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.
20 opinions for “Reynolds v. Bancorp South”
American Heritage Bancorp v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION FIRESTONE, Judge. Currently pending before the court are two motions by plaintiff American Heritage Bancorp (“AHB”). The first is AHB’s August 15, 2002 motion to strike or dismiss defendant United States’s (“government’s”) defenses and counterclaims in this Winstar-related litigation. AHB contends that the government’s defenses and counterclaims to its breach of contract claims should be
Reynolds v. Schrockpublic domain
142 P.3d 1062 (2006) 341 Or. 338 Diane REYNOLDS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Clyde G. Reynolds, Respondent on Review, v. Donna SCHROCK, fka Donna Frechette, Defendant, and Charles R. Markley; and Greene & Markley, P.C., an Oregon professional corporation, Petitioners on Review. (CC C991357CV; CA A119200; SC S52503). Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.</
INTERN. BANCORP v. Société Des Baines De Merpublic domain
192 F.Supp.2d 467 (2002) INTERNATIONAL BANCORP, L.L.C., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SOCIETE DES BAINS DE MER ET DU CERCLE DES ETRANGERS A MONACO, Defendant. No. CIV.A.01-115-A. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. March 25, 2002. *468 *469
Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge SCHALL. Concurring opinion filed by Circuit Judge LINN. SCHALL, Circuit Judge. This is a patent case. Larson Manufacturing Company of South Dakota, Inc. (“Larson”), appeals the final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota dismissing its suit against Aluminart Products Limited and Chamberdoor Industries, Inc. (together, “Al
International Bancorp, L.L.C. v. Societe des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers a Monacopublic domain
REVISED MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ELLIS, District Judge. This declaratory judgment trademark infringement action pits the owner of Mon-aco’s famed gambling establishment, Casino de Monte Carlo, against an individual and five companies who have registered fifty-three “.com” and “.net” domain names that incorporate, in various ways, the name “Casino de Monte Carlo.” The dispositi
ACCEPTED 03-15-00248-CV 7127861 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
ACCEPTED 03-15-00248-CV 7124709 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
Megatel C90-2, Inc., Armin Afzalipour, and Megatel Homes, LLC F/K/A Megatel Homes, Inc. v. Bank of Utahpublic domain
Supreme Court of Texas ══════════ No. 24-0206 ══════════ Megatel C90-2, Inc., Armin Afzalipour, and Megatel Homes, LLC f/k/a Megatel Homes, Inc., Petitioners, v. Bank of Utah, Respondent ═══════════════════════════════════════ On Petition f
Hubbard v. Bancorpsouth Bankpublic domain
KITCHENS, Justice, for the Court: ¶ 1. This is an appeal from the DeSoto County Circuit Court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings in favor of BancorpSouth Bank. In 2010, the residence of Brent and Amy Hubbard secured a note and deed of trust held by Trustmark National Bank. Additionally, the Hubbards obtained a second loan, which was secured by a note and second deed of trust held by BancorpSouth on the same residence. In 201
Griffith v. Steinpublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SEAN J. GRIFFITH, § § Objector Below, § Appellant, § § v. § § SHIVA STEIN, derivatively on behalf§ of The Goldman Sachs Group, § Inc., and individually as a § stockholder of The Goldman § No. 264, 2021 Sachs Group, Inc.,
Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad v. Schiefferpublic domain
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS ROBERTO A. LANGE, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. See Dakota, Minn. E. R.R. Corp. v. Schieffer, 648 F.3d 935 (8th Cir.2011). The question on remand is whether there exists subject matter jurisdiction over the present action. This Court previously determined that t
Greg Brown v. Rhonda Brownpublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2021-CA-00728-COA GREG BROWN APPELLANT v. RHONDA BROWN APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/10/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MITCHELL M. LUNDY JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: DESOTO COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATT
Lord Noble Kato Bakari El v. United Statespublic domain
Motion to Dismiss; Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; Pro Se Plaintiff; Collateral Attack of State Court Judgment; Fraud; Mistake; Conspiracy; Trespass; Fifth Amendment Taking; Lack of Jurisdiction OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs pro se complaint for lack of subjec
Exxon Mobil v. Healeypublic domain
18-1170 Exxon Mobil v. Healey United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2019 Argued: February 18, 2020 Decided: March 15, 2022 No. 18-1170 EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Flexborrow LLC v. TD Auto Finance LLCpublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Joseph F. Bianco, District Judge: Plaintiffs Flexborrow LLC (“Flexbor-row”) and The Vault Auto Group, LLC (“Vault”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) bring this action against defendant TD Auto Finance LLC (“TDAF” or “defendant”), alleging (1) a substantive violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and conspiracy to violate
Beiles v. City of Chicagopublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RUBEN CASTILLO, Chief Judge. Plaintiff Richard Beiles'brings this action against Defendants Chris Traynor and the City of Chicago (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging false arrest in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), malicious prosecution under Illinois law, and intentional infliction of emotional distress under Illinois law. Presently before the Court i
Henry v. First Exchange Bankpublic domain
MOORE, Chief Justice (concurring specially). I concur with the decision of the Court to deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. I write specially to explain my reasons for denying the petition: (1) the petitioners’ delay in moving to strike the demand for a jury trial and (2) the unconstitutionality of predispute contractual jury waivers as violating the right to a jury trial.
Betty M. Smith v. Michael Bokorpublic domain
USCA11 Case: 18-14797 Date Filed: 03/12/2021 Page: 1 of 35 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-14797 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 8:18-cv-00381-WFJ-AAS BETTY M. SMITH, as
Oxy USA, Inc. v. United Statespublic domain
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OXY USA INC., and CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION, No. 19-694C (Filed: November 17, 2022) Plaintiffs, Contract; Motion to Dismiss; v. RCFC 12(b)(1); RCFC
Roath v. United Statespublic domain
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S 12(c) MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. 10) C.N. CLEVERT, JR., Chief Judge. Daniel R. Roath and Mary A. Roath (“Roaths”) brought suit against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), to recover costs for property damage. The United States seeks judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.