Cases

396 S.W.2d 40 (1965) UNITED-BILT HOMES, INC., Appellant, v. O. H. KNAPP, Emma Knapp, Mllburn Knapp, Hugh Younger and H. R. Bauerleln, Appellees. No. 5-3589. Supreme Court of Arkansas. November 8, 1965. Rehearing Denied December 13, 1965. Patten & Brown, Smith, Williams, Friday & Bowen, by John T. Williams and Frank Warden, Jr., Little Rock,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER YOUNG, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The named plaintiffs bring a putative class action against American Airlines, Inc., (“American”) on behalf of skycaps working at Logan Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, and at other airports served by American *17throughout the United States, who were affected by

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 18-1041 ____________ HEATHER R. OBERDORF; MICHAEL A. OBERDORF, her husband, Appellants v. AMAZON.COM INC., a Washington Corporation On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pen

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 18-1041 ____________ HEATHER R. OBERDORF; MICHAEL A. OBERDORF, her husband, Appellants v. AMAZON.COM INC., a Washington Corporation On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pen

21 F.Supp.2d 570 (1998) DACOTAH MARKETING AND RESEARCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff, v. VERSATILITY, INC., Defendant. VERSATILITY, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, v. SALES & MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS, INC., and Thomas D. Phillips, Third-Party Defendants. No. 98-142-A. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. September 30, 1998.

RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge. This ease arises out of an agreement between Time Insurance Company and Benny Estes to do business in the individual medical-insurance market. Time engaged Estes and his newly formed company, Estes and Associates, to create a network of “sub-agents” to distribute Time’s product. Within several years of its creation, however, this relationship be

MEMORANDUM OPINION KEADY, District Judge. In this Title VII class action, plaintiffs Henry Spight, Jeremiah Simmons and Ernest Rainer sue defendant Tidwell Industries, Inc., d/b/a LaSalle Homes (LaSalle), to redress alleged employment discrimination on the basis of race. LaSalle maintained a workforce of between 104 and 145 employees during 1975 through 1981 (the period relevant to this lawsuit) for the m

MEMORANDUM OPINION Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., United States District Judge Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 10 — granted in part and denied in Part Presently before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss of Defendants The Coca-Cola Company, Coca-Cola Refreshments USA, Inc., Keystone CocarCola and Bottling and Distribution Corporation, Keystone Coca-Cola Bottling Company,. Inc., Keystone

285 F.Supp.2d 1104 (2003) Howard P. YATES Plaintiff, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, Defendant. No. 3:02-0286. United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division. September 10, 2003. *1105 *1106 Morris Reid Estes, Jr., John P. Nefflen, Stewart, Estes & Donnell, Richard Hughes Batso

MEMORANDUM Padova, Judge. Five individual Plaintiffs have initiated separate actions against Bayer Corp., Bayer Healthcare LLC, Bayer Essure, Inc., Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals and Bayer A.G. (collectively, “Bayer”). Each action asserts twelve. claims for relief, seeking compensation for injuries that the Plaintiff suffered in connection with her use of Bayer’s female birth control device known as “Essur

[J-65-2022] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT TODD, C.J., DONOHUE, DOUGHERTY, WECHT, MUNDY, BROBSON, JJ. ALLEGHENY REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH : No. 26 MAP 2021 CENTER, ALLENTOWN WOMEN'S : CENTER, DELAWARE COUNTY : Appeal from the Orders of the WOMEN'S CENTER, PHILADELPHIA : Commonwealth Court at No. 26 MD WOMEN'S CENTER, PLANNED : 2019 dated January 28, 2020, and PAREN

3 S.W.3d 474 (1999) Victor AUSTIN, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT, Defendant/Appellee. Court of Appeals of Tennessee, at Jackson. February 25, 1999. Application for Permission to Appeal Denied July 6, 1999. *476 Sandra C. Isom, Dowden, Zdancewicz & Camp, Memphis, TN, for Plaintiff/Appellant. Dedrick B

69 S.W.3d 393 (2002) 347 Ark. 941 Sherry C. FAULKNER v. ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL; Bonnie Taylor, M.D.; Michelle Moss, M.D.; Lorrie Baker, R.N.; and Carl Chipman, R.N., C.C.P. No. 01-860. Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 14, 2002. *396 Mark Alan Peoples, PLC, Little Rock, for appellant. Friday, E

W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: In this diversity case governed by Louisiana law, Reliance Insurance Company (Reliance) appeals a judgment the district court entered against it on a performance bond. We conclude that Reliance’s offer to issue a bond guaranteeing a contractor’s performance was never accepted and Reliance was never bound on the bond. We therefore reverse.

77 P.3d 83 (2003) 102 Hawai'i 399 Jennifer L. TROYER, formerly known as Jennifer L. Decker, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carl W. ADAMS, M.D., Defendant-Appellant, and John Bellatti, M.D., and Patricia Bailey, M.D., Defendants-Appellees. No. 25174. Supreme Court of Hawaii. September 25, 2003. *85 Ellen Godbey

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc WELLS FARGO BANK, a National ) Supreme Court Banking Association, ) No. CV-00-0062-PR ) Plaintiff-Counterdefendant- ) Court of Appeals Appellee, ) No. 1 CA-CV 99-0184 ) ) Maricopa County v.

179 Ariz. 22 (1994) 875 P.2d 1327 Wayne BOGUE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BETTER-BILT ALUMINUM CO., Defendant-Appellee. No. 1 CA-CV 91-0536. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department C. January 11, 1994. Review and Cross-Petition for Review Denied July 6, 1994. *24 Rosemary Cook, Ph

509 So.2d 12 (1987) Robert BELSER, M.D. v. ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. CA 860302. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit. May 27, 1987. *13 Daniel Reed, Baton Rouge, for appellants Dr. Eugene Berry & St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. Paul DuÉ, Baton Rouge, W. Hugh Sibley, Greensburg, for

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 99 This Order relates to the cases listed in Appendix 1 Richard Mark Gergel, United States District Court Judge Before the Court is Defendant’s Omnibus Motion for Summary Judgment, (Dkt. No. 1564).1 For the reasons stated below, the motion is GRANTED IN PART.2 I, Background

38 P.3d 12 (2002) 201 Ariz. 474 WELLS FARGO BANK, a National Banking Association, Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellee, v. ARIZONA LABORERS, TEAMSTERS AND CEMENT MASONS LOCAL NO. 395 PENSION TRUST FUND; Arizona Laborers, Teamsters and Cement Masons Local No. 395 Defined Contribution Pension Trust Fund; Arizona Operating Engineers Defined Benefit Pension Trust Fund; Arizona Operating Engineers Defined Contribution Pension Tr