⚖ 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.

19 opinions for “Kent County Water Authority v. 3M Company”

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2020-04-21 · Published · cited 0× · 392 Wis. 2d 293; 944 N.W.2d 52; 2020 WI App 22
2020 WI App 22 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2018AP2366 Complete Title of Case: ONEIDA COUNTY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-CROSS-APPELLANT, V. SUNFLOWER PROP II, LLC, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT-CROSS-RESPONDENT. Opinion Filed: April 21, 2020 Submitted
Nevada Supreme Court · 2015-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 2015 NV 84
131 Nev., Advance Opinion 614 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EUREKA COUNTY, A POLITICAL No. 61324 SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF NEVADA; KENNETH F. BENSON, INDIVIDUALLY; DIAMOND CATTLE COMPANY, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED FLED LIABILITY COMPANY; AND MICHEL AND
Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · 2025-05-29 · Published · cited 0×
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________ NO. 09-24-00304-CV ________________ BEACH CLUB CONDOMINIUMS, A WINKLER DEVELOPMENT, L.P., WINKLER & ASSOCIATES, INC., WINKLER DEVELOPMENT, INC., AND JAMES WINKLER, Appellants v. SHO
Kohler Co. v. DNRpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2023-12-05 · Published · cited 2× · 2024 WI App 2
2024 WI App 2 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2021AP1187 Complete Title of Case: KOHLER CO., PETITIONER-APPELLANT, V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT, CLAUDIA BRICKS AND FRIENDS OF THE BLACK RIVER FORE
Nevada Supreme Court · 2015-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 2015 NV 84
64 131 Nev., Advance Opinion IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EUREKA COUNTY, A POLITICAL No. 61324 SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF NEVADA; KENNETH F. BENSON, INDIVIDUALLY; DIAMOND CATTLE COMPANY, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED !•,.. 11A LIABILITY COMPANY; AND MICHEL AND MARGARET ANN ETCHEVERRY OCT 2 9 2015 FAMILY, LP, A NEVADA REGISTERED FOREIGN LIMITED PAR
Nevada Supreme Court · 2015-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 2015 NV 84
64 131 Nev., Advance Opinion IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EUREKA COUNTY, A POLITICAL No. 61324 SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF NEVADA; KENNETH F. BENSON, INDIVIDUALLY; DIAMOND CATTLE COMPANY, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED !•,.. 11A LIABILITY COMPANY; AND MICHEL AND MARGARET ANN ETCHEVERRY OCT 2 9 2015 FAMILY, LP, A NEVADA REGISTERED FOREIGN LIMITED PAR
Nevada Supreme Court · 2015-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 2015 NV 84
64 131 Nev., Advance Opinion IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EUREKA COUNTY, A POLITICAL No. 61324 SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF NEVADA; KENNETH F. BENSON, INDIVIDUALLY; DIAMOND CATTLE COMPANY, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED !•,.. 11A LIABILITY COMPANY; AND MICHEL AND MARGARET ANN ETCHEVERRY OCT 2 9 2015 FAMILY, LP, A NEVADA REGISTERED FOREIGN LIMITED PAR
Texas Supreme Court · 2009-11-20 · Published · cited 267× · 302 S.W.3d 866; 53 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 134; 2009 Tex. LEXIS 967; 2009 WL 3969544
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 868 We issued an opinion in this case on June 26, 2009. Today, we deny the motion for rehearing filed by respondent Central Expressway Sign Associates, withdraw our prior opinion, and substitute the following. The Texas Constitution provides that "[n]o person's property shall be taken, damaged or destroye
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2013-03-28 · Published · cited 1× · 960 F. Supp. 2d 512; 2013 WL 1285456; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48494
OPINION JAMES KNOLL GARDNER, District Judge. This matter is before the court on Defendant Metropolitan Edison Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed July 27, 2012. SUMMARY OF DECISION For the reasons expressed below, I grant Defendant Metropolitan Edison Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment and dismiss plaintiffs claims asserted against d
