Cases

558 F.3d 284 (2009) James D. DOTSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PFIZER, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellant. *285 James D. Dotson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pfizer, Incorporated, Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 07-1920, 07-1979. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued: September 23, 2008. Decided: March 4, 2009.

695 F.Supp.2d 966 (2010) Susan BLANKENSHIP, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Thomas J. CHAMBERLAIN, Defendant. Case No. 4:08CV01168 ERW. United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division. February 1, 2010. *967 Francis E. Pennington, III, Laura A. Shea, Pennington Shea, LC, Clayton, MO, for Plaintiffs. Lawrence M. Kenned

FILE THIS OPINION WAS FILED FOR RECORD AT 8 A.M. ON MAY 29, 2025 IN CLERK’S OFFICE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WASHINGTON SARAH R. PENDLETON MAY 29, 2025

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3294 ___________________________ Jerry Cook, on behalf of himself and all others similar situated, lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. George’s, Inc.,

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 23-1807 ___________________________ Bradshaw Family Trust Inc., doing business as Hunton Office Supply Inc. Plaintiff - Appellant v. Twin City Fire Insurance Company

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, United States District Judge THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Insys Therapeutics, Inc.’s (In-sys) Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15; Motion), filed on September 2,2016. In the Motion, Insys requests that this Court dismiss plaintiff Robert N. Markland’s complaint for Damages and Demand for a Jury Trial (Doc. 2; Complaint),

460 F.Supp. 37 (1978) Betty Mae BLANKENSHIP, Plaintiff v. ALLIS-CHALMERS CORPORATION, Defendant. No. DC 77-128-S. United States District Court, N. D. Mississippi, Delta Division. September 15, 1978. Charles M. Merkel, Holcomb, Dunbar, Connell, Merkel, Tollison & Khayat, Clarksdale, Miss., for plaintiff. James E. Upshaw, Upshaw, Dale, Dorizas & Calhoun

642 F.Supp.2d 758 (2009) Dolores STACHURSKI, et. al., Plaintiffs v. DIRECTV, INC., Defendant. Case No.: 1:08 CV 2850. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. July 13, 2009. *760 Daniel C. Bryden, Deanna D. Dailey, Sprenger & Lang, Minneapolis, MN, Garrett W. Wotkyns, Joshua G. Konecky, Todd M. Schneider, Sc

750 F.Supp.2d 582 (2010) Veda STRODER, Plaintiff, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., Defendant. No. 1:09CV335. United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina. August 30, 2010. *585 Angela Newell Gray, Gray Newell, LLP, Greensboro, NC, for Plaintiff. Glenn G. Patton, Alston & Bird LLP, Atlanta, GA, Susan Ballantine Molo

OPINION AND ORDER GREGORY L. FROST, District Judge. This matter is before the Court for consideration of Porsche Cars North America, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss the Master Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 62), Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant Porsche Cars North America, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss the Master Consolidated Amend

677 N.W.2d 856 (2003) 260 Mich. App. 98 Lovall GILLIAM and Kansas Gilliam, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. HI-TEMP PRODUCTS INC., Defendant-Appellant, and A Best Products Co., Adience Inc., A. J. Baxter Co., Allen Bradley Co. Inc., Alliance Machine Co., Allis Chalmers Product Liability Trust, Amchem Products Inc., A. P. Green Refractories Co., Argus Supply Co., Armstrong World Ind. Inc. Asbestos Claims Mgmt. Corp., Bw/Ip Inte

WILLIAM E. DOYLE, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff Olsen does business as Guitar City Studios, Inc., and he brings this action pursuant to Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2, and Section 2(e) of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13(e). Named as defendants in Olsen’s complaint and amended complaint are Progressive Music Supply, Inc.; Acoustic Control Corporation; Ovation Instruments, Inc. (a/

703 F.2d 432 1983-1 Trade Cases 65,257 Clair OLSEN and Guitar City Studios, Inc., a UtahCorporation, Plaintiffs- Appellants,v.PROGRESSIVE MUSIC SUPPLY, INC.; Norlin Music, Inc.,formerly Chicago Musical Instruments; and PeaveyElectronics, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 82-1357, 82-1400. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. <

MEMORANDUM OPINION MICHAEL F. URBANSKI, District Judge. This matter is before the court on defendants Valley Health System’s and Valley Regional Enterprises, Inc.’s (collectively “Valley Health”)1 motion to dismiss, in part, plaintiffs second amended complaint. Dkt. No. 33. In the second amended complaint, plaintiff Christy B. Downs (“Downs”) alleges that Valley Healt

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER E. RICHARD WEBBER, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the Court on Defendant City of Hannibal’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [ECF No. 41]. I. BACKGROUND A. Procedural History Plaintiffs Jacob and Sarah Blair (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Class Action Complaint in this Court on August 25,

*906MEMORANDUM AND ORDER E. RICHARD WEBBER, SENIOR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ' [ECF No. 19]. I. BACKGROUND .Plaintiffs Jacob Blair and Sarah Blair (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Class Action Complaint i

ORDER SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, District Court. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron dated December 3, 2013. No objections have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted. Based on the Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge and upon all of the files, records and pro

Robert M. Dow, Jr., United States District Judge Plaintiff Terry Paulsen brings this action against Defendants Abbott Laboratories *1161("Abbott"), AbbVie Inc. ("AbbVie"), Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. Inc. ("TPUSA"), and TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. ("TAP") (collectively "Defendants") alleging strict products liability, strict products

ORDER STEVEN P. LOGAN, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendant Medtronic’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 17). The motion is fully briefed (see Doc. 30, 32), and for the reasons that follow, will be granted.1 I. Background On January 28, 2014, Plaintiff Kathryn Marie Jones filed a Complaint (Doc. 1-2) in the Maricopa County Super

ORDER PATRICK J. SCHILTZ, District Judge. Plaintiffs James and Cheryl Wolff bring this action seeking to void the foreclosure of their mortgage and the subsequent sheriffs sale of their home. This matter is before the Court on the January 24, 2014 Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron. Judge Mayeron recommends granting defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ com