Cases

The third party plaintiff, the water pollution control authority of the town of Suffield, moves for summary judgment on its cross complaint seeking foreclosure of its sewer assessment and user liens. The facts are as follows: This action was started by the town of Suffield (town) to foreclose its tax liens recorded against the property of the defendants Franklyn H. Carrington and Carolyn R. Carrington (Carringtons). The water pollution control authority was made a defendant by virtue o

RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HAIGHT, Senior District Judge: Plaintiff Cedric Young, currently confined at the Northern Correctional Institution (“NCI”) in Somers, Connecticut, commenced this civil rights action pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that the defendants, prison officials and personnel, were deliberately indifferent to his medical and mental

McDONALD, J. **658 This certified appeal calls upon the court to decide whether allegations that a mortgagee engaged in a pattern of misrepresentation and delay in postdefault loan modification negotiations before and after initiating a foreclosure action-thereby adding to the mortgagor's de

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER JOAN B. GOTTSCHALL, District Judge. Plaintiff Mary Johnson brings Section 1983 claims alleging due process and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), violations, as well as various Illinois state law claims alleging malicious prosecution, false arrest and false imprisonment, and civil conspiracy. Defendants John Dossey, Kevin L

OPINION AND ORDER THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, District Judge. According to Plaintiff Jeanette Alder-son’s Complaint, her former employer, Ferrellgas, Inc., discriminated and retaliated against her in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), retaliated against her in violation of Title VII, subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her gender, and failed to pay her overtime in violatio

SHEEDY, J. By summons and complaint returnable to the Waterbury judicial district on March 23, 2004, the plaintiff, Catherine Smith, brought a three count complaint, each count asserted under the Product Liability Act (act), General Statutes § 52-572m et seq., against the defendants, Dynamic Cooking Systems, Inc. (Dynamic), Powerhouse Appliances and Television, Inc. (Powerhouse), and SBE Company, Inc. Paragraph three of count o

Opinion SULLIVAN, C. J. The plaintiff, Vincent P. Larobina, appearing pro se, brought a four count amended complaint against the defendants, Andrew McDonald, Peter Olson, Pullman and Comley, LLC (Pullman), and First Union National Bank (First Union), alleging abuse of process (count one), civil conspiracy (counts two and *396three) and neglig

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDERS AS TO COUNT ONE OF COMPLAINT GRANTING DEFENDANT WILSON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S CROSS MOTION ROBERT L. KRECHEVSKY, Bankruptcy Judge. I. ISSUE At issue in this adversary proceeding is whether Connecticut statutes mandate the *538

Opinion BISHOP, J. The plaintiff homeowners appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendant zoning board of appeals of the town of Wilton (board) dismissing their appeal from the board’s decision upholding the denial of a permit for construction on the plaintiffs’ property. The main issue on appeal is how General Statutes § 8-26a (b) applies to the plaintiffs’ lot and t

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Jeffrey Cole, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE INTRODUCTION “Plaintiff is a professional class-action plaintiff who regularly works with [Law Firm of] Anderson & Wanca to file TCPA cases.” Physicians Healthsource, Inc. v. Doctor Diabetic Supply, LLC, 2014 WL 7366255, at *7 (S.D. Fla. 2014).1 The plaintiff has

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. #38] VANESSA L. BRYANT, District Judge. I. Introduction The Plaintiff, Rebecca Johnson (“Johnson”), brings this failure-to-hire action against the Defendant State of Connecticut Department of Administrative Services (“DAS”) pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §

THACKER, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur in the majority’s opinion but write separately for three reasons: (1) I would not consider remarks made by candidate Trump before he took his presidential oath of office; (2) I would nonetheless find that Appellees have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their argument that Section 2(c) of the Second Executive Order (“EO-2”) violates the

419 B.R. 133 (2009) 2009 DNH 165 NEW ENGLAND WOOD PELLET, LLC v. NEW ENGLAND PELLET, LLC, Jason Tynan, and Steven Zaczynski. Civil No. 09-cv-123-JL. United States District Court, D. New Hampshire. October 30, 2009. *136 Michael C. Harvell, James S. Lamontagne, Sheehan Phinney Bass & Green, Manchester,

Opinion PETERS, J. This is a foreclosure action to enforce a note and a second mortgage purchased, through sealed bid, from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. In light of the mortgagor’s acknowledged default on the note and mortgage, the trial court granted the plaintiffs motion for foreclosure by sale.1 The court, however, reduced the amount of the loan secured

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1351 INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT, a project of the Urban Justice Center, Inc., on behalf of itself and its clients; HIAS, INC., on behalf of itself and its clients; MIDDLE EAST STUDIES ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., on behalf of itself and its members; MUHAMMED MET

749 F.Supp. 381 (1990) FRIENDS OF THE SAKONNET, et al. v. Bernard R. DUTRA, et al. v. Paul D. & Judy COOKINGHAM, et al. James E. O'NEIL, et al. v. Q.L.C.R.I., INC., et al. v. Paul D. & Judy COOKINGHAM, et al. C.A. Nos. 88-0704 P, 88-0705 P. United States District Court, D. Rhode Island. September 14, 1990.

Kinmonth, J. This action was brought under § 52-435 of the General Statutes.1 The issues were *492found for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed, assigning error in the court’s finding and in its conclusion that a married woman could maintain a cause of action under the statute. The defendant abandoned his attack on the finding, and t

NE Wood Pellet v . NE Pellet CV-09-123-JL 10/30/09 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE New England Wood Pellet, LLC v. Civil N o . 09-cv-123-JL Opinion N o . 2009 DNH 165 New England Pellet, LLC, Jason Tynan, and Steven Zaczynski O R D E R This case comes before the court on a motion to remand and a cross-motion t

DOWD, District Judge, dissenting: This case brings together a number of developments in Ohio political life. They *703include Ohio’s attempt by way of constitutional provisions to comply with the one man-one vote mandate of Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 82 S.Ct. 691, 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962), the ten year requirement1 to

345 F.Supp. 962 (1972) Harold F. DONNELLY et al., Plaintiffs, v. Thomas J. MESKILL, Governor of the State of Connecticut, et al., Defendants, J. Brian Gaffney et al., Intervenors. Christopher G. LINDSAY et al., Plaintiffs, v. Thomas J. MESKILL, Governor of the State of Connecticut et al., Defendants, J. Brian Gaffney et al., Intervenors. Civ. Nos. 15103, 15109. United States Distric