Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Woodbridge Group of Companies, LLC”
In re Woodbridge Grp. of Cos., LLCpublic domain
KEVIN J. CAREY, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Before the Court is the Debtors' Motion for Approval of Certain Compromises and Settlements, Partial Substantive Consolidation, and Related Relief with Respect to the Plan (D.I. 2721) (the "Motion"), and the Debtors' request for confirmation of the First Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan *764of Liquid
KEVIN J. CAREY, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE *203The Plaintiffs3 in this adversary proceeding filed their First Amended Complaint (Adv. D.I. 12) (the "Complaint") on July 17, 2018, asserting four counts against the Debtors: (1) Seeking a declaratory judgment that the Plaintiffs hold pre
In re Woodbridge Grp. of Cos.public domain
BY: KEVIN J. CAREY, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Before the Court is the Debtors' Objection to Contrarian Funds, LLC's ("Contrarian") Proof of Claim No. 1216 (the "Claim Objection"). At issue is: (I) whether an anti-assignment clause contained in a promissory note is a valid restriction on assignment rights under Delaware law;3 (II) whether a non-breaching party to a promissory note in payment default
KLINGENSMITH, J.. Woodbridge Holdings, LLC (“Wood-bridge”) appeals from the trial court’s corrected final judgment entered after a statutory valuation appraisal proceeding arising under Florida’s dissenting shareholder appraisal rights statute. Thereafter, Prescott Group Aggressive Small Cap Master Fund, G.P., Ravenswood Investments III, L.P., The Ravenswood Investment Company, L.P., and William J. Maeck (“Appellees”) cross-appe
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT WOODBRIDGE HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellant, v. PRESCOTT GROUP AGGRESSIVE SMALL CAP MASTER FUND, G.P., RAVENSWOOD INVESTMENTS III, L.P., THE RAVENSWOOD INVESTMENT COMPANY, L.P., and WILLIAM J. MAECK, et al., Appellees. No. 4D13-1262
276 F.Supp.2d 255 (2003) HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP, INC., Plaintiff, v. ROYAL HEALTHCARE OF MIDDLE-SEX, LLC; and Middlesex County Improvement Authority, Defendants. Middlesex County Improvement Authority, Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff, v. Surbhi Tarkas; Amjad Chowdry; and Greenwich Insurance Company, Third-Party Defendants. Civ. No. 01-3223 (WHW). United States District Court, D. New Jers
Ries v. Arizona Beverages USA LLCpublic domain
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This putative consumer class action challenges defendants’ representation that Arizona Iced Tea is “All Natural,” given that it contains high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and citric acid. Defendants move f
Filed 3/28/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE 11640 WOODBRIDGE B333848 CONDOMINIUM HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 22STCV00778) Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Defe
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, L.P., on ) behalf of itself and its affiliated landlord ) entities, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) C.A. No. N21C-01-258 MMJ CCLD v. ) ) BRIGHTON COLLECTIBLES,
PPL EnergyPlus, LLC v. Lee Solomonpublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT FUENTES, Circuit Judge. Dissatisfied with the stock and reliability of power-generating facilities in New Jer *246 sey, the state adopted the Long Term Capacity Pilot Program Act. The Act— known as LCAPP — instructed New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilitie
Triarsi v. BSC GROUP SERVICES, LLC.public domain
27 A.3d 202 (2011) 422 N.J. Super. 104 Joseph J. TRIARSI, as Trustee for the Joseph H. Halpin Insurance Trust, a New Jersey Trust, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BSC GROUP SERVICES, LLC, a/k/a Benefit Service Company, a New Jersey LLC, and Herbert Wright, Defendants-Respondents. DOCKET NO. A-5047-09T1 Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Argued Feb
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2021-CA-00535-COA MIMG C WOODRIDGE SUB LLC, MONARCH APPELLANTS INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC D/B/A WOODRIDGE APARTMENTS, LAKASHA THOMAS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND SHUANACY EVANS, INDIVIDUALLY v. KIMBERLY COURSE APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/04/2021 TRIAL JUDGE:
Cranpark, Inc. v. Rogers Group, Inc.public domain
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
Aquasea Group, L.L.C. v. Singletarypublic domain
[Cite as Aquasea Group, L.L.C. v. Singletary, 2014-Ohio-1780.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO AQUASEA GROUP, LLC, et al., : MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs-Appellees, : CASE NO. 2013-T-0120 - vs -
Epix v. MARSH & McLENNAN COMPANIESpublic domain
982 A.2d 1194 (2009) 410 N.J. Super. 453 EPIX HOLDINGS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MARSH & McLENNAN COMPANIES, INC., Marsh USA Inc., Marsh Inc., Twin City Fire Insurance Company, and Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company, Defendants-Respondents, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, American International Group, Inc., AIG Risk Management, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
National Air Cargo Group, Inc. v. United Statespublic domain
Bid protest; multiple awards of indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts; challenge by one of the awardees to a later award of an additional contract; statutory prerequisites for a bid protest; 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1); standing; dispute over applicability of the Competition in Contracting Act to the later award OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge.
A.W.L.I. Group, Inc. v. Amber Freight Shipping Linespublic domain
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. The Plaintiff in this case, A.W.L.I. Group, Inc. (“AWLI” or “the Plaintiff’) filed a complaint against the Defendant, Amber Freight Shipping Lines (“AFSL” or “the Defendant”) for alleged trademark infringement, false designation of origin, dilution, unfair competition and deceptive trade practices. For the reasons set forth below,
436 F.Supp.2d 790 (2006) UNITED GOVERNMENT SECURITY OFFICERS OF AMERICA, International Union Plaintiff, v. SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP, INC. Defendant. No. 1:06 CV 219. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. June 30, 2006. *791 Deborah C. Waters, Ferguson Rawls & Raines PC, Suffolk, VA, for Plaintiff.<
PVP Aston, LLC v. Financial Structures Limitedpublic domain
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PVP ASTON, LLC (f/k/a 98 RA2 ) ASTON LIMITED PARTNERSHIP), ) RX FREDERICKSBURG ) INVESTORS L.L.C., RA2 ) MUSKEGON L.L.C., and ACA FSL ) HOLDINGCO, LLC, each a ) Delaware limited liability company, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) C.A. No. N21C-09-095 AML
Ramirez v. STi Prepaid LLCpublic domain
644 F.Supp.2d 496 (2009) Orlando S. RAMIREZ and Alberto Torres-Hernandez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. STI PREPAID LLC, STi Phonecard, Inc., Telco Group, Inc., Voip Enterprises, Inc., and Leucadia National Corp., and ABC Corps 1-25, Defendants. Civil Action No. 08-1089 (SDW-MCA). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. March 1