Cases

(2008) Kurt JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE, INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. No. 5:07-CV-167. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio. February 12, 2008. OPINION & ORDER JAMES S. GWIN, District Judge. On December 19, 2007, the parties filed their briefs for judgment on the administrative record in this Employee Reti

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING Before SMITH, DENNIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: The petition for panel rehearing is DENIED, and no judge in regular active service having requested that the court be polled on rehearing en banc, the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. The opinion, 343 F.3d 331 (5th Cir.2003), is withdrawn for the limi

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: In what may be the ultimate negative value class action lawsuit,1 plaintiffs challenge defendants’ alleged practice of paying lower benefits and charging higher premiums to blacks in the sale of low-value life insurance. The district court denied plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2), finding, inter alia, that the majority

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA BLAKELY MCHUGH et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. S259215 Fourth Appellate District, Division One D072863 San Diego County Superior Court 37-2014-00019212-CU-IC-CTL Augus

OPINION AND ORDER MELINDA HARMON, District Judge. Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, alleging in Dr. Doris M. Jackson’s Second Amended Complaint age discrimination under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (“TCHRA”), Texas Labor Code § 21.051, denial of promised medical leave benefits under Texas statutory and common law, breach of contract and promissory estoppel, ret

ACCEPTED 13-14-00725-cv THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 7/23/2

ACCEPTED 13-14-00725-cv THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 4/2/2015 10

ACCEPTED 04-14-00829-cv 04-14-00829-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 17–1592 Filed June 29, 2018 GREGORY BALDWIN, Appellee, vs. CITY OF ESTHERVILLE, IOWA; MATT REINEKE, Individually and in his Official Capacity as an officer of the Estherville Police Department; and MATT HELLICKSON, Individually and in his Official Capacity as an officer of the Estherville Police Department, Appellant. Certified questions of law from the Unite

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

ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX

FILED IN st 1 COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TX 12/07/2015 CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, NO. CLERK IN THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TE

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. This case arises from claims of unconstitutional racial segregation of school children in the Kansas City metropolitan area. After trial, the district court1 imposed an intradistrict remedy against the Kansas City, Missouri School District (KCMSD) and the State of Missouri with the State bearing approximately three-fourths of the cost. The district court found that

ACCEPTED 13-15-00342-CV THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 10/5/2015 6:01:20 PM

807 F.2d 657 36 Ed. Law Rep. 569 Kalima JENKINS, by her next friend, Kamau AGYEI, et al.,Appellants/Appellees,andAmerican Federation of Teachers, Local 691, Appellant/Appellee,v.The STATE OF MISSOURI, et al., Appellants/Appellees,Park Hill School District R-5 and Dr. Merlin A. Ludwig,Superintendent thereof, et al., Appellees. Nos. 85-1765, 85-1949, 85-1974 and 85-207

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. The Kansas City School District desegregation case is before us again and we now must consider the scope of the remedies ordered by the district court,1 specifically with respect to magnet schools and capital improvements, and the tax increases authorized to generate the Kansas City, Missouri School District’s share of the costs of these programs.2</

812 F.Supp.2d 1133 (2011) The CONSOLIDATED DELTA SMELT CASES. Nos. 1:09-CV-00407 OWW DLB, 1:09-cv-00480-OWW-GSA, 1:09-cv-00422-OWW-GSA, 1:09-cv-00631-OWW-DLB, 1:09-cv-00892-OWW-DLB. United States District Court, E.D. California. August 31, 2011. *1136 Audrey M. Huang, Paul S. Weiland, John J. Flynn, III, Robert C. Horton, Nossaman LLP, I

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2022 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions by email at: JUD.Reporter@vermont.gov or by mail at: Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801, of any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press. 2022 VT 32

855 F.2d 78 CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION, Petitioner in No. 86-3798,v.UNITED STATES of America and Interstate Commerce Commission,Respondents,Association of American Railroads, Bessemer & Lake ErieRailroad Company, Edison Electric Institute, TheFertilizer Institute, and NationalIndustrial TransportationLeague, Intervenors.ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS, Petitioner in No. 86-3799,v.UNITED STATES of