Cases

244 F.Supp.2d 1250 (2003) HORIZON HOLDINGS, L.L.C. f/k/a Horizon Marine L.C.; Geoffrey Pepper; Cassandra O'Tool; and John O'Tool; Plaintiffs, v. GENMAR HOLDINGS, INC.; Genmar Industries, Inc.; and Genmar Manufacturing of Kansas, L.L.C, Defendants. No. 01-2193-JWL. United States District Court, D. Kansas. February 11, 2003. *1255

BRISCOE, Circuit Judge. Defendants Genmar Holdings, Inc., Gen-mar Industries, Inc., and Genmar Manufacturing of Kansas, Inc., appeal a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs Horizon Holdings, LLC (f/k/a Horizon Marine LC) and Geoffrey Pepper on plaintiffs’ claim for breach of contract. Plaintiffs cross-appeal, challenging the district court’s refusal to award post-judgment intere

241 F.Supp.2d 1123 (2002) HORIZON HOLDINGS, L.L.C. f/k/a Horizon Marine L.C.; Geoffrey Pepper; Cassandra O'Tool; and John O'Tool, Plaintiffs, v. GENMAR HOLDINGS, INC.; Genmar Industries, Inc.; and Genmar Manufacturing of Kansas, L.L.C, Defendants. No. 01-2193-JWL. United States District Court, D. Kansas. October 2, 2002. *1126 Fl

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOSEPH H. McKINLEY, JR., District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Groupwell International (HK) Limited’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Defendant’s Counterclaims [DN 55] and Motion for Protective Order [DN 58] and Defendant Counter-claimant Gourmet Express, LLC’s Motion for Relief Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(d) and 54(b) [DN 59] and Motio

JULIE A. ROBINSON, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff M.F. ("Minor"), a minor, brings a claim against Defendant ADT, Inc. ("ADT") for wrongful death under K.S.A. § 60-1901. Plaintiff Charles E. Frost, Jr., Administrator of the Estate of Elizabeth *1124Frost ("Administrator"), brings claims against ADT for negligence and fraudulent

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GERALD L. RUSHFELT, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Ed Tobergte Associates d/b/a Gear 2000 brings this action for patent infringement and false advertising under the Lanham Act. Plaintiff alleges that football shoulder pads sold by Defendant Russell Brands, LLC, through its division Bike Athletics, infringed upon its patent. This matter comes before the Court upon

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER LUNGSTRUM, District Judge. This lawsuit involves the popular Greenies® chew for dogs, which has been sold for years by defendant S & M NuTec LLC (SMN) using, until recently, a formulation containing confidential ingredients supplied by plaintiff MGP Ingredients (MGPI). In April of 2006, defendant Mars, Incorporated (Mars) acquired SMN. Plaintiffs complaint generally alleges that M

364 F.Supp.2d 1246 (2005) LDCIRCUIT, LLC, Plaintiff, v. SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., Defendant. No. 04-2327-JWL. United States District Court, D. Kansas. April 8, 2005. *1247 *1248 John R. Weist, McCormick, Adam & Long, P.A., Overland Park, KS, for Plaintiff. Elizabeth D. Ba

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GERALD L. RUSHFELT, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order Regarding Plaintiffs’ “Notice of Videotape Deposition Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6)” (doc. 104). Defendant moves the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), for a protective order limiting the scope of Plaintiffs’ Rule 30(b)(6) notice to relevant, non-pri

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WHALIN, United States Magistrate Judge. a. Background. This lawsuit involves a dispute over the employment contracts of four senior employees sued by their employer. The employees are all high-level investment managers employed by an international financial services firm as “Global Partners” in its Worldwide Fixed Income Group (hereinafter ‘WFI”)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WAXSE, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is a Motion to Compel additional discovery responses (doc. 116) filed by Plaintiffs Bradshaw, Adams and Raines (“Plaintiffs”). More specifically, Plaintiffs request the Court: • overrule Defendant’s general objections to the discovery requests; and

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SEBELIUS, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff filed the present Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Request for Productions on January 25, 2007 (Doc. 29). Defendant Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas (“BCBSKS”) filed a response (Doc. 48), to which plaintiff has replied (Doc. 49). The issues are therefore fully briefed and ripe for discussion. I.

ORDER JAMES P. O’HARA, United States Magistrate Judge. This action arises out of a house fire that resulted in the deaths of plaintiff Coley Gass-awajfs two children. Plaintiff alleges that defendant1 Sunbeam Products, Inc. was negligent in the manufacture, design, inspection, testing, and marketing of certain “space heaters” she purchased and that the fire was caused

*932OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO QUASH Janice D. Loyd, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Before the Court is the Defendant’s Amended Motion to Quash (the “Motion”) [Doc.17] a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Plaintiff to the Fort Sill Federal Credit Union (the “Credit Union”), a non-party in this adversary proceeding. Plaintiff has t

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DAVID J. WAXSE, United States Magistrate Judge. This is an employment discrimination case, which focuses on Defendant’s decision in October 2005 that Plaintiff could not perform his job, or any other available position in the plant, based on significant medical restrictions received from his personal physician. Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion to Compel (doe. 2

*643 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SEBELIUS, United States Magistrate Judge. This matter comes before the court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (Doc. 30). Defendants filed a timely response to plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. 37) to which plaintiffs have replied (Doc. 44). Additionally, defendants filed a Cross Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 37). Plain

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WAXSE, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is a Motion to Compel (doe. 98) filed by third party defendants and counterclaimants Excel Laminates and David Seitter (collectively “Excel”) seeking production of documents and answers to interrogatories from defendant and third party Plaintiff Lear Corporation (“Lear”). Excel also moves the Court to hear oral

719 F.Supp.2d 121 (2010) Joanne KUCHERA, Gary Kuchera, and Mary Williams, Plaintiffs, v. PAREXEL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Defendant. Civil Action No. 07-10815-NMG. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 16, 2010. *123 Andrea C. Kramer, Cyrus M. Perlman, Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP, Boston, MA, for Plaintiffs.

354 F.Supp.2d 1209 (2005) Sherri LITTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MAVERICK PAPER CO., et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 03-2377-KHV. United States District Court, D. Kansas. January 28, 2005. *1210 Rebecca M. Randles, Randles & Mata, LLC, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiffs. Eric E. Packel, John J. Yates, Husch & Eppenberge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER BOSTWICK, United States Magistrate Judge. Before the Court is Defendants’ oral motion for Plaintiffs to pay all or part of the costs relating to the discovery of Defendants’ electronic mail. Plaintiffs filed a Brief Addressing Cost^Shifting for Discovery of Electronic Mail (Doc. 58), opposing the shifting of any cost burden from Defendants to Plaintiffs. Defendants filed a Memorandum