Cases

134 N.J. 1 (1993) 629 A.2d 831 MORTON INTERNATIONAL, INC., SUCCESSOR TO MORTON THIOKOL, INC., NOW NAMED THIOKOL CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT, v. GENERAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, A PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION (SUCCESSOR TO THE POTOMAC INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE UNITED STATES BRANCH OF GENERAL ACCIDENT FIRE AND LIFE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD.); AFFILIATED FM INSURANCE COMPANY, A RHODE ISLA

OPINION CLELAND, District Judge. This case is grounded in a story all too familiar to jurists (and to busiriess interests, we suspect): a promising joint venture gone wrong. Following the breakdown of the parties’ busiriess relationship, Cranpark, Inc. (“Cranpark”) sued and won a $15.6' million jury verdict based on a

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ AQUA PRODUCTS, INC., Appellant v. JOSEPH MATAL, PERFORMING THE FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Intervenor ______________________ 2015-1177 _______________

The California Desert Conservation Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1781; The California Desert Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1410aaa-7j; The Common Varieties Act, 30 U.S.C. § 611; The Federal Land Management and Policy Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq.; The Mining Law of 1872, 30 U.S.C. §§ 22-54; Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, U.S. Const, amend. V, el. 4; Unpatented mining claims; 28 U

446 F.Supp.2d 551 (2006) KRAFT FOODS NORTH AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff, v. BANNER ENGINEERING & SALES, INC., Defendant. No. CIV.A. 305CV248. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. August 25, 2006. *552 *553 *554

222 F.Supp.2d 423 (2002) ASTRA AKTIEBOLAG, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ANDRX PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendant. Astra Aktiebolag, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Cheminor Drugs, Ltd., et al., Defendants. Astra Aktiebolag, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Genpharm Inc., Defendant. Astra Aktiebolag, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Kremers Urban Development Co., et al., Defendants. In re Omeprazole Patent Litigation. No.

GILMAN, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court, in which BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., Chief Circuit Judge, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, and CLAY, Judges, joined. KRUPANSKY, Judge (pp. 578-597), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. BOGGS, Judge (p. 597), also delivered a separate dissenting opinion, in which BATCHELDER, Judge, joined. OPINION GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Donald G. Wexler was hired

ACCEPTED 03-14-00735-CV 4703327 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

NO. 01-15-00267-CV FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS FOR THE 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS 3/25/2015 12:01:47 PM AT HOUSTON CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

ACCEPTED 03-15-00528-CV 7458584 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ACCEPTED 14-14-00855-cv FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 3/18/2015 12:34:30 PM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) TRAVIS LEBLANC, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-542 (RBW) ) UNITED STATES ) PRIVACY AND CIVIL

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1745 Doc: 70 Filed: 07/30/2026 Pg: 1 of 68 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-1745 VAPOR TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION; AMV HOLDINGS, LLC, d/b/a Kure CBD and Vape; WAGES AND WHITE LION INVESTMENTS, LLC, d/b/a Triton Distributio

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MANSI REDDY BUSHIREDDY, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 25 - 1102 (SLS) v. Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan TODD M. LYONS, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Defendant.

278 P.3d 632 (2012) 174 Wn.2d 642 WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION, a Washington nonprofit corporation; David Grumbois, an individual, Appellants, and Gruss, Inc., a Washington corporation, Plaintiff, v. STATE of Washington, Respondent, and John McKay, Bruce Beckett, Costco Wholesale Corporation, The Yes On 1183 Coalition, Washington Restaurant Association, MacKay Restaurant Group,

ORDER SCHREIER, Chief Judge. Plaintiffs, Daniel Pucket, Amy Pucket, Luke Pucket, and Benjamin Pucket (collectively referred to as plaintiffs), filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Hot Springs School District and its School Board (collectively referred to as School District) alleging that School District’s refusal to bus children to Bethesda Lutheran School violates the First and Fourteen

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 17-250V (to be published) ************************* Chief Special Master Corcoran NEONA MARTIN, on behalf of the * ESTATE OF JOSEPH JAMES MARTIN, * * Filed: July 17,

ZINTER, Justice (concurring specially). [¶ 27.] I concur in the Court’s opinion to the extent it suggests that Landowners initially had standing because they alleged SDCL 41-9-1.1(2) constituted a taking under the state and federal constitutions. I concur because, when standing is at issue in the early stages of litigation, “the focus is on the party seeking relief, not on the issues [prese

OPINION LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge. Editor Note: The paragraphs related to headnotes 1-105 are found on the supplemental pieces of this opinion on Westlaw. Part 1 is 2014 WL 815553; Part 2 is 2014 WL 815613; Part 3 is 2014 WL 815715; Part 4 is 2014 WL 815869 [Head-notes 1-2]; Part 5 is 2014 WL 815923 [Headnotes 3-51]; Part 6 is 2014 WL 815961 [Headnotes 52-87]; Part 7 is 2014 WL 816086 [Headnotes 88-

ACCEPTED 15-25-00102-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 7/24/2025 12:08 PM NO. 15-25-00102-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE CLERK