Cases

HERO LANDS COMPANY, * NO. 2023-CA-0269 L.L.C. * VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL * CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.; FOURTH CIRCUIT TOTAL PETROCHEMICALS * & REFINING USA, INC.; STATE OF LOUISIANA PIONEER NATURAL ******* RESOURCES, INC.; KEY OPERATING & PRODUCTION COMPANY, L.L.C.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2301 Doc: 61 Filed: 08/01/2025 Pg: 1 of 26 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-2301 DARRELL J. AUSTIN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., De

McMILLIAN, Circuit Judge. Charles Chadwell appeals from a final order entered in the United States District Court 2 for the District of Minnesota, upon a jury verdict in favor of his former employer, Koch Refining Co., on Chadwell’s claim of wrongful termination in violation of the Minnesota Whistleblower Statute, Minn.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE BBP HOLDCO, INC., BBP ) INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC, ) BRUNSWICK BOWLING ) PRODUCTS, LLC, BRUNSWICK ) BOWLING MAGYARORSZAG ) KORKLATOLT FELELOSSEGU ) TARSASAG, and BBP REYNOSA ) S. DE R.I. DE C.V. ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) C.A. No. N20C-10-135 PRW CCLD

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE RAUL ARMENTA JR. and ) SHANNON ARMENTA, individually ) and on behalf of their minor son, H.A., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No.: N24C-02-051 SPL ) G/O MEDIA INC., D/B/A ) DEADSPIN,

Lundberg Stratton, J. The issue before the court is whether a law firm should be automatically disqualified from representing a party when an attorney leaves his or her former employment with a firm representing a party and joins the law firm representing the opposing party, or whether that law firm may overcome any presumption of shared confidences by instituting effective screening mechanisms. Although this issue has been dealt

2022 WI 15 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2019AP1671 COMPLETE TITLE: Cree, Inc., Petitioner-Respondent-Petitioner, v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, Respondent-Co-Appellant, Derrick Palmer,

New England Youth Theatre, Inc. v. Envtl. Compliance Servs., No. 138-4-12 Wmcv (Carroll, J., Feb. 26, 2013) [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.] VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT SUPERIOR COURT

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 81 Ohio St.3d 1.] KALA, APPELLEE, v. ALUMINUM SMELTING & REFINING COMPANY, INC., APPELLANT. [Cite as Kala v. Aluminum Smelting & Refining Co., Inc., 1998-Ohio-439.] Attorneys at law—Criteria for determining whether individual or entire law firm should be disqualified from representing a party when attorney leaves employment with firm representing a party and joins la

Susan Richard Nelson, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Court on the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. (See Pl.'s Mot. for Summ. J. [Doc. No. 183]; Defs.' Mot. for Summ. J. [Doc. No. 170].) For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's motion is granted, and Defendants' motion is denied. II. BACKGROUND

JUSTICE FREEMAN, specially concurring: Our ruling today, for the first time, recognizes that direct participant liability is a valid theory of recovery under Illinois law. We also find that, on the specific record presented in this case, the trial court erred in granting defendant, Clark USA, Inc., summary judgment on plaintiffs’ direct participant liability cl

NANO VIC, P.J., — The law is contextual. Therefore, when we ask whether the sole owner and officer of a corporation or similar business entity is entitled to represent the business of which he is a part, we necessarily must further ask, under what circumstances: before whom, in what capacity, doing what. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND Defendant, CT Pellet LLC (“defendant”), is a

FILED 1 ORDERED PUBLISHED DEC 17 2015 SUSAN M. SPRAUL, CLERK 2 U.S. BKCY. APP. PANEL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT 3 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL 4 OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT 5

OPINION JONES, JUDGE: The Appellant, Kentucky Industrial Utility Customers, Inc., brings this appeal to challenge the Kentucky Public Service Commission’s approval of Kentucky Power Company’s application to recover from its customers an estimated $1.26 billion in costs associated with purchasing biomass energy from ecoPower Generation-Hazard LLC, over a twenty-year contract period. Having carefully review

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES 0. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff Lillian Anaya’s Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery Responses from Defendants CBS Broadcasting Inc. and Sharyl Attkisson, filed March 9, 2007 (Doc. 94)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on this motion on May 16, 2007. The primary issue is whether the Court should order Defendant C

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeals of -- ) ) John C. Grimberg Co., Inc. ) ASBCA Nos. 58791, 59167, 59168 ) 59169, 59170,59171 ) 59717 ) Under Contract No. W912DR-09-C-0038 )

721 N.W.2d 276 (2006) 271 Mich. App. 119 MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tracy L. PICKRELL, Defendant-Appellee, and Michigan Department of State, Defendant. Docket No. 265717. Court of Appeals of Michigan. Submitted February 28, 2006, at Lansing. Decided May 16, 2006 at 9:10. R

MARKMAN, J. We granted leave to appeal to consider: (1) whether the use of a park as a “dog park” violates a deed restriction limiting use of the land to “residential purposes only”; and (2) whether a plaintiff has waived the ability to challenge a violation of a deed restriction when the plaintiff has failed to challenge less serious violations of the deed restriction in the past. W

772 N.E.2d 256 (2002) 331 Ill. App.3d 842 265 Ill.Dec. 218 Michael BOROWIEC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., Defendant-Appellant. Tadeusz Kobik and Dorota Kobik, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Gateway, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. Leslie Waldron, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gateway, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 1-01-0480, 1-01-4187, 1-02-0001.

199 P.3d 191 (2008) 2008 MT 425 347 Mont. 415 PENNACO ENERGY, INC., Marathon Oil Company, St. Mary's Land & Exploration Company, and Yates Petroleum Corporation, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. MONTANA BOARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Northern Plains Resource Council, and Tongue River Water Users' Association, Defendants and Appellees.