Cases

980 F.Supp. 1463 (1997) Patricia M. COOK and James A. Cook, her husband, Plaintiffs, v. ROBERT G. WATERS, INC., Defendant. No. 96-1459-CIV-T-17E. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division. October 2, 1997. *1464 C. Kenneth Stuart, Jr., W. James Kelly, P.A., Lakeland, FL, for Plaintiffs. Gregory David Jones

94 S.W.3d 636 (2002) Tracy COOK-PIZZI and Husband, Joe Pizzi, Appellants, v. VAN WATERS & ROGERS, INC., a Subsidiary of Univar, et al., Appellees. No. 07-01-0115-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo. March 13, 2002. Rehearing Overruled April 30, 2002. *639 Nelson & Nelson, Tom H. Whiteside, Lubbock, fo

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE, GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND PERMITTING PLAINTIFFS TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FREDERICK P. STAMP, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This case is about a washing machine and the products liability suit it inspired. After years of use, the plaintiffs allege that they found their washer had developed a “biofilm” that rui

JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judge: Florida public school teachers challenged Florida’s Student Success Act, as well as the Florida State Board of Education’s and three school districts’ implementation of the Act, alleging that the Act resulted in teacher evaluation policies that violated the teachers’ rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Because we agr

969 So.2d 1287 (2007) Rosemary WATERS v. BROOKSHIRE GROCERY COMPANY. No. 2007-203. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. November 7, 2007. *1288 J. Morgan Passman, Walker & Passman, L.L.P., Alexandria, LA, for Appellant, Brookshire Grocery Company. Steven P. Mansour, Alexandria, LA, for Appellee, Rosemary Waters

Waters v Saha (2024 NY Slip Op 03071) Waters v Saha 2024 NY Slip Op 03071 Decided on June 5, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

229 P.3d 1058 (2010) NEWFLOWER MARKET, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Elizabeth C. COOK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 09CA0956. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I. April 29, 2010. *1059 Robinson Waters & O'Dorisio, Stephen L. Waters, Kimberly A. Bruetsch, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Stevens, Littman, Biddison, T

904 F.Supp. 616 (1995) William WATERS, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. James GROSFELD and Nancy Grosfeld, Defendants. No. 95-CV-73108-DT. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. November 17, 1995. *617 Laurence M. Scoville, Jr., Clark, Klein, Detroit, MI, Neil A. G

2 F.Supp.2d 66 (1997) WATERS CORPORATION and Philip Taymor, Brian K. Mazar and Douglas M. Berthiaume, Individually and as Trustees of the Waters Retirement Plan, Plaintiffs, v. MILLIPORE CORPORATION, the Retirement Plan Committee, Jeffrey D. Gard, Patricia Powers, Robert Tunsmeire, Geoffrey Nunes, Michael Carroll, and Retirement Plan for Employees of Millipore Corporation (as a Nominal Defendant), Defendants. No. CIV. A. 96-

711 F.Supp. 1121 (1989) Simbi WATERS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Marion BARRY, Jr., et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 89-0707 (CRR). United States District Court, District of Columbia. April 24, 1989. Arthur B. Spitzer and Elizabeth Symonds, American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the Nat. Capital Area, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs. Frederick D. Cooke, Jr., Corp. C

2025 IL App (3d) 240322 Opinion filed March 12, 2025 ____________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT 2025 MICHAEL POUNDSTONE,

711 F.Supp. 1125 (1989) Simbi WATERS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Marion BARRY, Jr., et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 89-0707 (CRR). United States District Court, District of Columbia. May 24, 1989. *1126 *1127 Arthur B. Spitzer and Elizabeth Symonds, American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the Nat. Cap

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-84,565-01 EX PARTE KERRY MAX COOK, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 1-77-179-A IN THE 114TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FROM SMITH COUNTY RICHARDSON J., delivered the opinion of the Court in which HERVEY, NEWELL, WALKER, SLAUGHTER, and MCCLURE, JJ., joined. KELLER, P.J., filed a conc

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE KEVIN COOK AND NICHOLE COOK ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2021-0522-SG ) DEEP HOLE CREEK ASSOCIATES, a ) Delaware partnership, DEEP HOLE ) CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC., a ) Delaware corporation, LAURENCE L. ) BURKE and SUZANNE T. WAT

Paul E. Danielson, Justice, dissenting. |14I would affirm the circuit court’s ruling that the loan transactions at issue were not securities within the purview of the Arkansas Securities Act, currently codified at Arkansas Code Annotated §§ 23-42-101 to -509 (Repl.2012 & Supp.2013). Even if the circuit court’s order fails to mention any reliance on Schultz v. Rector-Phill

PHILLIPS, Judge. In January, 1979 defendant deeded approximately 480 acres of Beaufort County land to plaintiff. Based upon allegations that the boundaries of the tract are not as defendant’s agent represented them to be plaintiff seeks to rescind or reform the deed on the grounds of fraud or mistake; not mutual mistake, though, but his unilateral mistake caused or known about by the seller, as laid down in this case when it

347 S.E.2d 65 (1986) Vernon F. HOWELL v. Donald Ray WATERS. No. 862SC66. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. August 19, 1986. *67 Pritchett, Cooke & Burch by Stephen R. Burch and W.W. Pritchett, Windsor, for plaintiff-appellant. Wilkinson & Vosburgh by John A. Wilkinson, Washington, for defendant-appellee. W

Memorandum Decision VOROS, Judge: ¶ 1 Lon Arden Cook (Husband) and Bri-gette Jeanne Cook (Wife) divorced in 2011. Husband appeals from the Decree of Divorce, asserting six claims of error. We affirm. ¶ 2 Each of Husband’s six claims challenges a substantive ruling of the trial court and contends that the trial court’s findings of

HANSEN, Circuit Judge. This appeal involves two separate cases which were consolidated béfore the district court. The plaintiffs in each ease sought judicial review of agency action taken by the defendants, the United States Forest Service and the United States Department of Agriculture. The agency action complained óf involves the defendants’ interpretation of the statutes go

Opinion of the Court by Corrigan, J. *672 *446 In People v. Franklin (2016)