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.
12 opinions for “PALMAS ATHLETIC CLUB CORP”
Davila, Ivelisse v. Acme, Palmas Athletic Club Corppublic domain
Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL III Certiorari IVELISSE DÁVILA procedente del Tribunal de Recurrida Primera Instancia, S
Ramos-Santiago v. WHM Carib, LLCpublic domain
LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. *69 Appellants Víctor Ramos-Santiago ("Ramos-Santiago"), his daughter Maryam Ramos-Meléndez and four minor grandchildren (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Ramos-Santiago"), filed this suit under Puerto Rico law, premised on diversity jurisdiction, against Ramos-Sa
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 28, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00224-CV AMY W. STARKEY AND MICHAEL J. STARKEY, Appellant V. BARKAN RONEN ENRI OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE YITSHAK EINI D/B/A SUPER DEAL AUTO SALES, Appellee On Appeal from the 61st District Court Harris Co
Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self Insurance Fund v. Pharr-San Juan-Alamo ISDpublic domain
NUMBER 13-17-00655-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG TEXAS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS PROPERTY/ CASUALTY JOINT SELF INSURANCE FUND, Appellant, v. PHARR-SAN JUAN-ALAMO ISD, Appellee. On appeal from County Cou
In re City Sports, Inc.public domain
Re: D.L 712 OPINION KEVIN GROSS, U.S.B.J. The issue at hand is: should a claim for unredeemed gift cards1 be classified as a priority claim or a general unsecured claim? The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the “Commonwealth”) filed a claim (“Claim”) for unredeemed gift cards issued by City Sports, Inc., and City Sports-DC, LLC2
Harker v. Utica College of Syracuse Universitypublic domain
885 F.Supp. 378 (1995) Phyllis HARKER, Plaintiff, v. UTICA COLLEGE OF SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, James Spartano, in his official capacity of Athletic Director, and Michael Simpson, President of Utica College, Defendants. No. 93-CV-1504 (FJS) (GJD). United States District Court, N.D. New York. April 24, 1995. *379
Gerardo Gonzalez v. Icepublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GERARDO GONZALEZ; SIMON Nos. 20-55175 CHINIVIZYAN, 20-55252 Plaintiffs-Appellees/ Cross-Appellants, D.C. Nos. 2:12-cv-09012- v. AB-FFM
Erlich v. Menezespublic domain
Opinion BROWN, J. We granted review in this case to determine whether emotional distress damages are recoverable for the negligent breach of a contract to construct a house. A jury awarded the homeowners the full cost necessary to repair their home as well as damages for emotional distress caused by the contractor’s negligent performance. Since the contractor’s negligence directly caused only economic injury an
SENTENCIA Luego de una serie de trámites procesales, que incluye un recurso de certiorari ante este Tribunal, el foro de instancia, el 2 de junio de 1988, dictó injunction permanente mediante el cual prohibió a la Liga Atlética Interuniversitaria (L.A.I.), a su presi-dente Dr. José L. Martínez Picó y a la Comisionada de Deportes, Sra. Criselia Ríos de Vázquez, impedir que Brian Whitehead, estudiante de la Universidad d
Lewis v. Superior Courtpublic domain
82 Cal.Rptr.2d 85 (1999) 970 P.2d 872 19 Cal.4th 1232 James T. LEWIS, Petitioner, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of San Bernardino County, Respondent; Chester Green, et al., Real Parties in Interest. No. S061240. Supreme Court of California. February 8, 1999. Rehearing Denied March 31, 1999.
Buell-Wilson v. Ford Motor Co.public domain
73 Cal.Rptr.3d 277 (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 1107 Benetta BUELL-WILSON et al., v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY et al., Defendants and Appellants. Nos. D045154, D045579. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District, Division One. March 10, 2008. *288 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., William E. T
OPINION & ORDER KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge: Plaintiffs bring challenges to certain zoning and environmental ordinances enacted by Defendant Village of Pomona (the “Village”), alleging they are unlawful under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Aet of 2000 (“RLUIPA”), 42