater New York Taxi Association, et al., Appellants, v. New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, &c., et al., Respondents, Nissan Taxi Marketing, N.A., LLC., et al., Intervenors-Respondents. Mitchell Berns, for appellants. Elizabeth I. Freedman, for respondents.

Cardona, EJ. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Coccoma, J.), entered March 17, 2006 in Delaware County, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Flaintiff was the owner of Chapel Bank Farm, a dairy farm located in the Village of Hobart, Delaware County, which included a two-story milk house and adjoining barn. As relevant herein, the milk house contained a motoriz

745 F.Supp.2d 227 (2010) ARMSTRONG PUMP, INC., Plaintiff, v. Thomas HARTMAN d/b/a the Hartman Company and Optimum Energy, LLC, Defendants. No. 10-CV-446S. United States District Court, W.D. New York. October 7, 2010. *229 David Kulik, Floyd Chapman, Karin A. Hessler, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC, Jodyann Galvin, Paul I. Perlman

[Cite as Durnell's RV Sales, Inc. v. Beckler, 2023-Ohio-3565.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT LOGAN COUNTY DURNELL’S RV SALES INC., PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, CASE NO. 8-22-40 v. LISA BECKLER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS, -and- OPINION DAVID DURNELL, ET AL.,

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. *53 In this diversity tort action, Raymond Lapointe seeks damages for a severe knee injury sustained when he slipped on fluid at an auto dealership that his company had been hired to clean. Finding that the dealership neither had a duty to warn Lapointe of the puddle nor a

O’Donnell, J., dissenting. {¶ 13} Respectfully, I dissent. I believe that the trial court order dismissing this action pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(2), without prejudice and not on the merits, is not a final, appealable order. {¶ 14} The law with respect to final, appealable orders emanates from Section 3(B)(2), Article IV, Ohio Constitution, which states that “[c]ourts of appeals shall have su

VALIHURA, Justice: A dispute pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) turns on the interpretation of Delaware’s Equipment Dealer Contracts Statute, 6 Del. C. § 2720, et seq. (the “Dealer Statute”). To assist the Third Circuit in resolving this dispute, the Third Circuit certified the following question of law to this Court: Does

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John F. O’Donnell, J), entered May 18, 2005. The order denied the motion of defendants Zenith Fuel Systems, Inc. and Zenith Fuel Systems LLC to dismiss the amended complaint against them. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action in October 200

Dillard, Judge. We granted Laibe Corporation’s (“Laibe”) application for interlocutory appeal to review the trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss General Pump & Well, Inc.’s (“General”) complaint for, inter alia, *828improper venue and lack of personal jurisdiction. For the reasons set forth infra, we vacate the trial court’s denial of Laibe’s motion to dism

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT WILLIAM C. GRIESBACH, District Judge. Plaintiff Kaeser Compressors, Inc. (“Kaeser”), sells industrial compressors, blowers, and related products manufactured by its German affiliate Kaeser Compressoren GmbH. Defendant Compressor & Pump Repair Services, Inc. (“CPR”), is a Kaeser distributor for the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota, and a po

781 F.Supp.2d 819 (2011) KAESER COMPRESSORS, INC., Plaintiff, v. COMPRESSOR & PUMP REPAIR SERVICES, INC., Defendant. Case No. 09-C-521. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. February 14, 2011. *821 Michael A. Bowen, Trent M. Johnson, Foley & Lardner LLP, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. Jessica M. Swietlik, Te

803 F.Supp.2d 974 (2011) KAESER COMPRESSORS, INC., Plaintiff, v. COMPRESSOR & PUMP REPAIR SERVICES, INC., Defendant. Case No. 09-C-521. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. March 18, 2011. Michael A. Bowen, Trent M. Johnson, Foley & Lardner LLP, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. Jessica M. Swietlik, Terry E. Nilles, Von Briesen & Roper SC, Mi

Spearman, J. ¶1 — This appeal stems from an asbestos lawsuit. Kay Morgan appeals the summary judgment dismissal of the Morgans’ claims against Aurora Pump Co., Buffalo Pumps Inc., Elliott Co., IMO Industries Inc. (formerly DeLaval Turbine Inc.), Leslie Controls Inc., Warren Pumps LLC, Weir Valves & Controls USA Inc. (formerly Atwood & Morrill Co. Inc.), and Wm. Powell Co. (collectively Respondents).1

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-20-00042-CV KEARY BARNES AND BVW INTERESTS, LLC, Appellants v. SUPREME SERVICE & SUPPLY CO., INC., Appellee From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court

2 A.3d 76 (2009) VIKING PUMP, INC., Plaintiff, v. CENTURY INDEMNITY COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Warren Pumps LLC, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Century Indemnity Company, et al., Third-Party Defendants. Viking Pump, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff, v. John Crane, Inc., Houdaille Industries, Inc., Third-Party Defendants. C.A. No. 1465-VCS. Court of Chancery of Delaware.

MEMORANDUM OPINION STARK, District Judge: I. INTRODUCTION Currently pending before the Court are the following motions filed by Plaintiff Southern Track and Pump, Inc. (“STP”) and Defendant Terex Corporation (“Terex”): • Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Counts I and II of the Second Amended Complaint (D.I. 189)