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 “Nash v. AT&T Integrated Disability Service Center”
Hubbard v. Tyco Integrated Cable Systems, Inc.public domain
ORDER LANDYA McCAFFERTY, United States Magistrate Judge. Greg Hubbard, a former employee of Tyco Integrated Cable Systems, Inc. (“Tyco”) who was born and raised in England, is suing Tyco in five counts. He asserts: (1) two claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.; and (2) three claims under New Hampshire’s Law Against Discrimination, N.H.Rev.Sta
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0215p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ MEMPHIS CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH; │ PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF TENNE
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0215p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ MEMPHIS CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH; │ PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF TENNE
Ingham Regional Medical Center v. United Statespublic domain
Money-Mandating Statute and Regulation; Failure to State a Claim; Breach of Express and/or Implied in Fact Contract; Release; Mutual Mistake; Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; Statute of Limitations. OPINION HORN, J. Plaintiffs Ingham Regional Medical Center (Ingham), Bay Regional Medical Center (BRMC), McLaren North
08/06/2018 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 18, 2018 Session CINDY HATFIELD, ET AL. v. ALLENBROOKE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER, LLC, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-004249-10 Donna M. Fields, Judge
East Texas Medical Center Gilmer v. Birder Porterpublic domain
ACCEPTED 12-14-00220-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 9/4/2015 3:01:53 PM
Klotz v. St. Anthony's Medical Centerpublic domain
311 S.W.3d 752 (2010) James KLOTZ and Mary Klotz, Appellants/Cross-Respondents, v. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant, Michael Shapiro, M.D., and Metro Heart Group, LLC, Respondents/Cross-Appellants. No. SC90107. Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc. March 23, 2010. As Modified May 25, 2010. *757 Louis M.
Gray v. Nash Finch Co.public domain
701 F.Supp. 704 (1988) Bobbi GRAY, Plaintiff, v. NASH FINCH COMPANY, Defendant. Nos. C86-0010, C86-0016. United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Cedar Rapids Division. November 17, 1988. J. Richard Johnson, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for plaintiff. Mark M. Schorr, Lincoln, Neb., Carolyn M. Hinz, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for defendant. HANSEN, District Judge.
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, Chief Judge: Federal courts' must pay scrupulous heed to Article Ill’s limitation of our jurisdiction to actual cases or controversies. This requirement girds our judicial power within its proper sphere, and thereby legitimizes its exercise. Yet the doctrines of standing and justiciability, in which the case or controversy requirement plays an important part, must
OPINION OF THE COURT SLOVITER, Chief Judge. The issue before us, whether a non-student co-obligor of a guaranteed educational loan may be discharged from that debt in bankruptcy without proving one of the statutory exceptions, is one of first impression in the courts of appeals. Over the last ten years, the bankruptcy courts have divided on this issue,
Lane v. Kitzhaberpublic domain
OPINION AND ORDER STEWART, United States Magistrate Judge: INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs filed this class action alleging violations of Title II of the Americans with *1200Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-34 (“First Claim”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) (“Seco
Human Rights v. Agency Educationpublic domain
VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION Washington Unit Case No. 23-CV-03565 65 State Street Montpelier VT 05602 802-828-2091 www.vermontjudiciary.org Vermont Human Rights Commission v. Vermont Agency of Education Opinion and Order on the Agency of Education’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff the Vermont Human Rights Commission (the “HRC”) cla
Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. James M. Piersonpublic domain
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED Lawyer Disciplinary Board, November 8, 2023 Petitioner released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CL
Dewitt v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.public domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SAM A. CROW, Senior District Judge. This employment practices case comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff brings the following claims against Defendant: terminating her employment on the basis of her disability in violation of the ADA; failing to reasonably accommodate her in violation of the ADA; and terminating her in retaliation for her use
Hupp v. Monahanpublic domain
FILED June 2, 2021 released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
Morris v. Brandenburgpublic domain
OPINION CHÁVEZ, Justice. {1} Since at least 1963 it has been a crime in New Mexico to deliberately aid another in the taking of his or her own life. See NMSA 1978, § 30-2-4 (1963). Yet a physician who withdraws life-sustaining treatment from a patient, at the patient’s direction, and in compliance with the Uniform Heal
Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Leah Perry Maciapublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2022 Term FILED _______________ April 8, 2022 No. 20-0908 released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK
State v. Blackwellpublic domain
[Cite as State v. Blackwell, 2025-Ohio-1451.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 114129 v. : MALIK BLACKWELL,
Lane v. Brownpublic domain
AMENDED ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT STEWART, United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiffs, eight individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (“1/ DD”) and one institution, filed this action *1185on January 25, 2012, to challenge the State of Oregon’s overreliance on segregated sheltered workshops for employment servic
D.H. Ex Rel. R.H. v. Adept Community Services, Inc.public domain
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT D.H. and L.H., minor children, by and ) through their next friends and permanent ) guardians, R.H. and S.H., )