Cases

ARNOLD, Judge. By their cross-appeal defendants assign error to the trial court’s ruling that a restrictive covenant exists and applies to their land. In 1948 the Wilsons recorded a “contract . . . with all future purchasers of lots in the R. L. Wilson subdivision to place Protectibe [sic] Covenants in all future deeds of convenance [sic].” Among the covenants enumerated in the “contract” was the covenant that the lots “shall b

BAUER,' Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellee, Columbia College Chicago (“Columbia”), tenninated plaintiff-appellant, Professor Joseph Roberts (“Roberts”), after it discovered that Roberts plagiarized several chapters in a textbook that he composed in 2Q04. -Roberts filed suit against Columbia and several Columbia faculty members. In his complaint, Roberts pleaded multiple theories of recovery. All defendants moved for summary jud

MESKILL, Circuit Judge.1 Appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, Scullin, /., dismissing the case for failure to state a cause of action under the Clean Air Act. This appeal requires us to consider whether section 304(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a)(3), allows a private litigant to sue in federal court

790 N.E.2d 549 (2003) BOONVILLE CONVALESCENT CENTER, INC., Appellant-Plaintiff, v. CLOVERLEAF HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., Cloverleaf Healthcare of Boonville, In., Wanda Prock, Theodore E. Bruzas, Charline Bruzas, George A. Smith, Trela C. Smith, James L. Smith, Sharon K. Smith, William T. Rees, Helen L. Rees, Paul S. Hulse, Mihoko Hulse, Tim J. Shrout, Kimberly Shrout, Paul C. Ade, Ruth Ade, and Bruce H. Whitehead, Appellees-Defendants.

BRITT, Judge. Appellants contend that each of them owns more than one-seventh interest in the lands and that the judgment of Judge Webb, affirmed by this court, is not res judicata in determining their interests. We reject this argument and hold that the judgment is res judicata. In Masters v. Dunstan, 256 N.C. 520, 523-524, 124 S.E. 2d 574, 576 (1962), in an opinion by Justice Cl

MESKILL, Circuit Judge.1 Appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern *534District of New York, Scullin, /., dismissing the case for failure to state a cause of action under the Clean Air Act. Reversed and remanded. This appeal requires us to consider whether section 30

279 F.Supp.2d 228 (2003) Patrick J. GOGGINS and Laura A. Goggins, on behalf of themselves and as representatives of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ALLIANCE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, L.P., Alliance Premier Growth Fund Inc., John D. Carifa, Alfred Harrison, Mark D. Gersten, Ruth Block, David H. Dievler, John H. Dobkin, William H. Foulk, Jr., James M. Hester, Clifford L. Michel, and Donald J. Robinson, Defendants. No.

BROCK, Judge. Appellants argue that five of grantor’s six living children failed to sign the deed. The record on appeal is conflicting on this point. The copy of subject deed as recorded by the Register of Deeds which is incorporated as an exhibit in the record on appeal fails to reflect a signature for five of the living children of Sarah E. (B) Herring. However, the notary certificate recites that five of the six children ap

504 S.E.2d 802 (1998) Anna Mae SHERRILL, Annetta C. White, Linda S. Mintz, Vernette Price, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. AMERADA HESS CORPORATION a/k/a Amerada Petroleum Corporation; Amoco Oil Company; BP Exploration & Oil Inc.; Citgo Petroleum Corporation; Colonial Pipe Line Company; Conoco, Inc. a/k/a Southern Facilities; Crown Central Petroleum Corporation; Exxon Corporation; Marathon Oil Compa

291 S.E.2d 885 (1982) STATE of North Carolina v. Allen Mitchell MELVIN. No. 814SC1221. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. June 1, 1982. *886 Atty. Gen. Rufus L. Edmisten by Asst. Atty. Gen. Elisha H. Bunting Jr., Raleigh, for the State. Warrick, Johnson & Parsons by W. Douglas Parsons, Clinton, for defendant-appellant

392 F.3d 532 James F. WEILER, Sandra L. Weiler, Kimberely Dewey, Ann Martin, Charlene Poore, Kenneth Poore, Kenneth C. Poore, Jr., Clem Coryer, Mary Coryer, Marie E. Craven, Sheila House, Phillip Dority, Pamela Dority, Gregory A. Mills, Nancy Mills, Robert Woodard, Lisa Woodard, H.A. Patterson, Brian T. Patterson, Gary Mallette, and Ernestine M. Rieck, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.CHATHAM FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

CONSOLIDATED ORDER RE: MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION SARIS, District Judge. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23, plaintiffs have moved for an order certifying a class in this action. After considering the submissions of the parties and the record in this case, and after hearing on January 19, 2006, I order that plaintiffs’ motion for class eerti*230

986 A.2d 925 (2009) Jonathan C. PHILLIPS, by Mari B. PHILLIPS, his attorney in fact, Appellants v. WASHINGTON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY; Oscar V. Cole; Southwestern PA Area Agency on Aging, Inc.; Rubin Sabatine; and Washington County Aging Services. No. 358 C.D. 2009 Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued October 13, 2009. Decided December 14, 2009.</

359 N.E.2d 602 (1977) YODER FEED SERVICE and Clarence Yoder d/b/a Yoder Feed Service, Defendants-Appellants, v. ALLIED PULLETS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee. No. 3-374A38. Court of Appeals of Indiana, Third District. January 26, 1977. *603 Gregory A. Hartzler, Yoder, Ainlay, Ulmer & Buckingham, Goshen, for defendants-appellants.<

Patent Infringement; 28 U.S.C. § 1498; Claim Construction; Claim Differentiation; History Disclaimer; Indefiniteness; Prosecution 35 U.S.C. § 112. SECOND CLAIM CONSTRUCTION OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAMS, Judge. This patent infringement case involves bags for the containment and disposal of bodily fluids. Plaintiff, American Innotek,

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 11-223C (Filed: April 12, 2016)1 ************************** * * Patent Infringement; 28 U.S.C. § AMERICAN INNOTEK, INC., * 1498; Claim Construction; Claim * Differentiation; Prosecution

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge, joined by EDITH H. JONES, Chief Judge, and JERRY E. SMITH, RHESA H. BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, EDITH BROWN CLEMENT, OWEN, JENNIFER W. ELROD, SOUTHWICK and HAYNES, Circuit Judges: The overarching question before the en banc Court is whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the transfer of this case from the Marshall Division of the Eastern District of Texas — which has no connection to th

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAMS, Judge. This patent infringement case involves bags for the containment and disposal of bodily fluids. Plaintiff, American Innotek, Inc., the owner of U.S. Patent No. 5,116,139 (“the ’139 Patent”) entitled “Fluid Containment Bag,” manufactures a product called The Flight Extender™ according t

OPINION OF THE COURT SLOVITER, Circuit Judge. This case is before us on a petition by the United States for a writ of mandamus directing a District Judge of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to vacate his order transferring this criminal action against defendant Ruth Streeval to Tennessee and to refrain from transferring the case unless the showing an

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 896 The appellant was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment in the State penitentiary. He was further ordered to pay a $10,000 fine. The record indicates that the victim, Earl Couch, who was 67 years old at the time of the offense, testified, through the use of a video tape