⚖ 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.

20 opinions for “American Family Mutual Insurance Company v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.”

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 2007-08-10 · Published · cited 2× · 499 F. Supp. 2d 1137; 26 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1037; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58691; 2007 WL 2297052
499 F.Supp.2d 1137 (2007) Deshanda CRUSSELL, as Next Friend and Custodial Parent of J.C., a Minor, Plaintiff v. ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC., a Foreign Corporation, Defendant. No. 4:06-CV-4042. United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division. August 10, 2007. Thomas H. Johnson, Attorney at Law, Texarkana, AR, for Plaintiff. J. Michael Smith,
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2013-10-16 · Published · cited 0× · 978 F. Supp. 2d 1376; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149045; 2013 WL 5719111
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman. Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the American Family Mutual Insurance Company (“American Family”), a plaintiff in three actions, moves to centralize this litigation, which consists of 35 actions1 pending in 21 districts as listed on Schedule A, in the Northern District of Illinoi
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005-08-05 · Published · cited 0× · 416 F.3d 848
MELLOY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-Appellant Electrolux Home Products (“Electrolux”) appeals the district court’s 1 denial of its motion for summary judgment on a claim to vacate an industrial arbitration award. Electrolux also appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant-appellees on a cla
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005-08-05 · Published · cited 7× · 416 F.3d 848; 10 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1350; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16160
416 F.3d 848 ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, Plaintiff—Appellant,v.THE UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA; The United Automobile Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local No. 442 Defendants—Appellees. No. 04-4080. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: June 23, 2005.
District Court, D. Kansas · 2008-09-30 · Published · cited 5× · 672 F. Supp. 2d 1161; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111764; 2008 WL 7051410
672 F.Supp.2d 1161 (2009) Kevin and Diana PEKAREK, Plaintiffs, v. SUNBEAM PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant. No. 06-1026-WEB. United States District Court, D. Kansas. September 30, 2008. *1163 Named Expert: William T. Cronenwett, Chris Komarek George E. McLaughlin, McDermott, Hansen & McLaughlin, LLP, Denver, CO, Todd B. Butle
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2023-07-07 · Published · cited 20× · 79 F.4th 1299
USCA11 Case: 22-10575 Document: 65-1 Date Filed: 07/07/2023 Page: 1 of 92 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-10575 ____________________ GEORGE TERSHAKOVEC, D
District Court, S.D. New York · 2016-03-08 · Published · cited 98× · 169 F. Supp. 3d 396; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29752; 2016 WL 890251
OPINION & ORDER Seibel, United States District Judge. Table of Contents I.Background.. .408 A. Background Applicable to Both Cases.. .408 B. Background Related to Jennifer Dan-ley. . .410 C. Background Related to Christie Hayes.. .411 II. Discussion.. .411 A. Legal Standard.. .411
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2016-04-19 · Published · cited 11× · 181 F. Supp. 3d 278; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52294
*283MEMORANDUM Stengel, District Judge This case is part of a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) involving claims of liver damage from the use of Tylenol at or just above the recommended dosage.1 This is the first “bellwether” scheduled for trial.2 *284
District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016-01-07 · Published · cited 58× · 155 F. Supp. 3d 772; 88 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 669; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1841; 2016 WL 74671
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AMY J. ST. EVE, District Court Judge: In this consolidated, multi-district litigation (“MDL”), Plaintiffs1 are purchasers and users of a paint product called “Deck *778& Concrete Restore” or “Restore 10X” (collectively “Restore”), manufactured by Defendant Rust-Oleum Corporation (“Rust-O
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017-05-18 · Published · cited 51× · 857 F.3d 1169; 2017 WL 2176488; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8718
WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judge: This appeal presents the questions whether due process forbids giving a jury’s findings of negligence and strict liability in a class action against cigarette manufacturers preclusive effect in a later individual suit by a class member and, if not, whether federal law preempts the jury’s findings. Florida smokers and their survivors filed a class action against several tobacco companies, and aft
District Court, M.D. Florida · 2017-03-10 · Published · cited 4× · 320 F.R.D. 271; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60693; 2017 WL 1304302
ORDER MARY S. SCRIVEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Motion for Class Certification (Dkt. 93) filed by Plaintiffs, Jason Herman, William Cohen, Joey Kratt, and Christina Lancaster, the Response in opposition thereto (Dkt. 99) filed by Defendant, SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment, Inc. (“SeaWorld”), and the Supplement (Dkt. 115) filed by Plaintiffs;
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · 2015-10-23 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 05-15-01292-CV 05-15-01292-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS
District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2009-08-18 · Published · cited 170× · 678 F. Supp. 2d 1280; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73041; 2009 WL 2568062
678 F.Supp.2d 1280 (2009) Sharon ANDERSON and George Anderson, Plaintiffs, v. DUNBAR ARMORED, INC.; Harry A. Kocopi, Individually and as the Director of Employee Relations for Dunbar Armored, Inc.; Ashley R. Mew, Individually and as the Branch Manager for Dunbar Armored, Inc.; and Horace Johnson, Individually and as the General Manager of Dunbar Armored, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action File No. 1:08-CV-3639-BBM.
