Cases

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin, United States District Judge On January 13, 2016, Plaintiff Kathy Ferrin sued Defendant Aetna Life Insurance Company seeking payment of long-term disability benefits pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Specifically, Ferrin

190 F.Supp.2d 1187 (2002) Steven W. WINTER, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. No. 97-1484-PHX-PGR. United States District Court, D. Arizona. March 8, 2002. *1188 Steven M. Friedman, Begam Lewis Marks & Wolfe PA, Phoenix, AZ, D. Michael Cutchen, Gibson Ferrin & Riggs PLC, Mesa, AZ, for Plaintiff. Ja

PER CURIAM. We affirm the award of support for the child in this paternity action. While we have concern for the very high figure of $1,200 per month, we shall not substitute our judgment for that of the trial judge. Hopefully, the award will not penalize those to whom the father already has court ordered obligations. No award should do so. We reverse the award of medical care and remand with direction to limit same

PER CURIAM. We have for review a referee’s report on complaint of The Florida Bar. We have *462jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. We approve the report. In his lengthy and detailed report, the referee made the following findings of fact as to the allegations made in the Bar’s complaint: AS TO COUNT I

PER CURIAM. Petitioners, Quest Diagnostics, Inc. (QDI) and Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc. (QDCL), seek certiorari or prohibition relief following a trial court order granting respondent Jeffrey R. Swa-ters’s (Swaters) motion to compel production of his urine specimen. For the reasons below, we grant the petition as one seeking a writ of certiorari, quash the order and return the case to the trial court for fur

144 Ga. App. 157 (1977) 240 S.E.2d 730 CITY OF ATLANTA v. ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY et al. 54257. Court of Appeals of Georgia. Argued June 28, 1977. Decided November 9, 1977. Rehearing Denied December 1, 1977. Ferrin Y. Mathews, Ralph C. Jenkins, Huie, Ware, Sterne, Brown & Ide, W. Stell Huie, Lawrence

IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion) STATE V. WYNNE NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY NEB. CT. R. APP. P. § 2-102(E). STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE, V.

IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion) STATE V. SMITH NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY NEB. CT. R. APP. P. § 2-102(E). STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE, V.

Error: Bad annotation destination United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 04-1264 DOFASCO INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and

Goldstein, J., dissents and votes to affirm the order appealed from, with the following memorandum: From July 1995 until July 1996, Elsie C. Daniels was covered by an Assigned Risk Policy issued under the New York Automobile Insurance Plan (hereinafter, the assigned-risk plan). The rules of the assigned-risk plan constitute “a comprehesive regulatory scheme which supplants the rights and liabilities of parties to an ordinary insur

{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant Progressive Direct Insurance Company ("Progressive") appeals from the trial court's entry of summary judgment for defendants-appellees Steven, Jennifer, George, and Joyce Gross ("the Grosses") in Progressive's declaratory-judgment action. {¶ 2} This appeal involves the application of traditional choice-of-law principles. Because the trial court erred in determining that Kentucky law, rather than the law of Ohio, wa

269 B.R. 871 (2001) In re OREAD, INC., Debtor. No. 01-40326. United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Kansas. November 28, 2001. *872 Robert L. Baer, Cosgrove Webb & Oman, Anne L. Baker, Commerce Bank Building, Tom R. Barnes, II, Charles R. Hay, Patricia A. Reeder, Woner Glenn Reeder, Girard & Riordan, Wesley F. Smith, Thomas A. Valent

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 03/04/2022 08:07 AM CST - 527 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. JOHNSON Cite as 310 Neb. 527 State of Nebraska, app

RYAN, Circuit Judge, concurring. I concur in the view that the judgment entered by the district court should be affirmed because, according to Ohio’s choice of law rules, Louisiana has the most significant relationship to the insurance contracts entered into between Crown Equipment Corporation and International Insurance Company. I reach that conclusion, howeve

ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: Appellants Jackson and Musgrove appeal the dismissal of their class action complaint against Okaloosa County, Florida and its Commissioners, (the “County”), and the Fort Walton Beach Housing Authority and its members, (the “Authority”), regarding the siting process for a new public housing project. All defendants were sued under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq., and the County

*1729 MEMORANDUM OPINION EATON, Judge: Before the court are the motion of plaintiff Parkdale International Ltd. (“Parkdale” or “plaintiff”) for a preliminary injunction pursuant to USCIT Rule 65(a) and the response to Parkdale’s motion of defendant the United States (“

Slip Op. No. 23-80 UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE GUIZHOU TYRE CO., LTD. AND GUIZHOU TYRE IMPORT AND EXPORT CO., LTD., et al., Plaintiffs, Before: Timothy C. Stanceu, Judge v. Consol. Court No. 18-00099 UNITED STATES, Defendant. OPINION [Sustaining an agency decisio

Richard W. Goldberg, Senior Judge *1267Goldberg, Senior Judge: This action arises from a challenge by plaintiffs, Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd. and Guizhou Tyre Import and Export Co., Ltd., (collectively, "Guizhou" or "GTC"), consolidated plaintiff Xuzhou Xugong Tyres Co., Ltd., ("Xugong"), and intervenor-plaintiff Tianjin United Tire & Rubber International Co., Ltd. ("

MEMORANDUM OPINION Granting Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Bernice C. Atchison, proceeding pro se, seeks damages from various Defendants associated with the series of lawsuits in this District that culminated in

OPINION Appellants are makers on (they say guarantors of) a note held by plaintiffs and initially secured by a trust deed. That trust deed was junior to a trust deed which was foreclosed nonjudicially. No proceeds from that sale were available to apply toward the obligation evidenced by the note at issue in this action. In due course, plaintiffs commenced this action to collect the full amount due on their now-unsecured note. They were awarded summary judgment, from w