Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Rhone v. Charles River Laboratories, Inc.”
Ashley v. Abbott Laboratoriespublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Personal Jurisdiction WEINSTEIN, District Judge: *557TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.557 II. FACTS.558 A. Background.558 B. Present Actions.559 C. Motions.559 III. NEW YORK SUBSTANTIVE LAW AND RULES A
United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.public domain
449 F.Supp.2d 1 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, and National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, Intervenors, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., (f/k/a Philip Morris, Inc.), et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 99-2496(GK). United States Distri
In Re Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.public domain
137 F.Supp.2d 985 (2001) In re TELECTRONICS PACING SYSTEMS, INC., Accufix Atrial "J" Leads Products Liability Litigation Nos. MDL1057, C-1-95-87. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. March 8, 2001. *986 *987 Richard Stuart Wayne, Strauss & Troy, Cincinnati, OH, Ronald Richar
Transclean Corp. v. Bridgewood Services, Inc.public domain
77 F.Supp.2d 1045 (1999) TRANSCLEAN CORPORATION, James P. Viken, Jon A. Lang, and Donald E. Johnson, Plaintiffs, v. BRIDGEWOOD SERVICES, INC., Defendant. No. Civ. 97-2298 RLE. United States District Court, D. Minnesota. November 12, 1999. *1046 *1047 *1048
Ford v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.public domain
703 So.2d 542 (1997) Kenneth E. FORD, et al. v. MURPHY OIL U.S.A., INC., et al. Nos. 96-C-2913, 96-C-2917 and 96-C-2929. Supreme Court of Louisiana. September 9, 1997. Charles S. McCowan, Jr., James P. Dore, Glenn M. Farnet, Baton Rouge, Donald F. Woods, Jr., Los Angeles, CA, Dewey Ballantine, Kean, Miller, Hawthorne, D'Armond, McCowan & Jarman, Baton Rouge, for
662 F.Supp.2d 1069 (2009) In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LITIGATION. This Document Relates To: 3:05-CV-596 (SlaymanOregon) 3:07cv120 (Nevada) 3:07cv272 (Arizona) 3:07cv322 (Connecticut) 3:07cv324 (GivensFLSA) 3:07cv325 (VargasMCSA) 3:07cv326 (North Carolina) 3:07cv328 (LeighterOregon) 3:08cv336 (Ohio) 3:07cv411 (Georgia) 3:07cv412 (Vermont) 3:07cv478 (Colorado) 3:08cv193 (BoudreauxLouisiana) 3:08c
Lopez v. Delta Int'l Mach. Corp.public domain
JAMES O. BROWNING, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's Rule 59 Motion for New Trial and/or to Alter or Amend the Judgment, filed August 23, 2017 (Doc. 107)("Motion"). The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court clearly erred when it relied on a contract that Plaintiff Ismael Lopez submitted in supplemental briefing in granting Stanley Black & Decker Inc.'s Motion
Dennis Speerly v. General Motors, LLCpublic domain
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0170p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DENNIS SPEERLY; JOSEPH SIERCHIO; DARRIN │ DEGRAND; DANIEL DRAIN; WAVERS SMITH; RICHARD
Abraham v. WPX Energy Production, LLCpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER James 0. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Alter or Amend and to Reconsider Memorandum Opinion and Order [Doe. 252], filed September 15, 2016 (Doc. 255)(“Motion to Amend”); and (ii) the Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Class Certification, filed September 15, 2016 (Doc. 256)(“Second Motion for Class Certifi
Anderson Living Trust v. WPX Energy Production, LLCpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion and Supporting Brief to Determine That This Matter Proceed as a Class Action, filed January 6, 2014 (Doe. 194)(“Motion”). The Court held a two-part class certification hearing with its first portion on March 10,11, and 12, 2014, and its second portion on April 3 and 4, 2014.
Markweise v. Peck Foods Corp.public domain
205 Wis.2d 208 (1996) 556 N.W.2d 326 (93-CV-006741) Daniel MARKWEISE, Bonnie Markweise, individually and as Guardian for Steven Douglas Raymond Pallo and Wayne Murphy, Plaintiffs-Respondents,[] v. PECK FOODS CORPORATION and Northbrook Property and Casualty Insurance, Defendants, CITY OF MILWAUKEE and City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works, Defendants-Appellants. (93-CV-012419) Darin GAINES, Willia
711 A.2d 45 (1995) E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. 89C-AU-99. Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County. Submitted: August 11, 1995. Decided: August 23, 1995. Charles S. Crompton, Jr. and Richard L. Horwitz of Potter, Anderson & Corroon and Richard Allen Paul and Erin Kell
Cerro Metal Products v. Marshallpublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT ADAMS, Circuit Judge. This appeal requires us to decide whether the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has properly authorized its compliance officers to seek ex parte inspection warrants in order to inspect industrial establishments for alleged health and safety violations. The problem is sharpened by the fact that Supreme Court dictum noting that such auth
In re Synthroid Marketing Litigationpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER BUCKLO, District Judge. The plaintiffs, third party payers, sued the defendants, Knoll Pharmaceutical Co. [“Knoll”], BASF Corporation [“BASF”], Boots Pharmaceuticals, Inc. [“Boots”], and individual defendants alleging federal and state claims relating to the marketing and sale of the drug Synthroid. The plaintiffs move to certify a class of all insurance providers a
In Re Genetically Modified Rice Litigationpublic domain
666 F.Supp.2d 1004 (2009) In re GENETICALLY MODIFIED RICE LITIGATION. Case No. 406MD1811 CDP. United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division. October 9, 2009. *1012 Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr., Armstrong Teasdale, LLP, St. Louis, MO, pro se. J. Michael Ponder, Phillip J. Barkett, Jr., Cook and Barkett, Cape Girardeau,
ACCEPTED 13-14-00725-cv THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 4/2/2015 10
ACCEPTED 03-14-00510-CV 4243321 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
ACCEPTED 13-15-00167-CV FILED THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS IN THE 13TH COURT OF APPEALS
In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigationpublic domain
*875 OPINION GENE E.K. PRATTER, District Judge. I. Introduction Indirect purchasers1 of domestic eggs and egg products charge producers of those goods, and the producers’ trade groups, with conspiring to manipulate the supply of, and thereby fix prices for, domestically-sold eggs an
620 F.2d 964 8 O.S.H. Cas.(BNA) 1196, 1980 O.S.H.D. (CCH) P 24,411 CERRO METAL PRODUCTS, Division of Marmon Group, Inc.v.MARSHALL, Ray, Secretary of Labor; Rhone, David H., RegionalAdministrator; Rieder, Matthew, Staff Attorney,andInternational Union, United Automobile, Aerospace andAgricultural Implement Workers of America, and itsLocal 1282, (Intervening Defts.)International Union, United Au