Cases

OPINION BY JUDGE COHN JUBELIRER We are asked to decide whether including in the definition of "tobacco products" under the Tobacco Products Tax Act (TPTA), 1 "electronic cigarettes" (e-cigarettes), when they do not deliver tobacco, as well as "e-liquids" that do not contain nicotine or co

ORDER NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT. JUDGE In this litigation, Plaintiff' Andretti Sports Marketing Louisiana, LLC (“Andretti”) alleges that it is owed money under a contract it entered into with Defendant NOLA Motorsports Host Committee, Inc. (“NMHC”).1 Andretti alleges that Defendants NOLA Motor Club, LLC (“NOLA Motor”) and Laney Chouest (“Chouest”) are also

Burnes, J. INTRODUCTION This case arose out of the attempt by the plaintiffs to broker the sale of a printing press to the defendant Dataprint, the purchase of that printing press by Dataprint directly from the seller, and an altercation that took place between the defendant David A. Wooldridge and the plaintiff Philip J. Keon. This case was originally filed in this court. After it had been pending here,

433 B.R. 335 (2010) In re MARKET CENTER EAST RETAIL PROPERTY, INC., Debtor. No. 11-09-11696 SA. United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico. August 3, 2010. *342 Daniel J Behles, Cuddy & McCarthy, LLP, Albuquerque, NM, for debtor. MEMORANDUM OPINION ON ORIX CAPITAL MARKET, LLC'S MOTION TO ALLOW SECURED CLAIM PURS

OPINION BY JUSTICE CLEO E. POWELL In this appeal, we consider whether Code § 56-49.01(A) allows a natural gas company to gain access to private property for the purpose of conducting surveys and other activities that are only necessary for the selection of the most advantageous route. We further consider whether the trial court in this case misapplied Code § 56-49.01 and, if so, whether a natural gas company's subsequent

MEMORANDUM RULING REBECCA F. DOHERTY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court is a “Motion to Dismiss, and in the -Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgement” [Doc, 24] filed on behalf of.defendants, the United States Coast, Guard,, Marine Safety Unit (“USCG”) and Jeh Charles Johnson, the Secretary of Homeland Security (‘collectively, “defendants”),- wherein defendants seeks .dismissal with preju

Filed 12/2/15 Certified for Publication 1/4/16 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ---- NORTH COAST RIVERS ALLIANCE et al., C072067 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Super. Ct. No. 34-2010-

Filed 3/30/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR EAST OAKLAND STADIUM ALLIANCE et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. A166221 CITY OF OAKLAND et al., (Alameda County Defendants and Super. Ct. No. Appellants;

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT LEWIS M. KILLIAN, JR., Bankruptcy Judge. This matter is before the Court on Co-rus Construction Venture, LLC’s (CCV) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment which seeks a declaratory judgment that defendants Jonathan R. Adkins, et al. and defendants Peter Bell, et al. (collectively, the “Ori

433 B.R. 401 (2010) In re LAKETOWN WHARF MARKETING CORPORATION, n/k/a Laketown Wharf Marketing, LLC, Debtor. Corus Construction Venture, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Laketown Wharf Marketing Corporation, et al., Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 08-40692-LMK. Adversary No. 09-4009-LMK. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division. June 7, 2010.

Cantil-Sakauye, C.J. *690 In this case we decide whether federal law, the ICC [Interstate Commerce Commission] Termination Act of 1995 ( Pub.L. No. 104-88 (Dec. 29, 1995) 109 Stat. 803

OPINION GOULD, Circuit Judge: We consider whether Plaintiffs-Appellants have pleaded facts sufficient under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 9(b) to support a plausible theory of Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) and RICO conspiracy *994violations against Defendants-Appellees. We have jurisdiction under 28 U

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge MICHAEL wrote the opinion in which Judge NIEMEYER joined. Judge NIEMEYER wrote a separate concurring opinion. OPINION MICHAEL, Circuit Judge: This is the latest in a series of appeals in copyright infringement cases arising out of the design and use of the logo for the Baltimore Ravens football team. In *3

DeALMEIDA, P.J.T.C. The question before the court is whether plaintiffs approximately twelve-acre, mostly vacant plot of land, on which is located a 290-foot, income-generating, cellular communications tower, qualifies for farmland assessment pursuant to the Farmland Assessment Act of 1964, N.J.S.A. 54:4-23.1, et seq. The property is put to dual uses. In addition to collecting rent from the operation of the c

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ECLECTIC PROPERTIES EAST, LLC, a No. 12-16526 California limited liability company; RISOLA FAMILY LP II, a Florida D.C. No. limited partnership; CECA 3000, LP, 5:09-cv-00511- a Nevada limited partnership; RMW CHEATHAM PROPERTIES, LLC, a California limited liability company, successor in interest of John and OPINION Mary Cheatham; VAS ENTERPRISES I LLC, a

OPINION OF THE COURT ROTH, Circuit Judge. This case comes before us a second time for a determination whether New Jersey’s regulation of the disposal of solid waste is constitutional under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. New Jersey’s “flow control” statutes require waste management districts to contract with designated waste facilities for the disposal of locally generated waste. Following the Su

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCS. 68, 75, 78) LAWRENCE J. O’NEILL, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This case concerns approval by the United States Department of the Interior and its member agency the United States Bureau of Reclamation (collectively, “Federal Defendants,” “Reclamation,” or the “Bureau”) of eight (8) interim renewal cont

821 F.Supp. 125 (1993) 210 EAST 86TH STREET CORP., Plaintiff, v. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC., et al., Defendants. PARK COMCAR ASSOCIATES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC., et al., Defendants. Nos. 87 Civ. 6497 (VLB), 87 Civ. 6498 (VLB). United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 31, 1993. *126

ACCEPTED 15-24-00040-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM JOYNER, District Judge. Defendants have moved this Court to dismiss the instant action for a number of reasons that include improper venue, lack of standing, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. This case arises out of the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board (PMMB) Order A-863, which establishes minimum milk prices in PMMB Area # 1. Area # 1 con