District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2003-10-09 · Published · cited 17× · 288 F. Supp. 2d 105; 72 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1500; 2003 DNH 173; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18010; 2003 WL 22316542
288 F.Supp.2d 105 (2003) ANHEUSER-BUSCH, INC. v. CAUGHT-ON-BLEU, INC. No. Civ. 02-196-JD. United States District Court, D. New Hampshire. October 9, 2003. *106 *107 Kimberly Ann Sutherland, Chicago, IL, for Robert Petit, Richard E Alder, John F Apel, Amy Bagans, William Baldree, William Barron
District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1996-09-15 · Published · cited 27× · 943 F. Supp. 1445; 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13805; 1996 WL 528865
943 F.Supp. 1445 (1996) JONES DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC., an Iowa corporation, Plaintiff, v. WHITE CONSOLIDATED INDUSTRIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, and Frigidaire Company, a division thereof, Defendants. No. C 94-4029-MWB. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division. September 15, 1996. *1446
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2023-12-20 · Published · cited 6× · 89 F.4th 881
USCA11 Case: 21-12702 Document: 73-1 Date Filed: 12/20/2023 Page: 1 of 42 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-12702 ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellate Court of Illinois · 2008-02-27 · Published · cited 39× · 379 Ill. App. 3d 878; 884 N.E.2d 1221; 318 Ill. Dec. 950; 2008 Ill. App. LEXIS 139
JUSTICE GREIMAN delivered the opinion of the court: Raymond Corporation (Raymond), one of the named defendants in plaintiff Shala Ammerman’s products liability and negligence action, appeals from a trial court order denying its motion to transfer the case pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens. On appea
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2010-03-18 · Published · cited 4× · 230 P.3d 1275; 2010 Colo. App. LEXIS 369; 2010 WL 963226
230 P.3d 1275 (2010) GENERAL STEEL DOMESTIC SALES, LLC, d/b/a General Steel Corporation, a Colorado limited liability company; and Jeffrey W. Knight, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HOGAN & HARTSON, LLP, a foreign limited liability partnership; and Ty Cobb, Defendants-Appellees. No. 09CA0252. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. VI. March 18, 2010.
Nebraska Supreme Court · 2021-12-17 · Published · cited 22× · 968 N.W.2d 64; 310 Neb. 543
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 03/14/2022 08:08 AM CDT - 543 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports DE VRIES v. L & L CUSTOM BUILDERS Cite as 310 Neb. 543 Tabe de Vries, an individual,
Appellate Court of Illinois · 2008-02-27 · Published · cited 6× · 884 N.E.2d 1221
884 N.E.2d 1221 (2008) Shala AMMERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. The RAYMOND CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant (Caterpillar, Inc., Defendant; XPAC, Third-Party Defendant). No. 1-07-1666. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Third Division. February 27, 2008. *1224 Kralovec, Jambois & Schwartz, Chicago (Robert J. Kelleher,