Cases

United States Tax Court 160 T.C. No. 3 3M COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent ————— Docket No. 5816-13. Filed February 9, 2023. ————— P is the common parent company of the P consolidated group. As

CONSOLIDATED DECISION Before this Court are two motions to dismiss pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens. The Plaintiffs in these matters object to the motions and request guidance from this Court as to the application of Rhode Island Supreme Court opinionKedy v. A.W. Chesterton Co., 946 A.2d 1171 (R.I. 2008), to ongoing asbestos litigation. Due to simil

ORDER DAVID C. NORTON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the court on defendant Crane Co.’s (“Crane”) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the court denies Crane’s motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff James Wilson Chesher (“Chesher”), a former machinist mate and a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy, together with his wife, plaintiff

CONNOLLY, Judge Appellants brought product-liability actions in state and federal courts, alleging that respondent's forced-air warming device (FAWD) used to maintain patients' normal body temperature during surgery increased the risk of surgical-site infection (SSI). Each party moved to exclude the *19other party's experts; appellants moved to ad

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge RANDOLPH. RANDOLPH, Circuit Judge: This petition for review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s assessment of civil penalties turns on the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2462, the direct descendant of a statute of limitations enacted more than a century and a half ago. There, are three questions. Does § 2462 apply to administrative proceedings? If so, is a proc

17 F.3d 1453 38 ERC 1259, 305 U.S.App.D.C. 100, 62USLW 2549,24 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,544 3M COMPANY (MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING), Petitioner,v.Carol M. BROWNER, Administrator of Environmental ProtectionAgency and Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents. No. 92-1126. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit.

HANNA, Judge. The claimant, Ronald Pemberton, appeals from that part of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s decision denying his claims for interest on unpaid medical bills resulting from his 1991 hernia, and for medical expenses that he incurred in connection with his hernia mesh repair surgery in 1994. In two related points, the claimant disputes the commission’s determination that he failed to meet his burden

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1391 DOROTHY E. SMITH, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Julian Jackson Smith, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SCHLAGE LOCK COMPANY, LLC, Defendant - Appellee, and AMETEK, INC., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Haveg

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. This ease arises out of an agreement between TAS Distributing Company, Inc. (“TAS”) and Cummins Engine Company, Inc. (“Cummins”). In that agreement, TAS granted Cummins a co-exclusive license to use its idle-eontrol technology for heavy-duty truck engines. The agreements required Cummins to “make all reasonable efforts to market and sell” the licensed prod

MORENO, District Judge: This case requires the Court to analyze the plaintiffs burden of production in a § 1981 employment discrimination action 1 once the defendant moving for summary judgment offers evidence of a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for its decision not to enter into a contract with the plaintiff. The

"F'”`H"N_D lN m m‘ ; seals wit DE:‘ mci , n ~,.\.» "¢ 8 LU|5 :\/\ T“Q Cou\_r\~ of Aq\?(f,p\\l, gaf .\»\,\L ` ` w l`;`_d,j ~K;(C,§ _ S'\‘k\\/\ 'S“Aac.»\ b\e’m‘ </'\- o (» ”\'L$@\§ FH_ED 'N .. .. c_. _\ 4~;.\:.`fs KJ! ;»'.‘:; |he COUF{ Of Appeals Sixth Dfstrict IEC i 3 2015 . Texarl=<ana, Texas D@fbrca iK. Ammneyy,, '~Glenk \~lo~ 0b» \5»00\?_°\- Cv\ 50\\~\€,6 %Arr_»\rA C;\AM-'v\f$\’\“vv\) A()\OL\\AA\ \/. 'Y\/\L SX-o\XL og/Ykiv\§, AQQQ\\U "/`\(5\’ W\o»\'\`o\/\ ('D( €`k"€»/\SR'O\F\ 0 C T\

Hicks, J. The plaintiff, Signal Aviation Services, Inc. (Signal), appeals a ruling of the Superior Court (Bornstein, J.) granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant, City of Lebanon (City), in this action by Signal for, among other things, breach of contract. The City cross-appeals a portion of the trial court

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2374 ___________________________ Michael A. Oien Plaintiff - Appellant v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., a Delaware Business Corporation, doing business as The Home Depot

.\_..X AN\L§_ \\§\%\§ Q\\§cm,, §§ _C_~r~\m male \\\\§m Q .§zw\@__s `C\é\\. /{VP€.\\ ami- I_M T§£€_ ; AY>@\Q /\\\\B \\\,uw\v>€.§\&¢§_ O_PMSE ANB R@ec&€u§w /\_C=

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas OPINION No. 04-22-00524-CV ROCKSPRINGS VAL VERDE WIND, LLC, Appellant v. Jackie CASANOVA, RPA, CCA, in her capacity as the Chief Appraiser of the Val Verde

FINE, J. Anthony D. Bonds appeals from a judgment convicting him of second degree sexual assault, in violation of section 940.225(2)(a), Stats. The judgment was entered on Bonds' guilty plea. Bonds also appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. The various issues he raises on this appeal focus on his contention that the allegations in the criminal complaint, and the testimony adduced at the p

Case: 21-1154 Document: 50 Page: 1 Filed: 11/05/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ CELGENE CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant v. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., MYLAN INC., MYLAN N.V., Defendants-Appellees ______________________ 2021-1154 ______________________

ORDER DANIEL P. JORDAN III, District Judge. This products-liability case is before the Court on the following motions filed by Defendant Ford Motor Company: Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Mark Sutherland [85]; Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Stan Smith [86]; Motion for Summary Judgment [89]; and Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Punitive Damages Claim [91]. As set forth below, the Motion to Exc

MEMORANDUM OPINION SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On March 31, 2010, plaintiffs Mark S. Wallach, as Chapter 7 Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Performance Transportation Services, Inc. (“PTS”), and Tauro Brothers Tracking Company (“Tauro Brothers”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) filed an antitrust class action complaint against various defendants. (D.I. 1) Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATHAN SMITH, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 18-2532 (TJK) ULTA SALON, COSMETICS & FRAGRANCE, INC., d/b/a/ ULTA BEAUTY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Nathan Smith alleges that his former employer Ulta Beauty discriminated against him because of hi