Cases

874 So.2d 228 (2004) BARHAM & ARCENEAUX v. Charles KOZAK and Mull & Mull (a Louisiana Partnership). No. 2002 CA 2325. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit. March 12, 2004. *231 Bruce S. Kingsdorf, Barrios, Kingsdorf & Casteix, L.L.P., New Orleans, for Plaintiff-in-Cross-Claim/Appellee Mull & Mull, A Louisia

365 B.R. 268 (2007) In re Jeffrey DAPRIZIO, Debtor. Merrill Lynch Business Financial Services, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Jeffrey Daprizio and Sportspower Limited, Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 05-20442-RBR, Adversary No. 05-2094-RBR. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida, Broward Division. March 27, 2007. *269

[Cite as In re A.P., 2015-Ohio-206.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF MEDINA ) IN RE: A.P. C.A. No. 13CA0083-M APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 10-398V (To Be Published) ************************* * Special Master Corcoran SHEA KYLIE SULLIVAN, * * Filed: February 13, 2015

263 Cal.App.2d 430 (1968) MACMORRIS SALES CORPORATION, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant, v. MACK KOZAK, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Respondent; MORRIS BOWMAN, Cross-defendant and Appellant. Civ. No. 31383. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. Two. June 25, 1968. Hindin, McKittrick & Powsner and Maurice J. Hindin for Plaintiff, Cross-d

OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge Plaintiffs Charles D. and Jane E. Adkins are victims of a fraudulent investment scheme, and seek a refund of federal income taxes based on the losses they sustained due to the scheme. The parties have cross-moved for summary judgment. Plaintiffs claim that the undisputed facts demonstrate that they suffered a

COHEN, J., The court has before it the post-verdict motions of defendant CoreStates Bank NA., as well as post-verdict motions of defendants American Financial Mortgage Corporation, Thomas F. Flatley, and plaintiff Pioneer Commercial Funding Corporation which were filed in the aftermath of a long, bitterly contested trial. Testimony in this matter began on June 2, 2000. The jury returned a verdict on July 26,

ACCEPTED 05-15-01513-CV 05-15-01513-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12/11/2015 4:54:22 PM

*37 Affirmed by published opinion. Senior Judge PHILLIPS wrote the opinion, in which Judge LUTTIG and Judge MICHAEL joined. OPINION PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Harry Hager appeals from the denial of his motion to dismiss a bankruptcy, proceeding for lack

959 A.2d 67 (2008) 2008 ME 165 YORK HOSPITAL et al. v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et al. Docket: Ken-07-597, Ken-07-598. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Argued: April 8, 2008. Decided: November 4, 2008. *68 Joseph M. Kozak, Esq., Julius Ciembroniewicz, Esq., Michael D. Seitzi

Opinion MANELLA, J. Appellants Gary Batze, Carlo Cesar and Justin Hayes brought suit against their employer, Safeway, Inc., and The Vons Companies, Inc., for failure to pay overtime wages. 1 Appellants claimed that in their positions as first and second assistant managers (AMs) for respondent’s stores

Filed 5/3/17 Unmodified opinion attached CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR GARY BATZE et al., B258732 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BC348090 & v. BC39

2020 IL App (1st) 190854 SIXTH DIVISION November 20, 2020 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT No. 1-19-0854 BINO OOMMEN, M.D., )

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and i

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ALAN C. KAY, Senior District Judge. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) was filed on May 7, 2012. (Doc. No. 44). Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss the First Ame

788 F.Supp.2d 523 (2011) WELLOGIX, INC., Plaintiff, v. ACCENTURE, LLP, Defendant. Case No. 3:08-cv-119. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. April 22, 2011. *528 Richard N. Laminack, Laminack Pirtle et al., Buffy Kay Martines, Laminack Pirtle and Martines, Frank Zugin Lin, Hagan Noll Boyle LLC, Guy Kelly Co

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE SETTLEMENT CLASS, FINAL APPROVAL OF THE CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, APPROVAL OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES, REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES, AND APPROVAL OF CLASS REPRESENTATIVE SERVICE AWARD ANDREW L. CARTER, District Judge. Plaintiff Jorge Guadron (“Plaintiff’) and Class Members are current and former Marketing Representatives or Marketing Specialists who worked at A

WATT, C.J. T1 A single dispositive issue is presented on appeal: whether the affidavit of merit1 requirement of 63 O.S. Supp2008 § 1-1708.1E2 * is constitutional. We determine *863that the statute is an unconstitutional special law prohibited by the Oklahoma Constitution art. 5, § 46.3

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S CONTINGENT MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT PAUL L. MALONEY, Chief Judge. In this lawsuit, the Plaintiffs seek insurance coverage under a specific policy that was in effect between 1998 and 1999. Before this Court are three motions for summary judg

OPINION AND ORDER WOLSKI, Judge. This case concerns the respective responsibilities of a government contractor and the United States Department of the Air Force (“Air Force”) under a contract to service and maintain vehicles at an Air Force Base (AFB) complex. The contractor, suing on behalf of a former subcontractor, argues that the Air Force breached a term of the contract requiring additiona