District Court, D. Oregon · 2009-09-30 · Published · cited 4× · 663 F. Supp. 2d 983; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91623; 2009 WL 3245917
663 F.Supp.2d 983 (2009) SIERRA CLUB, a non-profit corporation; Northwest Environmental Defense Center, a non-profit corporation; Columbia Gorge, a non-profit corporation; Columbia Riverkeeper, a non-profit corporation; and Hellscanyon Preservation Council, a non-profit corporation, Plaintiffs, v. PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, an Oregon corporation, Defendant. Civil No. 08-1136-HA. United States D
Brock v. Thomaspublic domain
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011-04-14 · Published · cited 2× · 782 F. Supp. 2d 133; 2011 WL 1709858
782 F.Supp.2d 133 (2011) Margaret BROCK et al. v. Danette THOMAS et al. William Nolde v. Silver Buckman et al. Civil Nos. 10-687, 10-3128. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. April 14, 2011. *136 Daniel Urevick-Ackelsberg, Elizabeth C. Goodell, Montgomery L. Wilson, Community Legal Services, Inc., Philade
Supreme Court of Iowa · 2018-02-23 · Published · cited 15× · 908 N.W.2d 235
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 16–0775 Filed February 23, 2018 OLIVER FENCEROY, Appellee, vs. GELITA USA, INC., TOM HAIRE, and JEFF TOLSMA, Appellants, and BOB KERSBERGEN and JEREMIE KNEIP, Defendants. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge. Interlocutory review of a district court order denying a protective order and permitting
United States Court of Federal Claims · 2010-01-15 · Published · cited 4× · 91 Fed. Cl. 412; 2010 U.S. Claims LEXIS 233; 2010 WL 391510
OPINION ALLEGRA, Judge: In this case, an agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) alleges that, following a highly successful undercover operation, ATF failed to protect him and his family from threats and violence, and otherwise subjected him to a hostile work environment. He asserts that ATF’s malfeasance and misfeasance in these and other regards violated an agreement he h
Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2019-07-22 · Published · cited 0×
07/22/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE February 20, 2019 Session CAROLYN COFFMAN ET AL. v. ARMSTRONG INTERNATIONAL, INC. ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County No. 2-485-14 William T. Ailor, Jud
District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2009-07-24 · Published · cited 16× · 644 F. Supp. 2d 905; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64557; 2009 WL 2217640
644 F.Supp.2d 905 (2009) JDC MANAGEMENT, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Tom REICH, Michael G. Petersen, and Scott Bowen, the Commissioner of State Lottery, an officer of the State of Michigan, Defendants. Case No. 1:08-cv-760. United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division. July 24, 2009. *907 Gregory R. Todd, David T. Bowen
District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1984-12-06 · Published · cited 3× · 607 F. Supp. 1537; 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24992
607 F.Supp. 1537 (1984) FOSECO INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, Plaintiff, v. FIRELINE INC., Gallis, Inc., Randall Gallatin, Defendants. No. C80-595A. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D. September 19, 1984. On Motion for New Trial December 6, 1984. *1538 *1539 Hal D. Cooper, R
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002-05-14 · Published · cited 26× · 288 F.3d 732; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9126; 2002 WL 976468
288 F.3d 732 Barbara GRUTTER, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Lee BOLLINGER, et al., Defendants-Appellants (01-1447),Kimberly James, et al., Intervening Defendants-Appellants (01-1516). No. 01-1447. No. 01-1516. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: December 6, 2001. Decided and Filed: May 14, 2002 <
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-04-17 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX
District Court, C.D. California · 2007-10-22 · Published · cited 22× · 247 F.R.D. 98; 2007 WL 4291967
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION [79] AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS [74] STEPHEN V. WILSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) consists of twenty-two class actions from across the country against Defendant Clear Channel Communications, Inc. and its subsidiaries.1 The