Cases

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER HARRINGTON, Senior District Judge. Count One of the Plaintiffs’ Fifth Amended Complaint sets forth an allegation of an overarching conspiracy on the part of the Defendants, who are private equity firms, “to allocate the market for and artificially fix, maintain, or stabilize prices of securities in club LB Os in violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.” Plaintiffs are

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER EDWARD F. HARRINGTON, Senior District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on thirteen motions for summary judgment. The motions consist of one omnibus motion for summary judgment as to Count One of the Fifth Amended Complaint filed jointly by the Defendants, one motion for sum*123mary judgment as to Count Two filed by the De

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER HARRINGTON, Senior District Judge. Proposed intervenor, the New York Times Company moves to intervene in this case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(b), and to unseal the Fifth Amended Complaint and its associated exhibits. On July 30, 2009, the Court entered a First Amended Stipulated Protective Order to govern discovery in this case. The Protective Order permits any party or non-

714 F.Supp.2d 225 (2010) Kirk DAHL, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. BAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-12388-EFH. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 22, 2010. *226 George C. Aguilar, Robbins Umeda, Kristen M. Anderson, Mary K. Bl

597 F.Supp.2d 211 (2009) Kirk DAHL, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. BAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-12388-EFH. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. February 12, 2009. George C. Aguilar, Brian J. Robbins, Robbins Umeda LLP, Kristen M. Anderson, Christopher M. Burke, Hal

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER EDWARD F. HARRINGTON, Senior District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Settled and Released Claims and Time-Barred Claims from the Fifth Amended Complaint. The Court allows-in-part and denies-in-part the Defendants’ motion. Releases. After a review of the memoranda of the parties and releases submitted i

760 F.Supp.2d 196 (2011) Kirk DAHL, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. BAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-12388-EFH. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. January 13, 2011. Arthur L. Shingler, III, Hal Cunningham, Scott & Scott LLP, George C. Aguilar, Brian J. Robbins, Rob

655 F.Supp.2d 146 (2009) Kirk DAHL, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. BAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-12388-EFH. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 22, 2009. *147 Arthur L. Shingler, III, Hal Cunningham, Christopher M. Burke, Kr

612 N.W.2d 188 (2000) Joseph WHITENER, Jr., Michael Lee Bower, Jerome Lee Whitener, and Thomas Jacob Whitener, minors, by their guardian ad litem, Lee Miller, Respondents, v. Ronald DAHL, d/b/a Flowing Well Supper Club, defendant and third-party plaintiff, Appellant, v. Mahnomen Implement, Inc., et al., third-party defendants. No. C7-99-2177. Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

(2008) Kirk DAHL, et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. BAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 07-12388-EFH. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. December 15, 2008. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER HARRINGTON, Senior District Judge. This case comes before the court o

HARTZ, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs brought suit against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 2674, alleging that the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wrongfully destroyed a stockpile of mineral ore on their mining claim. The district court dismissed their FTCA claim on the ground that they had failed to present the claim to the BLM

912 P.2d 541 (1996) Judy M. PRICE; Paul H. Bratton, Jr., Appellants, v. Linda DAHL, Clerk, Matanuska-Susitna Borough, Appellee. No. S-6596. Supreme Court of Alaska. March 15, 1996. Eric Smith, Anchorage, for Appellants. Michael Gatti, Borough Attorney, Matanuska-Susitna Borough, Palmer, for Appellee. Before RABINOWITZ, MATTHEWS, COMPTON and EASTAUGH, J

625 N.W.2d 827 (2001) Joseph WHITENER, Jr., Michael Lee Bower, Jerome Lee Whitener, and Thomas Jacob Whitener, minors, by their guardian ad litem, Lee MILLER, Petitioners/Appellants, v. Ronald DAHL, d/b/a Flowing Well Supper Club, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, Respondent, v. Mahnomen Implement, Inc., et al., Third Party Defendants. No. C7-99-2177. Supreme Court of Minnesota.

707 S.W.2d 694 (1986) Wesley Eugene DAHL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 3-85-080-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. March 26, 1986. Kenneth E. Houp, Jr., Austin, for appellant. Ronald Earle, Dist. Atty., Paul Womack, Asst. Dist. Atty., Austin, for appellee. Before POWERS, EARL W. SMITH and BRADY, JJ.

545 N.W.2d 918 (1996) Kirk DAHL, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Respondents, v. CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC., Petitioner, Appellants. No. C1-94-1040. Supreme Court of Minnesota. April 19, 1996. *920 Steve Gaskins, Jeannine L. Lee, Minneapolis, Norman J. Barry, Jr., Barrie L. Brejcha, Chicago,

524 N.W.2d 742 (1994) Kirk DAHL, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Appellants, v. CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC., Respondent. No. C1-94-1040. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. December 13, 1994. Review Granted February 14, 1995. *743 Karl L. Cambronne, Jeffrey D. Bores, Chestnut &

MEMORANDUM OPINION Rufe, District Judge. Plaintiff Owen Dahl brings this diversity action against Defendants Gladstone Technology Partners, LLC; Gladstone Associates, LLC; Daniel Kreuter, Chairman of Gladstone Technology and Gladstone Associates; and Paul Lally, Chief Executive Officer of Gladstone Technology and President of Gladstone Associates.1 In his Amended Complaint, Dahl

GARRISON, Judge. This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court, in favor of plaintiff and against the individual defendant and her insurer. The judgment awards damages in the amount of $12,320.10,1 plus legal interest and costs, for injuries sustained by him when he was hit twice by a vehicle operated by the defendant, Raquel J. Trumbach and bitten by her. The defendant’s insurer, GEI

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PAUL E. PAVULAK, No. 19-16314 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 4:19-cv-00274-RM-JR BARBARA VON BLANCKENSEE, ORDER AND Respondent-Appellee. AMENDED OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Rosemary Márq

MEMORANDUM OPINION JAMES C. CACHERIS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendants Julie and Ronald Goetzes’ and Defendant Aerospace Employees’ Retirement Plan of the Aerospace Corp.’s Motions to Dismiss. [Dkts. 4, 11.] For the following reasons, the Court will grant the motions. I. Background Phyllis Dahl (“Ms. Dahl” or “Plaintiff’) is the