⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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.

6 opinions for “Ambrose v. Comcast Corporation”

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2007-03-15 · Published · cited 5× · 492 F. Supp. 2d 480; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18576; 2007 WL 838967
492 F.Supp.2d 480 (2007) Willie PORTER, Plaintiff, v. BROADSPIRE AND THE COMCAST LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, Defendants. Civil Action No. 05-1684. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. March 15, 2007. *481 *482 Gregory G. Paul, Peirce Law Offices, Pittsburgh, PA, for Plaintiff. <
Marston v. Orlandopublic domain
Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2019-06-25 · Published · cited 0× · 127 N.E.3d 296; 95 Mass. App. Ct. 526
BLAKE, J. *527 This legal malpractice action requires an understanding of the requirements for expert testimony under Fishman v. Brooks , 396 Mass. 643 </
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016-05-20 · Published · cited 92× · 823 F.3d 472; 94 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 986; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9233; 2016 WL 2943193
BEAM, Circuit Judge. General Mills, Inc., challenges the district court’s grant of class certification in this environmental-contamination lawsuit. 1 Plaintiffs, all owners of residential properties in a particular neighborhood in Minneapolis, Minnesota, sued General Mills, alleging General Mills caused the chemical subst
Ohio Supreme Court · 2010-12-27 · Published · cited 51× · 2010 Ohio 6279; 128 Ohio St. 3d 68
Brown, C.J., dissenting. {¶ 42} Cable companies and satellite companies sell the same thing: pay-television service. But in Ohio they are not taxed the same. Satellite companies must collect the 5 1/2 percent sales tax; cable companies do not. {¶ 43} Why the difference? When the tax bill was introduced, it imposed an equal tax regardless of sell
Griffin v. Biermanpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2008-02-12 · Published · cited 29× · 941 A.2d 475; 403 Md. 186; 2008 Md. LEXIS 27
941 A.2d 475 (2008) 403 Md. 186 Joyce A. GRIFFIN v. Howard N. BIERMAN, et al. No. 79, Sept. Term, 2007. Court of Appeals of Maryland. February 12, 2008. *477 Deepak Gupta (Michael T. Kirkpatrick and Brian Wolfman of Public Citizen Litigation Group of Washington, DC, Philip Robinson of Civil Justice Inc. of
District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2017-04-25 · Published · cited 26× · 250 F. Supp. 3d 856; 2017 WL 1487439; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62790
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the requests in the Plaintiffs’ Mo*867tion to Strike Affirmative Defenses, filed November 4, 2015 (Doc. 191)(“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses”); (ii) the requests in the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on