Cases

702 F.Supp.2d 826 (2010) Patricia DUDEK, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS & THOMAS ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS AT LAW, LLC, Defendant. Case No. 1:08-CV-2159. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. March 22, 2010. *829 Robert J. Berk, Cleveland, OH, for Plaintiff. Franklin C. Malemud, Reminger & Reminger, Cle

643 F.Supp. 1108 (1986) Leslie R. MAZE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FOND DU LAC, a municipal corporation, City Center Development Corporation, a joint venture consisting of Community Savings and Loan Association, a Wisconsin savings and loan association, and Wisconsin Cablevision and Radio Co., Inc., a Wisconsin Corporation, Defendants. No. 85-C-473. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.

*2To: Michael D. Huitink Michael B. Apfeld Godfrey & Kahn, S.C. 1780 North Water Street Milwaukee, WI 53202-3590 Beth Kushner Thomas Armstrong von Briesen & Roper, S.C. 411 E. Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1000 Milwaukee, WI 53202-4427 Lisa M. Lawless Ann M. Maher Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek, S.C. 555 E. Wells St., Ste. 1900 Milwaukee, WI 53202-3819

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT JON P. McCALLA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE Before the Court is Plaintiff Great American Insurance Company (“GAIC”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December "23, 2016. (ECF No. 25.) Defendants Nelson, Inc., Willie .. Nelson, Sr., and Hattie Nelson filed, a response in opposition on January 2Ó, 2017. (ECF No. 26.) P

OPINION AND ORDER STEWART, United States Magistrate Judge: INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs filed this class action alleging violations of Title II of the Americans with *1200Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34 (“First Claim”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) (“Seco

651 F.Supp.2d 997 (2009) Anastasia BAKAS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AMERIPRISE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., f/k/a American Express Financial Advisors Inc., and Does 1-20, Defendants. Civ. No. 09-1263 (RHK/SRN). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. September 3, 2009. *998 Jon E. Druc

324 S.C. 516 (1996) 479 S.E.2d 808 The STATE, Respondent, v. Ralph A. ANDREWS, Appellant. No. 2582. Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard October 8, 1996. Decided October 28, 1996. Rehearing Denied January 24, 1997. *518 Assistant Appellate Defender, Robert M. Dudek, S

DECISION AND ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT PLUMMER AND SHERIFF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 13), GRANTING DEFENDANT SOL-LENBERGER’S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 2-1, at PagelD# 126-27), GRANTING DEFENDANT ES-TRIDGE’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOC. 17), AND TERMINATING CASE. Thomas M. Rose, Judge, United States District Court Plaintiff Michael J. Sollenberger (“Plaintiff Sollenberger”) filed suit against Jennifer A

OPINION Myron H. Thompson, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the court is a challenge to a decision by the Governor of Alabama to terminate the State’s Medicaid provider agreement with Planned Parenthood Southeast, Inc. (‘PPSE’), which funds services unrelated to abortion, including routine gynecological exams, pregnancy counseling, and breast- and cervical-cancer screenings. The plaintiffs are PPSE and

(2007) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. BROADCOM CORPORATION, Defendants. Civil No. 05-CV-1958-B(BLM). United States District Court, S.D. California. August 6, 2007. ORDER ON REMEDY FOR FINDING OF WAIVER RUDI M. BREWSTER, Senior District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On March 21, 2007, this Court entered an Order (1) finding in

MEMORANDUM & ORDER MATSUMOTO, District Judge: Plaintiffs USHA Holdings, LLC (“USHA”) and Atul Bhatara (“Bhatara”) brought suit against defendants Franchise India Holdings, Limited (“Franchise India”), Francorp Advisors Private Limited (“FAPL”), and Gaurav Marya (“Marya”) in the Supreme Court of New York, Queens County, by filing a Summons and Complaint dated June 14, 2012.1

177 Mich. App. 660 (1989) 442 N.W.2d 755 EXECUTONE BUSINESS SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. IPC COMMUNICATIONS, INC Docket Nos. 100681, 101577, 101795. Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided June 19, 1989. Schlussel, Lifton, Simon, Rands, Galvin & Jackier (by Donald B. Lifton and Lawrence M. Dudek), for plaintiff. Butzel

284 Wis.2d 573 (2005) 2005 WI 125 701 N.W.2d 440 Matthew FERDON, by his Guardian ad Litem, Vincent R. Petrucelli, Cynthia Ferdon and Dennis Ferdon, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Petitioners, v. WISCONSIN PATIENTS COMPENSATION FUND, Medical Protective Company, Michael J. Brockman, M.D., and Aurora Health Care, Inc., d/b/a Bay West Gynecology & Obstetrics, Ltd., Defendants-Respondents, CONNECTICUT GEN

523 So.2d 55 (1988) Charlene L. MILLER, BY her next friend, Gail MILLER, Thomas J. Miller, Glen Miller and Tommy Jean Eckert[1] v. STIGLET, INC. No. 57374. Supreme Court of Mississippi. March 16, 1988. *56 W. Harvey Barton, John L. Hunter, Cumbest, Cumbest & Hunter, Louis Fondren, Pascagoula, for appellants.

PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. In a suit for patent infringement filed by The Laitram Corporation against NEC Corporation, NEC Information Systems, Inc., and Sears, Roebuck and Company (collectively “NEC”), the grant of partial summary judgment in favor of NEC was certified for immediate appeal. 1

PELL, Circuit Judge. These consolidated appeals are from summary judgments granted in suits challenging two resolutions of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB or Board).Both of the resolutions at issue grant authority to the First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Wisconsin (First Federal) to operate branch facilities in two areas near Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The plaintiff-appellant in No. 78-1038, City Federal Savings

465 So.2d 311 (1985) Luther Ray HOLLINGSWORTH, on Behalf of Himself & Heirs of Rita Sue Hollingsworth v. BOVAIRD SUPPLY CO. No. 55154. Supreme Court of Mississippi. February 27, 1985. *312 Stanford Young, David Slaughter, Waynesboro, for appellant. C. Denton Gibbes, Gibbes, Graves, Mullins, Bullock & Ferris, Laurel

96 Wis.2d 438 (1980) 291 N.W.2d 869 WISCONSIN BANKERS ASSOCIATION (INCORPORATED), a Wisconsin nonstock corporation, on behalf of its members, and Kilbourn State Bank, a Wisconsin banking association, and Grafton State Bank, a Wisconsin banking association, on behalf of all state or federally charted banks in Wisconsin, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Petitioners, v. MUTUAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF WISCONSIN, a Wisconsin sav

87 Wis.2d 470 (1978) 275 N.W.2d 130 WISCONSIN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, and others, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MUTUAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF WISCONSIN, Defendant-Respondent.[†] No. 77-347. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin. Argued October 25, 1978. Decided December 29, 1978. *477

600 F.2d 681 CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD and First Federal Savings &Loan Association, Defendants-Appellees.MUTUAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF WISCONSIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD et al., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 78-1038, 78-1498. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh