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.
6 opinions for “Salvo Technologies, Inc. v. Landmark American Insurance Company”
American Lung Association v. EPApublic domain
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued October 8, 2020 Decided January 19, 2021 No. 19-1140 AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION AND AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND ANDREW WHEELER, ADMINISTRATOR, RESPONDENTS AEP GENERATING COMPANY, ET AL.,
700 F.2d 785 1982-83 Trade Cases 65,194, 12 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1426 LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., Litton Business Telephone Systems,Inc., Litton Business Systems, Inc., and LittonIndustries Credit Corporation,Plaintiffs-Appellees- Cross Appellants,v.AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, Western ElectricCompany, Inc., Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., New YorkTelephone Company, Inc., New Jersey
Litton Sys., Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.public domain
OAKES, Circuit Judge: This appeal is taken from jury awards exceeding ninety niillion dollars before trebling entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, William C. Conner, Judge, in an antitrust action brought by Litton Systems, Inc. and some of its subsidiaries (Litton) against the American Telephone and Telegraph Company and some of its subsidiaries (AT & T). The awards were base
Seidl v. Greentree Mortgage Co.public domain
30 F.Supp.2d 1292 (1998) Matthew L. SEIDL, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, v. GREENTREE MORTGAGE COMPANY, Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. Shirley Sostre, Counterclaim Defendant, and Mark Van Keuren, individually and d/b/a Modern Computing Concepts, Third Party Defendant. No. CIV. A. 97-WY-2087-A. United States District Court, D. Colorado. October 18,
A & M SUPPLY CO. v. Microsoft Corp.public domain
654 N.W.2d 572 (2002) 252 Mich. App. 580 A & M SUPPLY COMPANY, Individually, and as Representatives of all Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 236598. Court of Appeals of Michigan. Submitted May 14, 2002, at Detroit. Decided August 27, 2002, at 9:00 a.m. <
ACCEPTED 01-15-00989-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 12/3/2015 1:47:58 PM