⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “International Industries Corporation v. CR Brands Inc”

District Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2014-12-24 · Published · cited 5× · 73 F. Supp. 3d 846; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176993; 2014 WL 7359168
MEMORANDUM OPINION CHARLES R. SIMPSON III, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss (DN 82) of Defendants Yum! Brands, Inc. (‘Yum!” or the “Company”), David C. Novak, Richard T. Carucci, and Jing-Shyh S. Su (“Individual Defendants”). Defendants request that the Court dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”) (DN 72) with prejudice for fai
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011-06-08 · Published · cited 0× · 616 F.3d 888; 2010 WL 3220600
642 F.3d 608 (2011) SOUTHEAST MISSOURI HOSPITAL, Plaintiff, Saint Francis Medical Center, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C.R. BARD, INC., Defendant-Appellee, Tyco International, US, Inc.; Tyco Health Care Group; John Does 1-10, Defendants. Attorney General of the State of Missouri, Amicus on Behalf of Appellant. No. 09-3325. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Court of Appeals of Washington · 2022-08-01 · Published · cited 0×
NOTICE: SLIP OPINION (not the court’s final written decision) The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the written opinions that are originally filed by the court. A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential pur
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2026-03-30 · Published · cited 0×
USCA11 Case: 24-13294 Document: 69-1 Date Filed: 03/30/2026 Page: 1 of 35 FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-10816 ____________________ A.G.,
District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2009-09-28 · Published · cited 1× · 657 F. Supp. 2d 1069; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89166; 2009 WL 3088814
657 F.Supp.2d 1069 (2009) ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. C.R. BARD, INC., Defendant. No. 1:07cv0031 TCM. United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division. September 28, 2009. *1076 Christopher Studebaker, David E. Kovel, Karina Shostakovsky, Kenn
District Court, S.D. Florida · 2006-09-27 · Published · cited 0× · 453 F. Supp. 2d 1357; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73312; 2006 WL 2801985
453 F.Supp.2d 1357 (2006) CANON LATIN AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff, v. LANTECH (CR), S.A., Defendant. No. 05-20297 CIV COOKE, 05-20297 CIV BROWN. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. September 27, 2006. *1358 Michael Diaz, Jr., Scott A. Burr, and Robert T. Rigal, of Diaz, Reus, Rolff, & Targ, LLP, Miami, Counsel for Plaint
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2021-04-01 · Published · cited 5× · 248 A.3d 1137; 250 Md. App. 135
Adcor Industries, Inc. v. Beretta USA Corp., No. 118, September Term, 2019, Argued: September 2, 2020 CONTRACTS – NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS Contracts are voluntary undertakings that obligate the parties to duties and responsibilities that they otherwise wouldn’t have assumed. The risks of signing a contract are many and often unforeseen. Before signing a contract, the parties must assess whether the expected benefits of the transaction outweigh the risks, including the possibility that they unde
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2010-03-31 · Published · cited 558× · 702 F. Supp. 2d 465; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31615; 2009 WL 6315330
702 F.Supp.2d 465 (2010) UNIVAC DENTAL COMPANY, and Lactona Corporation, Consolidated Plaintiffs, v. DENTSPLY INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 1:07-CV-493. United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania. March 31, 2010. *467 Gregory J. McDonald, Paul R. Braunsdorf, Rayne Hammond Benz, Harris Beach PLLC, Pittsford
District Court, S.D. New York · 2014-05-21 · Published · cited 11× · 23 F. Supp. 3d 173; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69999; 2014 WL 2119841
OPINION SWEET, District Judge. Plaintiffs Idea Italiana s.r.l. (“Idea” or “Idea Italiana”) and Helios International S.A.R.L. (“Helios”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) have moved pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 56.1 for partial summary judgment on their claims of conversion of 112 pieces of Cantamessa jewelry (the “Jewelry”) by Defendants Cantamessa USA,
District Court, E.D. New York · 1995-10-02 · Published · cited 52× · 907 F. Supp. 547; 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20174; 1995 WL 591309
907 F.Supp. 547 (1995) IVY MAR CO., INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. C.R. SEASONS LTD., et al., Defendants. No. 95 CV 0508 (FB). United States District Court, E.D. New York. October 2, 1995. *548 *549 *550 Feinsilver Law Group, P.C. by David Feinsilver, Daniel
United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010-09-30 · Published · cited 2× · 438 B.R. 817; 2010 WL 4026811
438 B.R. 817 (2010) In re John F. LUBY and Vanessa Luby, Debtors. Panda Herbal International, Inc., AFAB Industrial Services, Inc., SVT, Inc., Carolina Fulfillment, Everett L. Farr, III, and Henry Hadry, Plaintiffs v. John F. Luby and Vanessa Luby, Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 06-16050 SR. Adversary No. 07-0250. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. September 30,
District Court, E.D. California · 2012-05-31 · Published · cited 0× · 879 F. Supp. 2d 1096; 2012 WL 1979209; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75818
ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge. This matter comes before the court on the motion for summary judgment filed by Sierra Pacific Industries (“SPI”) and Eunice Howell and Howell’s Forest Harvesting (together, “Howell”). (ECF 417.) The motion was heard on April 12, 2012; Kelli Taylor, Richard Elias and Glen Dorgan appeared for plaintiff; William Warne, Annie Amaral, Meghan Baker, Michael
United States Court of Federal Claims · 2005-02-09 · Published · cited 28× · 64 Fed. Cl. 150; 2005 U.S. Claims LEXIS 51; 2005 WL 419411
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PERMANENT INJUNCTION WILLIAMS, Judge. This post-award bid protest comes before the Court on the parties’ cross motions for judgment on the administrative record (AR) and on Plaintiffs motion for a permanent injunction against continued performance of a contract for trash pick-up services.2 This Court denied Plaintiffs motion for
District Court, S.D. California · 2000-09-18 · Published · cited 11× · 114 F. Supp. 2d 992; 56 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1548; 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13762; 2000 WL 1473886
114 F.Supp.2d 992 (2000) CONTINENTAL LABORATORY PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff, v. MEDAX INTERNATIONAL, INC., Alma A. Timpson, Paul M. Jessop, Defendants. No. 97-CV-0359 W JAH. United States District Court, S.D. California. September 18, 2000. *993 *994 Kathleen A. Pasulka, Edward C. Schewe, Brown,
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · 2015-07-06 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 14-15-00024-CV FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/6/2015 5:12:55 PM
Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · 2015-10-08 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 12-14-00323-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 10/8/2015 10:52:32 AM
Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler) · 2015-06-08 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 12-14-00323-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 6/8/2015 8:38:00 PM
District Court, S.D. New York · 2006-12-07 · Published · cited 0× · 464 F. Supp. 2d 246; 2006 WL 3531196
464 F.Supp.2d 246 (2006) MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION, Defendant. No. 06 Civ. 3036(LAP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. December 7, 2006. *247 *248 *249 Martin S. Hyman,
Missouri Court of Appeals · 2014-09-16 · Published · cited 77× · 450 S.W.3d 308; 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1013; 2014 WL 4589815
LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, Presiding Judge. “Our Tigger.” That is what Austin Manning’s parents called him when he was a little boy, because he bounced around like Tigger from the classic tale, Winnie the Pooh. He never sat still for more than a second. At the time, the family thought it was cute. Little did they know of the problems to come.