Cases

KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER is before the Court on four pending motions to dismiss: (1) Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC's ("MBUSA['s]" and, collectively with Defendant Daimler AG,1 "Mercedes Benz['s]") FRCP 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss (DE 78; Response DE 97; Reply DE 104); (2) Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.'s ("Honda['s]" and, co

OPINION OF THE COURT O. Peter Sherwood, J. This is an action brought to have a cell phone tower adjudged a common-law nuisance and removed from the rooftop of a building owned by defendant Amalithone Realty, Inc. The building is located near the residential property where plaintiffs reside. Defendant Amalgamated Lithographers of America, Local One, a union, leases the building in question as its headqu

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS FILED October 11, 2023 03:27 PM ST-2010-CV-00672 TAMARA CHARLES IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS CLERK OF THE COURT DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN KkeRKKKKReKR KEKE GO FAST CHARTERS, LLC, ) ) CASE NO. ST-2010-C V-00672 Plaintiff, ) ) ACTION FOR BREACH OF -VS- ) CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, ) TRESSPASS, NUISANCE TEXACO CARIBBEAN, INC., ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. ) Cite as 2023 VI Super 58 MEMORANDUM OPINION qi THIS MATTER is befor

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 123 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 124 OPINION Hermelinda Aguiar, Alicia Maria Aldrete, Aurora Banuelos and Maria Alicia Gonzalez (collectively

I'm going to chat with [GW's Deputy Title IX Coordinator and Assistant Dean of Students] Tara [Pereira] about [plaintiff] as well and see if she thinks we need to reach out given that there may be a sexual assault history here as well. Even though she didn't file a report about that, she did make the university aware of something that "may" have happened in the past.

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

*173SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, C.J. ¶ 47. {dissenting) . Because I conclude that the majority opinion has gone too far in expanding the scope of the economic loss rule and the puffery doctrine, I dissent. ¶ 48. This case comes to us on a motion to dismiss a complaint. The plaintiffs in this case seek relief on two grounds. First, the plaintiffs asser

770 F.Supp.2d 1299 (2011) In re DELTA/AIRTRAN BAGGAGE FEE ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Civil Action File No. 1:09-md-2089-TCB. United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division. February 22, 2011. *1301 Cale Howard Conley, Richard A. Griggs, Conley Griggs LLP, Craig Gordon Harley, Martin D. Chitwood, Robert Ware Killorin, Chitwood Ha

449 F.Supp.2d 992 (2006) Barbara SCHWAB et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Lorillard Tobacco Co., Ligget Group, Inc., American Tobacco Co., Altria Group, Inc., British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd., Defendants. No. 04-CV-1945(JBW). United States District Court

771 A.2d 446 (2001) 138 Md. App. 244 LEWIN REALTY III, INC., v. Sean BROOKS, Jr., A Minor, etc. et al. No. 254, Sept. Term, 2000. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. April 26, 2001. *451 Frank F. Daily (Cynthia D. Spirt, on the brief), Hunt Valley, for appellant. Harvey S. Wasserman (Saul E. Kerpe

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________ <

20 Cal.3d 413 (1978) 573 P.2d 443 143 Cal. Rptr. 225 RAY P. BARKER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LULL ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents; EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU, Intervener and Respondent. Docket No. S.F. 23519. Supreme Court of California. January 16, 1978.

MESKILL, Circuit Judge: The plaintiff, SCM Corporation (SCM), appeals from an order entered in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, Jon 0. Newman, Judge, dismissing its claim for monetary damages asserted in this private antitrust action for injuries sustained as a result of alleged exclusionary acts committed by the defendant, Xerox Corporation (Xerox), in violation of §§ 1 and 2 of the

463 F.Supp. 983 (1978) SCM CORPORATION v. XEROX CORPORATION. Civ. No. 15807. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. December 29, 1978. *984 *985 Stephen Rackow Kaye, Ronald S. Rauchberg, Proskauer, Rose, Goetz & Mendelsohn, New York City, Jerome Gotkin, Widett, Widett, Slater &

645 F.2d 1195 209 U.S.P.Q. 889, 1981-1 Trade Cases 63,876 SCM CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.XEROX CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 14, Docket 79-7017. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Sept. 17, 1980.Decided March 12, 1981. Gordon B. Spivack, New

ACCEPTED 03-14-00510-CV 4519217 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/16/20

Opinion for the court filed by Chief Judge J. SKELLY WRIGHT. J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Chief Judge: Chrysler Corporation has petitioned for review of a final order of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), issued on November 20,1978, directing Chrysler to recall all 1975 vehicles equipped with 360 and 400 cubic inch displacement (CID) en