Cases

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated February 7, 1961, which denied his motion for summary judgment pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

FRANK, Circuit Judge. We think that crucial portions of the testimony did not receive adequate consideration by the Referee and the judge. The Referee’s opinion and findings show that he ignored the uncontradicted testimony of Hoey’s knowledge and belief concerning Sabbatino’s mental condition during the three months before the shooting. He ignored the significance of the fact that, after Hoey and Sabbatino had discussed the m

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION {¶ 1} Appellant, Guillermo Torres, appeals from a June 8, 2006 judgment of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, finding him guilty of murder with a firearm specification and sentencing him to eighteen years to life in prison. {¶ 2} On September 22, 2005, Torres was indicted by the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury on one count of aggravated murder, in violation of R.C.

Rose, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed August 31, 2001, which ruled that claimant had voluntarily withdrawn from the labor market. Claimant sustained a work-related back injury in February 1999. Claimant, then 62 years old, returned to work on March 10, 1999, but retired the next day and subsequently began receiving social security retirement benefits. At a hearing before a Work

The opinion of the court was delivered by Pkoctok, J. The sole question before us is the legitimacy for inheritance purposes of a child, bom out of wedlock, whose parents subsequently entered into a bigamous ceremonial marriage. Resolution of this problem hinges on the construction to be placed on the term "marry” in N. J. S. 3A:4-7:

372 F.3d 500 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Robert MALLELA, Tatiana Rybuk, Paul Schneider, Advance Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, P.C., d/b/a Mill Basin Physical Medicine, Ridgewood Medical Specialist and Hempstead Village Medical, Allied Medical Health Care, P.C., Astoria Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, P.C., Atlantic Medical Practice, P.C., Avenue U Medical Services, P.C., Bay Medical Health

CALABRESI, Circuit Judge. This case raises a question of state law that is unsettled, and of central importance to the functioning of New York’s no-fault automobile insurance scheme. It asks whether an insurance company may refuse to compensate medical providers for healthcare services that are within the scope of the no-fault program in every way except that they are provided by health care professionals employed b

ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Norman Whitt, Jr., as the administrator of the Estate of Norman Whitt, Sr. ("Whitt"), brings this action against defendant Kaleida Health ("Defendant" or "Kaleida Health"), for claims arising out of Whitt's employment at Kaleida Health. (See Dkt. 20). Presently before the Court is Defendant's motion for summa

558 F.2d 667 John E. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Joseph A. WALSH, Individually and as SuperintendentBridgeport Police Department, William A. O'Connor,President, Frances E. Fagan, Vice President; Andrew C.Lindmark, Frank Delaquila, Wiley Wheeler, Elmer R. Rinko,Timothy O'Neill, and Anthony Camarda, all Individually andas the members of the Board of Police Commissioners, City ofBridgeport, Roger Lehman, Edwin Mak,

WATERMAN, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a judgment order of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, Newman, J., dismissing, on the ground that the action was barred by the “borrowed” Connecticut tort statute of limitations, a civil rights action *669brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We affirm the dismissal of the complaint.

MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, District Judge. I. Introduction Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 41) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Public Schools (“PPS” or the “district”) and a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 44) filed by defendant Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers (“PFT” or collectively with PPS, “defendants”). Plaintiff Emily Davis

51 N.J. 345 (1968) 240 A.2d 429 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH CALOGERO. The Supreme Court of New Jersey. Argued March 5, 1968. Decided April 1, 1968. *346 Mr. Benjamin Marmer argued the cause for defendant-appellant, Frank Rizzo. Mr. Richard C. Schramm argued the cause for plaintiff-re

OPINION OF THE COURT PER CURIAM. In this appeal from the district court’s denial of appellants’ application for attorney’s fees, we are asked to determine that the efforts of appellants’ counsel resulted in a “common benefit” to a discernible class. Because the facts of this case fall far outside the narrowly circumscribed common benefit exception to the general “American Rule” that attorney’s fees are ordina