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 “Rodriguez v. Quality Automotive Services, Inc.”
Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES Panel II EDITH LINA RODRÍGUEZ Certiorari CANDELARIO, DAMARY ENID procedente del RIVERA AVILÉS, JOSÉ RAÚL Tribunal de ARROYO VÁZQUEZ, RAFAEL Primera Instancia, COLÓN COLLAZO, ROBERTO KLCE202301412 Sala de Ponce CARABALLO MARCUCCI, ARACELIS LÓPEZ NIEVES, ÉRICA
Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL VIII CARMEN DOLORES SURO Apelación RODRÍGUEZ; MIGUEL ÁNGEL procedente del Tribunal RIVERA RODRÍGUEZ; LUIS de Primera Instancia, DANIEL RIVERA RODRÍGUEZ Sala Superior de Ponce Apelantes Caso Núm.: v.
[Cite as Total Quality Logistics, L.L.C. v. Deltex Food Prods., Inc., 2022-Ohio-1274.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLERMONT COUNTY TOTAL QUALITY LOGISTICS, LLC, : Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2021-10-059 :
MEMORANDUM OPINION MARVIN ISGUR, Bankruptcy Judge. This class action lawsuit was initiated on February 26, 2008, by Ydalia Rodriguez, Maria and David Herrera and Lucy and Alfonso Moreno. Plaintiffs are former chapter 13 debtors with mortgage contracts serviced by Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (now BAC Home Loans Ser*726vicing, LP). ECF No
Byers v. Petro Services, Inc.public domain
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT JAMES I. COHN, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 21]. The Court has reviewed the Motion, Plaintiffs Response' [DE 33], and the record in this case, and is otherwise advised in the premises. For the reasons discussed herein, the Court determines that Plaintiff comes within the
Harry Auto Kool Inc v. Matta Rodriguez, Alejandrinopublic domain
ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL IX HARRY AUTO KOOL, INC. Apelación procedente del Apelante Tribunal de Primera Instancia, v. Sala Superior de Fajardo ALEJAND
Fast Gear Distributing, Inc. v. Rodriguezpublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 11) AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 10) AND DISMISSING CASE AVERN COHN, District Judge. I. Introduction This is a case arising out of the denial of a petition to permit a nón-immigrant to work in the United States. Plaintiff Fast Gear Distribution, Inc, (Fast Gear) seeks jud
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: This antitrust case requires us to apply the standards announced in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544 , 127 S.Ct.
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge, concurring in part in the judgment and dissenting in part: I concur with the majority in that I too would reverse the district court’s dismissal of the tortious interference claim. However, because I have significant concerns with the analysis of that claim, I join in that portion of the opinion only as to the
Asphalt & Concrete Services, Inc. v. Perrypublic domain
GRAEFF, J. Moran Perry, appellee, filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, seeking compensatory damages for injuries he sustained when he was struck by a dump truck while crossing an intersection. He sued Higher Power Trucking, LLC (“Higher Power”), William H. Johnson, II, and appellant, Asphalt &am;
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § GESPA NICARAGUA, S.A., § No. 08-22-00244-CV Appellant, § Appeal from the v. §
Quality Dialysis, Inc. v. Herbert Adamspublic domain
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § GESPA NICARAGUA, S.A., § No. 08-22-00244-CV Appellant, § Appeal from the v.
Gray v. WACKENHUT SERVICES, INC.public domain
721 F.Supp.2d 282 (2010) Gwendolyn GRAY, Plaintiff, v. WACKENHUT SERVICES, INCORPORATED, Alutiiq Security & Technology, LLC and Afognak Native Corporation, Defendants. No. 08 Civ. 3233. United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 25, 2010. *284 Finkelstein & Partners, LLP, by: George A. Kohl, Esq., Newburgh, NY, for
Rodriguez v. Penrodpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROBERT W. RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-00240 (CJN) VIRGINIA S. PENROD, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Lieutenant Colonel Robert W. Rodriguez, U.S. Army (retired), was an officer in the New York Army National Guard in the 1990s. Compl. ¶
State v. Rodriguezpublic domain
STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. LUIS M. RODRIGUEZ (SC 20372) Robinson, C. J., and Palmer, McDonald, D’Auria, Mullins, Kahn and Ecker, Js.* Syllabus Convicted, after a jury trial, of sexual assault in the first degree and criminal attempt to commit sexual assault in the first degree, the defendant appealed. The defendant’s conviction stemmed from an incident in which
Rodriguez v. FCA US, LLCpublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA EVERARDO RODRIGUEZ et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. FCA US, LLC, Defendant and Respondent. S274625 Fourth Appellate District, Division Two E073766 Riverside County Superior Court RIC1807727 October 31, 2
Rodriguez v. FCA US, LLCpublic domain
Filed 4/7/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO EVERARDO RODRIGUEZ et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, E073766 v. (Super.Ct.No. RIC1807727) FCA US, LLC, OPINION Defendant and Responde
705 S.E.2d 223 (2010) R & R INSULATION SERVICES, INC. v. ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY et al. R & R Insulation Services, Inc. et al. v. Royal Indemnity Company et al. Crane Company v. Royal Indemnity Company et al. Royal Indemnity Company et al. v. R & R Insulation Services, Inc. et al. Nos. A10A1537, A10A1538, A10A1539, A10A1540. Court of Appeals of Georgia.</
Northfield Insurance Co. v. Rodriguezpublic domain
ORDER XAVIER'RODRIGUEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is Plaintiff Northfield Insurance Company’s (“Northfield”) Mo*707tion for Summary Judgment (docket no. 16). Defendant Alex Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) did not file a response to North-field’s motion. After consideration, the Court will grant Plaintiff s motion. Bac