Cases

OPINION PAEZ, Circuit Judge: This case, which involves a dispute over the proceeds of a life insurance policy, raises the following issue: Does the federal interpleader remedy shield a negligent stakeholder from tort liability for its creation of a conflict over entitlement to the interpleaded funds? We hold that it does not, and that a claimant may s

Hon. M. James Lorenz, United States District Judge Pending before the Court in this putative class action alleging violation of antitrust laws is Defendants' motion to dismiss the first amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff filed an opposition and Defendants replied. The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1.d.1. For the

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY AND SETTING FORTH NEW DEADLINE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT Hon. Bernard G. Skomal, United States Magistrate Judge I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff brought this action against the Defendants in the Superior Court of the State of California claiming the Defendants violated the Cartwright Act and the Unfair Competition Law. Plaintiff primarily a

ORDER HEWITT, Judge. Before the court are plaintiffs Memorandum in Support of Claim of Continuing Capacity to Sue or Be Sued (Pl.’s Memo or plaintiffs Memo); defendant’s Memorandum in Support of Defendant’s Opposition to Plaintiffs Memorandum in Support of Claim of Continuing Capacity to Sue or Be Sued (Def.’s Memo or defendant’s Memo); Defendant-Intervenor’s Response to Emerald’s Memorandum in

ORDER HEWITT, Judge. This is a post-award bid protest filed by Emerald Coast Finest Produce Company, Incorporated (Emerald Coast), a fresh produce distributor that serves military facilities, Plaintiffs Statement of Facts (Facts) 2,1 challenging an award to Military Produce Group, LLC (Military Produce Group) under a solicitation issued by the United States, acting

ORDER HEWITT, Judge. Before the court are Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement the Administrative Record and Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Supplement (Mot. Supp. or motion to supplement), Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Amended and Restated Complaint and Memorandum in Support of the Motion for Leave to File (Mot. Amend, or motion to amend) (collectively, plaintiffs’ motions), Defendant’s R

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW.981 A. Background.981 1. Factual Background — The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.981 a. The Central Valley and the River Systems.981 b. The State Water Project and the Central Valley Project.983 c. Threatened and

606 F.Supp.2d 1122 (2009) PACIFIC COAST FEDERATION OF FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATIONS, Institute for Fisheries Resources, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Carlos M. GUTIERREZ, in his official capacity as Secretary of Commerce, et al., Defendants, San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, et al., Defendant-Intervenors. No. 1:06-cv-00245-OWW-GS. United States District Court, E.D. California.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS JAMES I. COHN, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon several dismissal motions filed by Defendants: Defendants Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Wells Fargo Securities LLC (f/k/a Wachovia Capital Markets LLC), J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. (£/k/a Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.), UBS Securities LLC, and Barclays Capital

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 17 2024 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50048 Plaintiff-Appellee,

BAXTER, J., Concurring. I join the majority’s narrow conclusion that, on the facts of this case, defendants have no affirmative defense, based on the free exercise of religion clauses of the federal and state Constitutions, against plaintiffs’ Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51) claims of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. With respect to the application of article I, section 4 of the California Constitut

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50048 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:20-cr- 00387-AB-1 v. STEVEN DUARTE, AKA Shorty, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California André Birotte

Filed 8/24/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ---- WEST COAST UNIVERSITY, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, C094077 v. (Super. Ct. No. 34-2020-

ERVIN, Judge. We reverse and remand the deputy commissioner’s order dismissing appellant and claimant Karl Gulliford’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. His claim stems from a July 13, 1980 auto accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with Nikko Gold Coast Cruises, the appel-lee. The claim falls within the dual-purpose doctrine, an exception to the going and coming rule which routinely bars compen

Filed 11/4/21 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY B310783 MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. 20STCP02985) v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al., Defendants and Respondents; CHINA SHIPPING (NORTH

RILEY, Chief Judge, dissenting. Relying on an expansive reading of a single line in Worth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 500, 95 S.Ct. 2197, 45 L.Ed.2d 343 (1975), the majority unnecessarily decides a difficult Article III standing question of first impression in our circuit, leading to an unsound ruling on the merits. I respectfully dissent. I. STANDING As the majority

Justice LEHRMANN announced the Court’s decision and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, III, V, and VII, in which Justice JOHNSON, Justice WILLETT, Justice GUZMAN, and Justice BOYD joined, and delivered an opinion with respect to Parts IV and VI, in which Justice JOHNSON, Justice WILLETT, and Justice BOYD joined. “If a mediated settlement agreement meets [c

MEMORANDUM Joan N. Feeney, United States Bankruptcy Judge I. INTRODUCTION The matter before the Court is the First Amended Complaint to Determine Nondis-chargeability of Debt filed by Maine Coast Shellfish, LLC (“Maine Coast” or the “Plaintiff’) against Jonathan Cowles (“Cowles,” the “Defendant,” or the “Debt- or”). Pursuant t

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE LEBANON COUNTY EMPLOYEES’ ) RETIREMENT FUND and TEAMSTERS ) LOCAL 443 HEALTH SERVICES & ) INSURANCE PLAN, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v.

DYK, Circuit Judge. Pacific Coast Marine Windshields Limited (“Pacific Coast”) is the assignee of all rights in U.S. Patent No. D555,070 (“the '070 patent”) for an ornamental boat windshield design. Pacific Coast brought suit against Malibu Boats, LLC, Marine Hardware, Inc., Tressmark, Inc., MH Windows, LLC, and John F. Pugh (collectively “Malibu Boats”) in the Middle District o