Cases

MARTIN AND BARBARA SCHACHTER, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RespondentSchachter v. CommissionerNo. 2939-96United States Tax Court

804 F.Supp. 53 (1992) John DOE, Plaintiff, v. Leon J. SCHACHTER, Director of Directorate for Industrial Security Clearance Review, Defense Legal Services Agency, for the U.S. Department of Defense; Richard Cheney, Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense; and Does 1 to 10, inclusive, Defendants. No. C-92-2481 MHP. United States District Court, N.D. California. October 2

955 F.Supp. 248 (1997) Raymond P. HAYDEN; Racia Jame Newman; Alan S. Fishbone; David I. Samuels; Hyman Askowitz; Hill Rivkins, Carey, Loesberg, O'Brien & Mulray; Barry Tallering; Tartan Oil Corp.; J. Edwin Carey; Geraldine Bura, Executrix for the Estate of Mark Bura; Burton Trinkoff; Joseph Kandel; Miles R. Ingber; Nat Sorkin; Alan S. Loesberg; Vincent J. Ryan; State Realty Co.; Nathan L. Freedman; Antoinette M. Salinitro, Executrix for the Estate of

92 F.Supp.2d 410 (2000) PAUL P., et al., Plaintiffs, v. John J. FARMER, Jr., Attorney General of New Jersey, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 97-2919 (JEI). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. April 11, 2000. Susan L. Reisner, Public Defender for New Jersey by Michael Z. Buncher, Deputy Public Defender, Edward Barocas, Assistant Deputy Public Defender,

766 F.Supp.2d 1012 (2011) Sara MONROE, Plaintiff, v. ZIMMER U.S. INC., Zimmer, Inc., and Does 1 through 25, Defendants. No. CIV. S-08-2944 FCD/EFB. United States District Court, E.D. California. February 14, 2011. *1015 Stewart C. Altemus, Altemus & Wagner, Redding, CA, Paul J. Schachter, PHV, Penny Hendy, PHV, Ronald E. John

DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS AND DENYING MOTION TO DE-CERTIFY CLASS William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge, United States District Court Plaintiffs are past and current workers in Defendant Waupaca Foundry Inc.’s iron foundries who seek to be paid for time spent “donning and doffing” (changing into and out of) work clothes and protective gear, and for time spent showering after their shi

700 F.Supp.2d 294 (2009) In re CITIGROUP AUCTION RATE SECURITIES LITIGATION. This Document Relates To: 08 Civ. 3095. Nos. No. 08 Civ. 3095(LTS)(FM), No. 09 md 2043(LTS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. September 11, 2009. *299 Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, by: Richard A Speirs, Esq., Robert S. Schachter, Esq., New

Opinion REARDON, J. —In this coordinated proceeding, certain purchasers of new automobiles in California (plaintiffs) brought state law claims against a number of automobile manufacturers and dealer associations under the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 16720-16728) and the unfair competition law (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 17200-17210). Specifically,

747 F.Supp.2d 1043 (2010) Ryan DeKEYSER, Thomas Cooper, Harley Granius and Carlo Lantz, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. THYSSENKRUPP WAUPACA, INC. d/b/a Waupaca Foundry, Inc., Defendant. Case No. 08-C-488. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. September 29, 2010. *1045 Anne T. Regan,

128 F.Supp.2d 1003 (2001) Norman HINES and Frankie Hines, Plaintiffs, v. AC AND S, INC., et al., Defendants. No. Civ.A. 3:00-CV-2637. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. January 24, 2001. *1004 Ashley L. Watkins, Waters & Kraus, Dallas TX, for Plaintiffs. Michael John Ramirez, Dunn Kacal Adams Pa

759 F.Supp.2d 958 (2010) Rachel KRUMPELBECK, Plaintiff, v. BREG, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 1:09-cv-91. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. December 27, 2010. *960 Ronald E. Johnson, Jr., Paul J. Schachter, Penny Unkraut Hendy, Schachter & Hendy, PSC, Ft. Wright, KY, Stephanie M. Day, Brett Colbert G

OPINION AND ORDER KAREN K. CALDWELL, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Transfer and Consolidate (DE 33) this case with another case currently pending in this judicial district, Varney v. I-Flow, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:08-CV-00101-DLB. Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides: (a) Consolid

100 N.Y.2d 139 (2003) 790 N.E.2d 1170 760 N.Y.S.2d 741 ADDYS PERALTA, Respondent, v. RAPHAEL HENRIQUEZ et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. Court of Appeals of the State of New York. Argued April 3, 2003. Decided May 13, 2003. MacCartney, MacCartney, Kerrigan & MacCartney, Nyack (Anna Melhem of cou

OPINION DECISION AND ORDER VICTOR MARRERO, District Judge. On November 20, 2012, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) brought this action against defendants CR Intrinsic Investors, LLC (“CR Intrinsic”)/Mathew Martoma (“Martoma”), and Sidney Gilman (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging violations of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15

OPINION OF THE COURT BECKER, Chief Judge. This appeal in a diversity case arises from an overtime pay dispute between a private employer and a number of its employees. Its resolution turns primarily upon a determination whether the New Jersey Commissioner of Labor exceeded his authority when he promulgated a regulation that excluded certain trucking indu

The opinion of the court was delivered by PARRILLO, J.S.C. (temporarily assigned). This dispute between plaintiff Joann Bankston and her employer, defendant Housing Authority of the City of Newark (NHA), arises out of the employee’s claim that the NHA owes her back-pay from September 1992 to August 1997 for having failed to pay her prevailing or union wages. The motion judge granted summary judgment in defe

76 Cal.Rptr.2d 58 (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1360 Michael D. BUNNELL, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant and Respondent. No. C025611. Court of Appeal, Third District. June 22, 1998. *60 James E. McGlamery for Plaintiff and Appellant. Schachter, Kristoff, Orenstein & Berk

42 F.Supp.2d 442 (1998) John KEELEY, Timmie Orange, Ariel Kilpatrick and Charles Werdann, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LOOMIS FARGO & CO., Defendant. No. Civ. 97-6207(DRD). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. October 15, 1998. *443 *444

CORRIGAN, J. *859 *631 When a child is allegedly harmed by in utero exposure to hazardous chemicals, which statute of limitations applies: that for toxic exposure claims ( Code Civ. Proc., § 34

11 F.Supp.2d 517 (1998) John KEELEY, Timmie Orange, Ariel Kilpatrick and Charles Werdann, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LOOMIS FARGO & CO., Defendant. Civ. No. 97-6207(DRD). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. June 12, 1998. *518 Paul Schachter, Mary P. Gallagher, Reinhardt