Cases

SECTION: “G”(4) ORDER NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Margaret Leech’s (“Leech”) “Motion to Remand to State Court.”1 Having considered the motion, the memoranda in support and in opposition, the record, and the applicable law, the Court will deny the motion. I. Background <

NANGLE, Senior District Judge: Catherine “Kip” Allison sought recovery in district court for injuries allegedly suffered from breast implants manufactured by McGhan Medical Corporation and Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company (“3M/McGhan”). She asserted claims in negligence, fraud/misrepresentation and strict liability/failure to warn. After holding a three day

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1180 ___________________________ Nancy Axline Plaintiff - Appellant v. 3M Company; Arizant Healthcare, Inc.

PUBLISH IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 08/18/99

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge ROGERS. ROGERS, Circuit Judge: The Chicago Local No. 458-3M, Graphic Communications International Union, AFL-CIO (“union”), appeals the National Labor Relations Board’s (“Board”) decision that White Cap, Inc. * (“company”), did not violate § 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”).

265 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ROGER W. BROWN, PH.D. Plaintiff-Appellant,v.3M, Defendant-Appellee,andAIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC., Defendant-Appellee,andREVLON, INC., Defendant. No. 00-1552 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit September 18, 2001 Appealed from: United States Di

20 F.3d 750 145 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2974, 127 Lab.Cas. P 11,062 COLFAX ENVELOPE CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.LOCAL NO. 458-3M, CHICAGO GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONSINTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-3010. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit. Argued Feb. 14, 1994.Decided April 1, 1994.

141 T.C. No. 1 UNITED STATES TAX COURT JOHN HANCOCK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.S.A.), AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO JOHN HANCOCK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (f.k.a. JOHN HANCOCK MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY) AND SUBSIDIARIES, ET AL.,1 Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket Nos. 6404-09, 7083-10, Filed August 5, 2013. 7084-10.

FLAUM, Circuit Judge. Larry Drake and Rosalie Drake, a married couple, each filed employment discrimination claims under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and race discrimination claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against their former employer, Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company (“3M”). The Drakes, both of whom are white, alleged that they were subjected to a hostile work environ

842 N.E.2d 870 (2006) Patricia FARIS, Individually and Personal Representative of the Estate of John Faris, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. AC AND S, INC., et al., Appellees-Defendants. No. 49A02-0506-CV-494. Court of Appeals of Indiana. February 21, 2006. Rehearing Denied May 1, 2006. *871 Linda George, W. Russell Sipes

LINN, Circuit Judge. This case first came to this court after, inter alia, a jury verdict finding Akamai’s U.S. Pat. No. 6,108,703 (“'703 patent”) not invalid and directly infringed by Limelight, followed by the entry of judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) overturning the jury’s infringement verdict on the basis of divided infringement. Akamai Te

MEMORANDUM KEARNEY, District Judge Police officers driving through intersections in response to an emergency must be alert to the presence of innocent drivers possibly unaware of the officer’s perceived need to’ speed through a red traffic signal. Police departments may purchase equipment to transmit a signal to the traffic controller device requesting a change in the color of approaching traffic lights. Our so

PER CURIAM. This case was returned to us by the United States Supreme Court, noting “the possibility that [we] erred by too narrowly circumscribing the scope of § 271(a)” and suggesting that we “will have the opportunity to revisit the § 271(a) question.... ” Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc., — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 2111, 2119, 2120, 189 L.Ed.2d 52 (2014). We hereby avail ourselves of that opportunity.</

¶ 1. SEIDL, J.1 Diane Storey appeals a small claims money judgment entered after a jury trial and posttrial motions, in which the court awarded the Estate of Stanley G. Miller (the Estate) sums totaling $52,629.90. That amount included restitution damages, exemplary damages, double statutory costs, and actual attorney fees. Storey argues she was never given actual notice of any claim

131 Nev., Advance Opinion 614 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EUREKA COUNTY, A POLITICAL No. 61324 SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF NEVADA; KENNETH F. BENSON, INDIVIDUALLY; DIAMOND CATTLE COMPANY, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED FLED LIABILITY COMPANY; AND MICHEL AND

ORDER Antonio Bryant sued his employer, General Packaging Products, and his labor union, Graphic Communications International Union, Local No. 458-3M, claiming employment discrimination. The district court recruited counsel to represent him. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). In November 2006, Bryant voluntarily dismissed his action against the union with prejudice. He then settled with General Packaging for $20,000, and on February 28,

ORDER Antonio Bryant sued his employer, General Packaging Products, and his labor union, Graphic Communications International Union, Local No. 458-3M, claiming employment discrimination. The district court recruited counsel to represent him. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). In November 2006, Bryant voluntarily dismissed his action against the union with prejudice. He then settled with General Packaging for $20,000, and on February 28,

133 S.W.3d 820 (2004) Kim HOWARTON, Individually and as Next Friend for Patricia Lynn Howarton and Harvey Lynn Howarton, and Marion Lynn Howarton, Sr., Appellants, v. MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING, INC., Appellee. No. 11-02-00280-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Eastland. April 8, 2004. Rehearing Overruled May 27, 2004.

OPINION BAKER, Judge. Appellant-plaintiff Dianne McCorkle (McCorkle), individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Phillip McCorkle, appeals from the trial court's grant of the motion to dismiss and final Judgment in favor of appellees-defendants AC and S, Inc., et al. (Appellees), in her action regarding personal injuries to Phillip caused by asbestos. For more background, see our companion de

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ZELDA GUNTER AND ) LONNIE GUNTER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) C.A. No.: N20C-11-032 PEL v. ) ) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC ) CORPORATION,