Cases

MAGILL, Circuit Judge. Stuart Hall appeals the district court’s denial of its motion for a preliminary injunction against Ampad in this trade dress action brought under Lanham Act § 43(a). Stuart Hall argues that the district court applied an unrecognized legal standard to determine whether its trade dress is inherently distinctive, and that the court failed to consider or to gr

LOKEN, Chief Judge. Eric G. Williams sued his former employer, George P. Reintjes Company, in state court for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and conversion. Williams alleged that Reintjes falsely represented that he was not entitled to the employee benefits mandated by the collective bargaining agreement between Reintjes and the Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilder

In the Missourt Court of Appeals Eastern District SPECIAL DIVISION SHANNON DUGAN, ) No. ED111485 ) Respondent, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court of ) the City of St. Louis vs. ) 1822-CC00663 ) HYATT CORPORATION D/B/A ) Honorable Timothy J. Boyer HYATT REGENCY ST. LOUIS AT THE )} ARCH, ) ) Appellant. ) Filed: December 3, 2024 Before Thomas C. Clark, II, C.J., James M. Dowd, J., and Renée Hardin-Tammons, J. Introduction On April 19, 2016, at the Hyatt Regency hotel in downtown St. Louis, Hyatt s

OPINION HUDSON, Justice. This appeal presents a constitutional challenge to a legislative repeal of provisions of a multistate tax compact that permitted corporate taxpayers, for a¡ period of time, to calculate their Minnesota tax liability using a formula promulgated by .a multistate tax commission. In 2013, rela-tors Kimberly-Clark Corporation and its

736 F.2d 1007 AFFHOLDER, INC., a Missouri corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.SOUTHERN ROCK, INC., a Mississippi corporation, Defendant-Appellant. No. 83-4420. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. July 2, 1984.Opinion on Denial of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Aug. 17, 1984. Butler, Snow, O'Mara,

On Motion to Assess Damages for Appeal ALVIN B. RUBIN, Circuit Judge: The appellee, Affholder, having prevailed in this diversity case, seeks to recover 15% of its judgment, in addition to the judgment amount, under a Mississippi statute that assesses such a fixed penalty against a litigant who

PER CURIAM. Appellant has filed an objection to a motion for an extension of time filed by appel-lee. In the objection, counsel for appellant recounts remarks made by opposing counsel at a settlement conference held, pursuant to 10th Cir.R. 33.1. This disclosure violates our rule that "... statements and comments made during a conference shall be confidential and shall not be di

DON E. BURRELL, J. Willie C. Clark (“Claimant”) appeals the determination of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“the Commission”) that he was entitled to Second Injury Fund (“the Fund”) benefits for permanent partial disability, rejecting Claimant’s assertion that the combined result of “the primary injury” he suffered as a machine operator and his preexisting disabilities left him permanently and totally disable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2017-CT-00411-SCT JOSHUA ERIC HAWK CLARK a/k/a JOSHUA CLARK v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/03/2017 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. THOMAS J. GARDNER, III TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: JOHN D. WEDDLE DAVID L. DANIELS PAUL C. GAULT RICHARD

Filed 12/6/19; Modified and Certified for Pub. 1/2/20 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE HALYARD HEALTH, INC., B294567 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC659662) v. KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP., Defen

IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS WESTERN DISTRICT STATE OF MISSOURI, OFFICE OF ) ADMINISTRATION, et al., ) ) WD81811 Appellants-Respondents, ) (Consolidated with 81819) v. )

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. I. Introduction Plaintiffs-appellants represent a class of retirees (collectively “Plaintiffs”) formerly employed by Sprint-Nextel Corporation (“Sprint”), Embarq Corporation (“Em-barq”), or a predecessor and/or subsidiary company of either Embarq or Sprint (collectively “Defendants”). Plaintiffs brought this suit after Defendant

ORDER This matter is before the court on appellees’ Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, as well as on the appellants’ Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc. We also have responses from the parties to both petitions. Upon consideration, the requests for panel rehearing are granted to the extent of the amendments

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge This case involves a consolidated trial of four products liability cases that are each part of a multidistrict litigation encompassing over twenty-five thousand total cases. The jury returned verdicts for the plaintiffs, awarding over $4 million to each. Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation asserts that the consolidation itself rendered the trial unfair, dis

MARCUS, Circuit Judge: In this products liability suit, Boston Scientific Corporation (BSC) appeals from various orders and a final judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Amal Eghnayem. Eghnayem alleged substantial injuries caused by the Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kit, a transvaginal mesh prescription medical device manufactured and sold b

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 603 U. S. Part 1 Pages 43–108 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 26, 2024 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are

CITY OF ST. ROBERT, MISSOURI, ) ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) v. ) No. SD33221 ) ALAN CLARK, ) Filed: Mar. 11, 2015 ) Defen

CHARLES CLARK, Circuit Judge: A.M.R. Enterprises, Inc., is a Florida corporation that was formed to develop real estate. It hoped to construct condominiums *1279 on a tract of land in Miami, Florida, which it purchased in July 1973. The land was encumbered with three mortgages in addition to the

FAY, Circuit Judge: Clark Ray Helms brought a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama claiming that his employer, Monsanto Company, had wrongfully denied him disability benefits. A third-party arbitrator had concluded that Mr. Helms was not totally and permanently disabl

(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 595 U. S. ____ (2022) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash- ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may b