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 “LaPine v. City of Detroit”
SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. This appeal concerns a non-judicial foreclosure under Michigan law. After reviewing the pleadings, we conclude that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case. Thus, we VACATE the judgment of the district court with instructions to REMAND to Michigan state court.
438 F.Supp. 1303 (1977) In re EQUITY FUNDING CORPORATION OF AMERICA SECURITIES LITIGATION. No. M.D.L.-142-MML. United States District Court, C. D. California. September 29, 1977. *1304 *1305 *1306 *1307
Hatcher v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurancepublic domain
712 N.W.2d 744 (2005) 269 Mich. App. 596 Kimberly HATCHER, as Next Friend of Aris Hatcher, Minor, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 262964. Court of Appeals of Michigan. Submitted December 13, 2005, at Detroit. Decided December 20, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. Releas
Houston v. Statepublic domain
[Cite as Houston v. State, 2012-Ohio-4404.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 98118 DARRELL HOUSTON PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.
Regis Lutz v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.public domain
OPINION GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-appellants are the owners and lessors of royalty rights to natural gas produced in Trumbull and Mahoning Counties in Ohio. In September 2009, plaintiffs filed this putative class-action lawsuit, alleging that defendants-appellees—three interrelated energy companies
Hammond v. Lapeer Countypublic domain
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 20) PAUL D. BORMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is Defendants Lapeer County, James Cummings and Dale En-gelhardt’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff filed a Response (ECF No. 24) and Defendants filed a Reply (ECF No. 26). The Court held a hearing on June 19, 2015. On
Nunez v. Bae Sys. San Diego Ship Repair Inc.public domain
Hon. Janis L. Sammartino, United States District Judge Presently before the Court is Class Counsel's and Defendant BAE Systems San Diego Ship Repair, Inc.'s (collectively, the "Parties") Joint Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement ("Final Settlement Mot."). (ECF No. 46.) Because the Settlement is fundamentally fair, reasonable, and adequate, the Court GRANTS the Parties' Final Settlement Motion. Also
Police & Fire Retirement System v. Safenet, Inc.public domain
645 F.Supp.2d 210 (2009) POLICE AND FIRE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF The CITY OF DETROIT, Plymouth County Retirement System, State-Boston Retirement System, and Michael Golde, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. SAFENET, INC., Anthony A. Caputo, Kenneth A. Mueller, Carole D. Argo, Thomas A. Brooks, Ira A. Hunt, Jr., Bruce R. Thaw, Arthur L. Money, Shelley A. Harrison, and Andrew E. Clark, Defendants. <
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2009 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
United States v. Exxon Corp.public domain
WILLIAM H. BECKER, Judge, concurring in part, and dissenting in part. CONCURRENCE IN PART First, I wish to concur in the affirmance of the excellent opinion and judgment of the able District Judge on those difficult and complex issues, finding and concluding that Exxon Corporation was liable for overcharges and interest for violation of the applicable
HILLMAN, Senior District Judge. Petitioner Terry Blackman petitions this court to review an order of the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) revoking his pilot’s certificate. The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (“Administrator”) ordered an emergency revocation of petitioner’s air transport pilot’s certificate due to petitioner’s alleged violations o
People v. Williamspublic domain
D. C. Riley, J. (dissenting). Following a jury trial in Detroit Recorder’s Court, March 6 through 14, *141978, defendants, under separate counts, were all found guilty of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520b(l); MSA 28.788(2)(1). Defendant Williams was sentenced to 1-1/2 to 10 years imprisonment; defendants Anderson and Respress were sentenced to terms o
In re IndyMac Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigationpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge. This putative class action concerns mortgage pass-through certificates (the “Certificates”) issued by IndyMac MBS, Inc. (“IndyMac MBS”) in ten offerings pursuant to two registration statements and related prospectuses and prospectus supplements (the “Offering Documents”).1 Lead Plaintiffs Wyoming State Treasurer and Wyoming R
Tinnerholm v. Parke, Davis & Co.public domain
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal by the defendant, Parke, Davis & Co., from a judgment in a personal injury action which held that Parke, Davis’ biological product, Quadri-gen, was defective and that the defect caused injuries to plaintiff Erie Tinner-holm, then 3 months old, which have left him permanently disabled, both physically and mentally. The District Court awarded total damages in the amount of $651,783.
Tinnerholm v. Parke Davis & Co.public domain
285 F.Supp. 432 (1968) Eric R. TINNERHOLM, an infant under the age of fourteen years, by his Guardian ad Litem, Carl F. Tinnerholm, and Carl F. Tinnerholm, Individually, Plaintiffs, v. PARKE DAVIS & CO., Defendant. No. 62 Civ. 4006. United States District Court S. D. New York. May 15, 1968. *433
International Harvester Co. v. Ruckelshauspublic domain
LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge: These consolidated petitions of International Harvester and the three major auto companies, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler, seek review1 of a decision by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency denying petitioners’ applications, filed pursuant to Section 202 of the Clean Air Act,2 for one-year suspensions of the 1975 emissio
Tinnerholm v. Parke, Davis & Co.public domain
411 F.2d 48 Eric R. TINNERHOLM, an infant under the age of fourteen years, by his Guardian ad Litem, Carl F. Tinnerholm, and Carl F. Tinnerholm, individually, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.PARKE, DAVIS & CO., Defendant-Appellant. No. 315. Docket 32697. United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit. Argued February 11, 1969.
In Re DRW Property Co. 82public domain
54 B.R. 489 (1985) In re DRW PROPERTY CO. 82 d/b/a Apache Arms (The Single Original Hereof Shall Be Deemed Filed Under Each Partnership Debtor and In Each Case Listed In the Caption of the Order Procedurally Consolidating Cases For Certain Administrative Purposes Entered on March 29, 1985 and as Supplemented on April 10, 1985), Debtor. In re OAKS II OF JACKSONVILLE, LTD. d/b/a Oaks II, Debtor. In re OAKS II OF JACKSONVILLE, LTD. d/b/a Oaks III, D
478 F.2d 615 4 ERC 2041, 155 U.S.App.D.C. 411, 3Envtl. L. Rep. 20,133 INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, Petitioner,v.William D. RUCKELSHAUS, Administrator, EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Respondent.GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.William D. RUCKELSHAUS, Administrator, EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Respondent.CHRYSLER CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, Petitioner,v.
269 F.2d 255 AMERICAN SAFETY TABLE COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee,v.Joseph SCHREIBER and David Goldberg, Individually and as Partners Trading as Schreiber & Goldberg, Defendants-Appellees-Appellants.AMERICAN SAFETY TABLE COMPANY, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Joseph SCHREIBER and David Goldberg, Individually and as Partners Trading as Schreiber & Goldberg, Defendants-Appellants. No. 16