Cases

MEMORANDUM RULING ELIZABETH ERNY FOOTE, District Judge. Before the Court is the Defendant EP Energy E & P Company, L.P.’s Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. [Record Document 18].1 Defendant Vernetta Queen is not a party to this motion and has filed her own Motion To Dismiss on different grounds.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-1812 MARY RODGERS-ROUZIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN QUEEN STEAMBOAT OPERATING COMPANY, LLC and HMS GLOBAL MARITIME LLC, Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United S

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 38492 CDA DAIRY QUEEN, INC., and ) DISCOVERY CARE CENTRE, LLC OF ) SALMON, ) Boise, August 2012 Term ) Plaintiffs-Appellants, ) 2013 Opinion No. 44

CHARLES R. JONES, Judge. | ¡The Appellant, Delta Steamboat Company (hereinafter referred to as Delta), appeals a judgment in favor of the Appel-lee, Anthony Todd. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand in part.1 Mr. Todd was an employee of the Delta Steamboat Company, which was the owner/operator/manager of the vessel the America Queen. Mr. Todd was employed as a relief e

201 P.3d 537 (2008) QUEEN CREEK SUMMIT, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; Rite of Passage, Inc., a Nevada corporation; Canyon State Academy, Inc., an Arizona corporation; Youth Partners Foundation, an Arizona corporation; Bank of America, N.A., a federally chartered banking association, Petitioners, v. The Honorable Glenn DAVIS, Judge of the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the County of Maricopa, Respondent Judge,

HORTON, Justice. CDA Dairy Queen, Inc. and Discovery Care Centre, LLC of Salmon (collectively, Dairy Queen) filed a class action against the Idaho State Insurance Fund (SIF) seeking a declaratory judgment that SIF violated Idaho Code § 72-915 by failing to distribute premium rate readjustments on a pro rata basis. The district court g

OPINION TRACY CHRISTOPHER, Justice. This is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to compel- arbitration. In a single issue, appellant Scott D. Morgan (Morgan) asserts that the trial'court erred in refusing to compel arbitration of the underlying dispute for three reasons: (1) the claim was previously submitted to arbitration, but withdrawn

PAUL J. SIMON, Judge. Curtis Schwartz, employee, appeals the award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) awarding 400 weeks for permanent partial disability for his scheduled and unscheduled losses pursuant to section 287.190 RSMo 1994 (all further references shall be to RSMo 1994 unless otherwise noted). Employee contends that Commission erred in concluding that it was limited to

Banke, Chief Judge. The appellants sued the appellee to recover for personal injuries they allegedly sustained when the appellee attacked them in the checkout line at a grocery store. The appellee counterclaimed to recover some $14,500 he had previously paid to the appellants as reimbursement for their medical expenses. A jury found for the appellee on both the main claim and the counterclaim. On appeal, the appellants contend

361 F.Supp. 1009 (1973) In the Matter of the QUEEN LTD. No. 70-251. United States District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania. July 27, 1973. *1010 Nathan Lavine, Adelman & Lavine, Philadelphia, Pa., for trustees. Harry Zuckerman, Ehrich & Zuckerman, Miami, Fla., for Manpower & Kelly. Peter C. Paul, Rawle & Henderson

78 Wyo. 359 (1958) 326 P.2d 1108 ANNAJEAN A. RAYBURNE Plaintiff and Appellant vs. O.H. QUEEN and ALICE QUEEN Defendants and Respondents. No. 2816. Supreme Court of Wyoming. June 17, 1958. *360 For the plaintiff and appellant the cause was submitted upon the brief and also oral argument of Scotty Gladstone

73 Wn.2d 783 (1968) 440 P.2d 453 REEFER QUEEN COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. MARINE CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN COMPANY, Respondent, J.M. MARTINAC SHIPBUILDING CORPORATION, Defendant, MANTEL GEAR WORKS, INC., Appellant.[*] No. 39012. The Supreme Court of Washington, Department One. May 2, 1968. Paul W. Steere, for appellant. <

73 Wn.2d 774 (1968) 440 P.2d 448 REEFER QUEEN COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. MARINE CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN COMPANY, Appellant.[*] No. 39717. The Supreme Court of Washington, Department Two. May 2, 1968. *775 Skeel, McKelvy, Henke, Evenson & Uhlmann, Frederick V. Betts, James M. Lindsey, J

JOHN E. MILLER, Chief Judge. This suit was filed by the United States of America on May 28, 1958, against' the defendant railroad to recover alleged overcharges on shipments by the Commodity Credit Corporation in 1952 and 1953. The United States asserts that it is the real party in interest and claims'' jurisdiction of this court under Title 15 U.S.C.A. § 714b (c). On June 25, 1958, the defendant railroad

SANBORN, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint of the United States in an action brought by it on May 25, 1958, to recover overcharges in freight rates collected by the defendant (appellee), a common carrier by rail, from the Commodity Credit Corporation on various lots of hay shipped into Arkansa

WESTERFIELD, J. Plaintiff was struck and injured by an automobile. He sues for damages. Prom a judgment for plaintiff for $250.00, defendants have appealed. In this court the defendant, Bernard Manheim, through his counsel, admitted liability, his co-defendant, J. K. D’Avricourt, persists in his denial of responsibility. *313The plai

ROSS, Circuit Judge. These cases were argued and submitted together. They are libels against the respective ships mentioned for alleged pilotage services. Both cases are alike, except that in that against the ship Umatilla a question is raised as to the sufficiency of the tender of the services sued for. . The cases were submitted upon an agreed statement of facts, from which it appears that the libelant in eac

GRONER, C. J. This case involves the right of the District of Columbia to assess and collect a *45municipal tax on certain personal property of petitioner found in the District on the statutory tax assessment day. Petitioner, a Maryland corporation, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of beer in Cumberland, Maryland. An independent distributor located in the Distric

This action was brought in the name of the State of Texas by its Attorney-General against the "Texas Insurance Club," an association of insurance agents, and against fifty-seven foreign insurance corporations, doing business in this State under permits granted in pursuance of the statutes of the State. It is alleged in the petition, that the Texas Insurance Club was created with the consent and by the procurement of the other defendants, with the object of organizing a combination for the pur

Higgins v Miles (2025 NY Slip Op 02913) Higgins v Miles 2025 NY Slip Op 02913 Decided on May 14, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.