Cases

390 F.Supp.2d 27 (2005) In the matter of an Application to Enforce Administrative Subpoena of the UNITED STATES COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, Applicant, v. THE McGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC., Respondent. No. 05-235 (RCL). United States District Court, District of Columbia. October 4, 2005. *28 *

*394 OPINION AND ORDER J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge. Plaintiff Reed Construction Data, Inc. (“Reed”) brought this action against Defendants McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., (“McGraw-Hill”), five unidentified natural persons, and five unidentified entities,1 claiming violations of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(

Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy J. Walker, A.J.), entered January 30, 2014. The order denied the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint. Now, upon the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the at *1415 torneys for the parties on February 19, 2015, and filed in the

BOUDIN, Chief Judge. Defendants — The McGraw-Hill Companies, Ltd., and The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (together “McGraw-Hill”) — successfully defended themselves against a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs InvesSys, Inc. (“InvesSys”), and Peter Hodges. One of the claims in the complaint was for copyright infringement and, at the end of the case, the district court awarded attorney’s

375 F.Supp.2d 252 (2005) The McGRAW-HILL COMPANIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. INGENIUM TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Defendant. No. 05 CIV.2127 JSR. United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 14, 2005. *253 *254 Adam J. Richards, David J. Sheehan, E. Evans Wohlforth, Oren J. Warshavsky, Gibbons,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DRK PHOTO, a sole proprietorship, No. 15-15106 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:12-cv-08093- PGR MCGRAW-HILL GLOBAL EDUCATION HOLDINGS, LLC; MCGRAW-HILL SCHOOL EDUCATION HOLDINGS, OPINION LLC, Defendants-Appellees.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered May 21, 2013, which denied the petition to inspect respondent’s books and records pertaining to the alleged wrongful conduct of its wholly-owned subsidiary, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition granted, and the matter remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith concerning the proper scope of inspection.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. I. INTRODUCTION David Minshall (“Minshall”) filed this suit against his former employer, McGraw-Hill Broadcasting Company (“McGraw-Hill”), alleging that McGraw-Hill unlawfully discriminated against him on the basis of age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, and Colo.Rev.Stat.

743 F.Supp. 1029 (1990) McGRAW-HILL, INC., Plaintiff, v. COMSTOCK PARTNERS, INC., Comstock Partners Strategy Fund, Inc., and Comstock One, L.P., Defendants. No. 89 Civ. 5574 (CMM). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 28, 1990. *1030 Darby & Darby, New York City, William F. Dudine, Jr., Andrew Baum, for plaintiff

383 Mass. 397 (1981) 420 N.E.2d 293 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE vs. McGRAW-HILL, INC. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. January 5, 1981. April 14, 1981. Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., BRAUCHER, WILKINS, LIACOS, & ABRAMS, JJ. Stephen S. Ostrach, Assistant Attorney General, for the plaintiff. Charles A. Schwar

421 F.Supp. 39 (1976) Lynne TUCK, Plaintiff, v. McGRAW-HILL, INC., Defendant. No. 74 Civ. 2914. United States District Court, S. D. New York. September 16, 1976. *40 Coles & Weiner, New York City, for plaintiff; Harold M. Weiner, New York City, of counsel. White & Case, New York City, for defendant; Laura B. Hoguet

Andrew R. Tyler, J. Plaintiff, Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. ("Rosemont”), has brought on the instant motion seeking an order which would modify the injunction contained in the order of this court entered on May 30, 1972 so as to restrain the defendant Clifford Irving ("Irving”) and all persons in active concert or participation with him, from further publishing the manuscript of a purported autobiography of Howard Hughes pending th

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND... 1091 A. Factual Background... 1091 1. The BCA Seminar and NBC’s Secret Recording.. .1091 2. The Dateline Episode... 1092 B. Procedural Background... 1094

DIMOCK, District Judge. This is a motion by defendant McGrawHill Publishing Company, Inc. to strike interrogatories served upon it by the plaintiff Caldwell-Clements, Inc. The action is brought by the plaintiff charging McGrawHill Publishing Company, Inc., and James H. McGraw, Jr., with, among other things, a conspiracy in restraint of trade, and monopolization or attempted monopolization in the publishing business and partic

ACCEPTED 15-25-00109-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/23/2025 5:08 PM NO. __-__-______-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 19–0180 Submitted September 17, 2020—Filed June 18, 2021 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. NICHOLAS DEAN WRIGHT, Appellant. On review from the Iowa Court of Appeals. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge. A defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence based on the warrantless seizure of

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 19–0180 Submitted September 17, 2020—Filed June 18, 2021 Amended August 31, 2021 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. NICHOLAS DEAN WRIGHT, Appellant. On review from the Iowa Court of Appeals. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge. A defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 19–0180 Submitted September 17, 2020—Filed June 18, 2021 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. NICHOLAS DEAN WRIGHT, Appellant. On review from the Iowa Court of Appeals. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Adam D. Sauer, District Associate Judge. A defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence based on the warrantless seizure of

96 F.3d 44 1996-2 Trade Cases P 71,558 STATE OF NEW YORK, by Attorney General Dennis C. VACCO;State of Alabama, by Attorney General Jeff Sessions; Stateof Alaska, by Attorney General Bruce Botelho; State ofArizona, by Attorney General Grant Woods; State ofArkansas, by Attorney General Winston Bryant; State ofCalifornia, by Attorney General Daniel E. Lungren; State ofColorado, by Attorney Ge

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED January 2023 Term June 12, 2023 _____________ released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APP