⚖ 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.

9 opinions for “KAHAN v. SLIPPERY ROCK UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA”

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2014-09-24 · Published · cited 20× · 50 F. Supp. 3d 667; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134708; 2014 WL 4792170
MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, Chief Judge. This is a civil rights, employment, and common law tort case in which Paul Kahan (“Kahan”) accuses his former employer, Slippery Rock University (“SRU”), several of its individual employees, and the husband and son of one of its employees, of wrongfully either failing to renew his teaching contract, or causing that contract not to be renewed. Under federal la
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2016-02-19 · Published · cited 1× · 163 F. Supp. 3d 280; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20488; 2016 WL 687118
MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, Chief District Judge I. Introduction Plaintiff Thomas W. Shaffer (“plaintiff’), an attorney formerly employed by Fayette County (the “County”) as an assistant public defender, filed this civil action against Fayette County Commissioner A1 Ambro-sini (“Ambrosini”) and the County (collectively, “defendants”) for allegedly tortious conduct undertaken in connection wi
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2015-03-24 · Published · cited 5× · 98 F. Supp. 3d 809; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36963; 2015 WL 1359147
*813 OPINION MARK R. HORNAK, District Judge. Brenda and David Benedict (“Plaintiffs” or “the Benedicts”), filed the Complaint in this action as co-administrators of the estate of their son, David. ECF No. 1-2, at ¶ 1. Defendants are (a)' Southwestern Pennsylvania Human Services, Inc., (b) Bruno Mediate in his official capacity as Director o
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2025-05-13 · Published · cited 0×
USCA11 Case: 23-12160 Document: 82-1 Date Filed: 05/13/2025 Page: 1 of 127 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12160 ____________________ HM FLORIDA-ORL, LLC,
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2025-05-13 · Published · cited 0×
USCA11 Case: 23-12160 Document: 82-1 Date Filed: 05/13/2025 Page: 1 of 127 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12160 ____________________ HM FLORIDA-ORL, LLC,
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2014-12-15 · Published · cited 5× · 66 F. Supp. 3d 661; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172952; 2014 WL 7152325
MEMORANDUM OPINION CONTI, Chief Judge. In this action, Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“Allstate”) asks this court to enter an order, pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, finding that it does not owe a duty to defend or a duty to indemnify to Charlene Winslow (“Mrs. Winslow”), Thomas E. Winslow (“Mr. Winslow”), or Thomas M. Winslow (“Tommy Wins
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2016-03-17 · Published · cited 28× · 170 F. Supp. 3d 801; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34588
MEMORANDUM OPINION KIM R. GIBSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. Introduction Pending before the Court is a motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 24) filed by Defendant New Enterprise Stone and Lime Co., Inc., with respect to all claims asserted in Plaintiff Suzette M. Bumbarger’s amended complaint filed on July 2, 2014, (ECF No. 2). Plaintiffs amended complaint alleges claims for a ho
Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2011-02-15 · Published · cited 24× · 16 A.3d 48; 2011 Del. Ch. LEXIS 22
16 A.3d 48 (2011) AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC., Plaintiff, v. AIRGAS, INC., Peter McCausland, James W. Hovey, Paula A. Sneed, David M. Stout, Ellen C. Wolf, Lee M. Thomas and John C. van Roden, Jr., Defendants. In re Airgas Inc. Shareholder Litigation. Civil Action Nos. 5249-CC, 5256-CC. Court of Chancery of Delaware. Submitted: February 8, 2011. Decide
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974-02-19 · Published · cited 238× · 489 F.2d 579; 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 10025
WISDOM, Circuit Judge: This appeal raises a variety of difficult questions under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Suing individually, as the representative of a class, and derivatively, Joe L. Smallwood, plaintiff-appellant, charged the defendants with a multitude of sins, including violations of the Proxy Rules, the tender offe