Cases

William Foster Reese and Frances Reese (the Reeses) brought this medical malpractice action against Dr. James E. Stroh, Jr., alleging that he negligently failed to treat Mr. Reese's emphysema condition with a protein replacement therapy called Prolastin. The Reeses contend that the trial court erred in excluding their expert medical witness testimony on the basis that it lacked sufficient foundation to go to the jury. We reverse. I FACTS Willi

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 11-3369 _____________ ROBERT ZIMMERMAN, Appellant v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION _____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

103 Cal.Rptr.2d 570 (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 768 COORS BREWING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Jay R. STROH, as Director, etc., Respondent. No. C031851. Court of Appeal, Third District. January 30, 2001. Review Denied April 11, 2001. *572 Rogers, Joseph, O'Donnell & Quinn and Renee D. Wasserman,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY, No. 22-35986 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:22-cv-05540- RJB ROBERT FERGUSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Washington,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEATTLE PACIFIC UNIVERSITY, No. 22-35986 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:22-cv-05540- RJB ROBERT FERGUSON, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Washington,

*302Madsen, J. — William and Frances Reese brought this medical malpractice action against Dr. James E. Stroh, Jr., alleging that he negligently failed to treat Mr. Reese’s emphysema with a protein replacement therapy called Prolastin. The trial court excluded the Reeses’ expert medical witness’ opinion testimony regarding causation as lacking sufficient foundation to go t

This action was brought by the Commissioner of Labor pursuant to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of North Carolina (OSHANC), G.S. 95-126 et seq., and arises from Edward Nettles' discharge as an employee of defendant The Stroh Brewery Company. Plaintiff contends that Nettles was discharged in retaliation for filing a complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Division of the North Carolina Department of Labor (OSHD) about an unsafe working condi

765 N.E.2d 153 (2002) M. Dee JONES and Kimberly D. Jones and Robert L. Hufty and Stacy L. Hufty, Appellants-Plaintiffs, v. Trent G. NICHOLS and Nichols Corporation, an Indiana corporation for profit, Appellees-Defendants. No. 03A05-0106-CV-254. Court of Appeals of Indiana. March 12, 2002. *154 C. Richard Marshall, Columbus, IN, A

314 Md. 176 (1988) 550 A.2d 373 NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. ELLEN L. STROH, ET AL. No. 8, September Term, 1987. Court of Appeals of Maryland. November 29, 1988. Robert C. Morgan (Donahue, Ehrmantraut & Montedonico, Chartered, on the brief), Baltimore, for appellant. Edward J. Gilliss (Thomas F. McDonough and Royston, Mue

Schultheis, C.J. Cle Elum Bowl, Inc., leased a building from Robert and Sena Lanphere and opened a bowling alley. Pursuant to its lease agreement, Cle Elum bought general liability insurance for its business from North Pacific Insurance Company. Cle Elum also promised to remove ice and snow from the building. When the bowling alley roof collapsed due to a heavy accumulation of snow, Mr. Lanphere sued Cle Elum. North Pacific denie

62 Wis.2d 295 (1974) 215 N.W.2d 9 SLAWEK, Appellant, v. STROH and others, Respondents. No. 313. Supreme Court of Wisconsin. Argued October 30, 1973. Decided February 25, 1974. *301 For the appellant there was a brief by Wheeler, Van Sickle, Day & Anderson of Madison, and oral ar

141 S.W.3d 679 (2004) Gilbert H. OLVEDA, Jr., and Brendalee Olveda-North, Individually and As Representatives of the Estate of Freida Hernandez, Deceased, Appellants, v. Rene A. SEPULVEDA, M.D., and Baptist Health System d/b/a St. Luke's Hospital and St. Luke's Baptist Hospital, an Assumed Name, Appellees. No. 04-03-00319-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. May 26, 2004

756 F.Supp. 945 (1991) FIRST AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, Plaintiff, v. STRAIGHT CREEK PROCESSING COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 3:90CV00580. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. February 28, 1991. *946 Jacob Stroman, IV, William Harry Schwarzschild, III, Robert Edward Eicher, Williams, Mullen, Chr

CALABRESI, Circuit Judge: This trademark case concerns the right of a brewer to identify its beer with the words “Honey Brown.” Beer can be either lager or ale, and in this case, the plaintiff uses the words “Honey Brown” (and others) on its lager product, while the defendant uses the same words (and others) on its ale product. In resolving the appeal, we explicitly endorse the

*319OPINION ON REHEARING Opinion By Justice BRIDGES. Before the Court is the motion for rehearing and motion for en banc reconsideration of appellees/cross-appellants Cedar Springs Investments, L.L.C., Business Resources Corporation, and Brown’s River Marotti Company. Appellees’ motion for en banc reconsideration is denied. We grant a

Riley, J. (dissenting). I cannot agree with the majority’s interpretation of MCL 418.354; MSA 17.237(354) that (1) an employee’s lump-sum pension payment is coordinated with his weekly worker’s compensation payments by amortizing the lump sum over his life expectancy, and (2) an employer cannot coordinate an employee’s lump-sum payment from a *556pension that he places into

530 P.2d 989 (1975) Robert C. STROH and Ann O. Stroh, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. AMERICAN RECREATION AND MOBILE HOME CORPORATION OF COLORADO, d/b/a Lakewood of Denver Trailer Sales, Inc., and Schult Mobile Homes Corporation, a foreign corporation, Defendants-Appellants. No. 74-067. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. II. January 7, 1975. *991

April 03, 2009 Ms. Christine S. Kibbe Entergy Services, Inc. P.O. Box 2951 Beaumont, TX 77704 Ms. Collyn A. Peddie Williams Kherkher Hart Boundas, LLP 8441 Gulf Freeway, Suite 600 Houston, TX 77017-5051 RE: Case Number: 05-0272 Court of Appeals Number: 09-04-00152-CV Trial Court Number: A-167,088 Style: ENTERGY GULF STATES, INC. v. JOHN SUMMERS Dear Counsel: Today the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed opinions and judgment in the above-

777 F.Supp. 690 (1991) GREATER ROCKFORD ENERGY AND TECHNOLOGY CORP., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. 90-3119. United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division. October 28, 1991. *691 Wendell W. Wright, Wright & Wright, Danville, Ill., Bob F. Wright, Domengeaux & Wright, L

610 F.Supp. 214 (1985) PABST BREWING COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. Leo J. ANGER, Carol L. Arneson, Leon E. Babcock, Raymond F. Bakula, Robert E. Barduson, Germaine L. Blazek, David Brindley, Nancy Brown, Frances Drzoznowski, William A. Campbell, Gladys M. Carlson, Paul F. Chuchel, Karen M. Corbo, Francis Coulter, Estelle R. Czech, Robert E. Dorfner, Mary E. Engebretson, John D. Ericson, William J. Farrar, Patricia L. Fleishauer,