Cases

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRAA. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs in this putative class action begin their Amended Complaint with the following statement: *466 The purpose of this lawsuit is to correct the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process abuses that have occu

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. 1. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs in this putative class action allege that banks, credit card companies, and debt collectors obtained thousands of judgments against debtors through false affidavits, misleading evidence, and other improper litigation tactics.1 They request injunctive, declaratory, a

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- ) ) American West Construction, LLC ) ASBCA No. 61094 ) Under Contract No. W912HY-10-D-0039 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Ryan J. Klein, Esq. Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

OPINION AND ORDER SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs are eight individuals who claim that defendants obtained tens of thousands of state court debt collection judgments against them using false affidavits, misleading evidence, and other improper litigation tactics. Defendants consist of two groups: creditors or their affiliates (“Creditor Defenda

Easterbrook, Circuit Judge. We have consolidated two appeals that pose a common question: whether persons who contend that air carriers have violated state law by using biometric identification in the workplace must present these contentions to an adjustment board under the Railway Labor Act (RLA),

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff Altagracia Diaz (“the Plaintiff’), on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, commenced this action against the Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (“the Defendant” or “RCS”) for alleged unlawful credit and collection practices engaged in by the Defendant in violation of the Fair Debt Collection P

RICHARD E. FEHLING, Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge I. INTRODUCTION The issue I must decide in this adversary proceeding is whether Debtor's pre-petition hardship withdrawal from her 401(k) account caused the withdrawn funds to lose their protected status as exempt under 11 U.S.C. § 541</

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ Nos. 22-2003, 22-2004, 22-2005, 22-2006, 22-0007, 22-2008, 22-2009, 22-2010, 22-2011 ________________ In re: LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC Debtor LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. THOSE PARTIES LISTED ON APPENDIX A TO COMPLA

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ Nos. 22-2003, 22-2004, 22-2005, 22-2006, 22-0007, 22-2008, 22-2009, 22-2010, 22-2011 ________________ In re: LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC Debtor LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. THOSE PARTIES LISTED ON APPENDIX A TO COMPLAI

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ Nos. 22-2003, 22-2004, 22-2005, 22-2006, 22-0007, 22-2008, 22-2009, 22-2010, 22-2011 ________________ In re: LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC Debtor LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. THOSE PARTIES LISTED ON APPENDIX A TO COMPLAI

529 F.Supp.2d 535 (2008) FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Rudolph M, CHIORAZZO, Jason Chiorazzo, John Chiorazzo, Kathleen Chiorazzo, and South Shore Auto World of Mays Landing, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 67-2852. United States District Court, D. New Jersey. January 7, 2008. *536 Day Pitney, LLP. by Scott A. Zuber,

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS ERIK P. KIMBALL, Bankruptcy Judge. THIS MATTER came before the Court upon Lawrence Duprey’s and Vishnu Ramlogan’s Motion to Dismiss Count I of the Adversary Complaint or, Alternatively, for Abstention [ECF No. 174] (the “Motion to Dismiss”) filed by Lawrence Duprey and Vishnu Ramlogan1 (together, the “Defe

Derrick K. Watson, United States District Judge *1327INTRODUCTION Irongate seeks summary judgment on the Sunday's Companies'1 remaining claims for breach of contract, conversion, and unjust enrichment, as well as on its own Counterclaim for breach of contract arising out of the failure o

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of -- ) ) Parsons Evergreene, LLC ) ASBCA No. 58634 ) Under Contract No. FA8903-04-D-8703 ) APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Douglas S. Oles, Esq. James F. Nagle, Esq.

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. On February 19, 2014, the Plaintiffs Schwartzco Enterprises, LLC (“Schwartzco”), a New York limited liability company; the Meat House — Roslyn LLC (“TMH Roslyn”), a New York limited liability company; and Arnold M. Schwartz, an individual resident of New *338York (collectively the “Plaintiffs”

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE CHRISTOPHER KOSCHO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) C.A. No. N24C-12-106 PAW CCLD ) THE MERIT DISTRIBUTION ) GROUP, LLC and CZECH ASSET ) MANAGEMENT, L.P., ) ) Defendants. ) Submit

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: *687On July 23, 2015, Plaintiffs Brad Schwartzman and Trusgan, Inc. (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed this action against two groups of defendants: (1) Defendants Label LLC, Label, N.Y. LLC, David Miller, and Jeremy Miller (collectively, "Label Defendants"), and (2) Defendants Automatic Data

Stuart's LLC and WAYNE GALVIN, Plaintiffs, againstStuart Edelman, LEVEL 8 APPAREL, LLC, WORLD CROSS CULTURE, INC., WORLDWIDE SOURCING GROUP, LLC, SEUNG BON KIM a/k/a SCOTT KIM a/k/a SAM KIM, PETER LISTER, MICHAEL HONG and MARY-LEE EDELMAN, Defendants. 012560-09

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. On August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff Charles Thomas (“the Plaintiff’), on behalf of him*85self and all others similarly situated, commenced this action against the Defendant American Service Finance Corporation d/b/a Merchants Interstate Collection Agency (“the Defendant”) for alleged acts committ