Cases

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 00-1820 ___________ Marion Nolan Smith, individually and * as next friend and natural guardian; * Steven Norris Smith, individually and * as next friend and natural guardian; * Sean Patrick Smith, a minor child by * and through his natural parents, *

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 447 OPINION On this appeal from an order determining costs we are called upon to decide whether Code of Civil Procedure section 998 applies to an offer to compromise made jointly by two defendants to one plaintiff, and if so, whether plaintiff may recover her p

102 N.J. 30 (1986) 505 A.2d 580 FRED S. NOLAN, RALPH R. BATTISTA, CHARLES W. CLEARY, JOSEPH A. DAVIS, WILLIAM J. DAVITT, JR., ANTHONY G. GOMES, JAMES HALLECK, DONALD C. HALLIWELL, PHYLLIS J. GORLEY KERKAWICH, JOSEPH M. KARKOSKY, JR., CHARLES KERR, PATRICK J. LARGEY, JR., ARMAND MACHADO, EDWARD M. MCBRIDE, THOMAS P. NUGENT, PETER J. REILLY, HERMAN J. RUSSOMANNO, EUGENE A. SCANNEPICO, RAYMOND J. SMITH, JOHN T. STARR, HAROLD C. STOLL

KANNE, Circuit Judge. Chicago Police Department Unit 542 provides protective services for the city’s mayor. The plaintiffs here are current and former police officers who served on this unit when Richard M. Daley was Mayor. But after Rahm Emanuel took office, the *543 department demoted them, appoin

Opinion issued August 6, 2024 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-22-00956-CR NO. 01-22-00957-CR NO. 01-22-00958-CR NO. 01-22-00959-CR ——————————— DANIEL CANAD

CASTAÑO, J.S.C. The impact of two federal statutes upon the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq, when the legality of a retirement benefit plan is challenged because of alleged age discrimination is the issue in this case. The federal laws involved are the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S. C. § 1001 et seq, and the Age Discrimination i

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-15-00208-CR KRIS EDWARD RAU APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------- FROM THE 271ST DISTRICT COURT OF WIS

568 A.2d 479 (1990) Martin F. NOLAN, Appellant, v. Margaret C. NOLAN, Appellee. Nos. 88-23, 88-1272. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued October 4, 1989. Decided January 5, 1990. *480 Charles H. Mayer, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Daniel G. Grove, Washington, D.C., with whom David S. Kovach,

OPINION *Page 2 {¶ 1} Danielle Nolan, a minor, appeals by and through her mother, Jacqueline Ritchie, from the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee Jason Turner on the basis of R.C. Chapter 2744 immunity. {¶ 2} In her sole assignment of error, Nolan contends genuine issues of mat

PER CURIAM. On this direct criminal appeal appellant Scott Edward Hawkins raises two issues: (1) That there is insufficient evidence of his sanity to support the jury’s verdict on that issue; and (2) that the sentence imposed was excessive. Both contentions lack substantial merit and, accordingly, we affirm the conviction.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANIEL G. DEMER, No. 13-17196 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 4:11-cv-00441-JGZ IBM CORPORATION LTD PLAN; METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE OPINION COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Cou

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANIEL CAMPBELL; et al, * No. 15-56990 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. 2:04-cv-08592- AG-AJW CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-Appellee. CESAR MATA,

WATERMAN, Justice. In this appeal, we must decide whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's disability discrimination claims. The plaintiff, who has multiple sclerosis (MS), applied for a full-time job as a firefighter. The defendant City declined to hire him after the physician performing its preemployment physical examination reported the applicant was not medically qualified for the

ON MOTION ORDER Upon consideration of Georgia Farm Services, LLC’s unopposed motion to withdraw its appeal, It Is Ordered That: (1) The motion is granted. The appeal is dismissed. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

155 F.3d 221 UNITED STATES of Americav.Angela NOLAN-COOPER, Appellant. Nos. 97-1171, 97-1298. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued March 19, 1998.Decided Sept. 2, 1998. David M. Howard (Argued), Jeffrey S. Edwards, Dechert, Price & Rhoads, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant.

DOMENGEAUX, Judge. This appeal arises out of a tort suit filed by plaintiff-appellant, Gene Nolan, against defendants-appellees, Dr. Charles Attwood, Steven Primeaux, and their liability insurer, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company. The plaintiff-lessee alleged that he received personal injuries as a result of a defect in the leased premises owned by the appellees-lessors, Atwood and Primeaux. Following a trial on

43 F.Supp.2d 916 (1999) Lee MATHIAS, on behalf of himself and all other Plaintiffs similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiffs, v. ADDISON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 1, Defendant. No. 96 C 6675. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. March 29, 1999. Thomas F. Howard, Oak Park, IL, Daniel A. Macahon, Park Ridge, IL, for Plaintiffs.

927 N.E.2d 132 (2010) MELROSE PARK SUNDRIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Don CARLINI, Defendant-Appellee. No. 1-09-0162. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Second Division. March 30, 2010. *133 John O. Tuohy, Chicago, Shea Rogal & Associates, LaGrange (Ira Rogal, Gereald W. Shea, Joseph Witkowski, of counsel), for

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER HARRY D. LEINENWEBER, District Judge. Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 35) and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 52). For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motion is denied, and Plaintiffs Motion is granted in part and denied in part. I. BACKGROUND

31 Cal.Rptr.3d 872 (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 1014 INCO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of the County of San Bernardino, Respondent; Dennis Haynes et al., Real Parties in Interest. No. E036800. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two. August 4, 2005. *873 Wood, Smi