Cases

APPEL, Justice. In this action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, we address the consequences of a contractor’s failure to render full and complete performance. 1 An owner and contractor entered into an agreement for the construction of a new home. During construction, the owner refused to pay the contractor after discover

OPINION AND ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge: This action arises out of a contract dispute between the petitioner, Landmark Ventures, Inc. (“Landmark”), and the respondent, InSightec, Ltd. (“InSightec”). Pursuant to the terms of the contract, the dispute was submitted to an arbitration governed by the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) and presided over by

The opinion of the court was delivered by Biles, J.: *716 In a criminal prosecution, the State's obligation is to ensure its case is vigorously, but properly, championed to bring about a just conviction-not merely a win. Prosecutors are the State's instrument in fulfilling this duty. When th

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions by email at: JUD.Reporter@vermont.gov or by mail at: Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801, of any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press. 2023 VT 6

480 F.Supp.2d 166 (2007) STOLT-NIELSEN TRANSPORTATION GROUP LTD., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group Ltd., Plaintiff, v. United States Department of Justice, Defendant. No. CIV. 05-2217(RJL), CIV. 06-0474(RJL). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 28, 2007.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) JEFFREY STEIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 17-cv-0189 (TSC) ) ) CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, ) et al., )

Filed 2/27/15 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE, D066919 L.P., Petitioner, (San Diego County Super. Ct. No. 37-2014-00012338- v. CU- MC-

Filed 3/12/15 (unmodified opn. attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE, D066919 L.P., Petitioner, (San Diego County Super. Ct. No. 37-2014-00012338-

7 Cal.Rptr.3d 466 (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 109 BLACK DIAMOND ASPHALT, INC., Petitioner, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of San Joaquin County, Respondent; Jesus Garcia Adames, Real Party in Interest. No. C042523. Court of Appeal, Third District. December 10, 2003. Review Denied March 24, 2004. *467

OPINION OF THE COURT COWEN, Circuit Judge. In Opalinski v. Robert Half International Inc., 761 F.3d 326 (3d Cir.2014), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1530, 191 L.Ed.2d 558 (2015), we held that the availability of class arbitration constitutes a “question of arbitrability” to be decided by the courts — and not the a

469 F.Supp.2d 1351 (2007) In re STAND `N SEAL PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION No. MDL-1804. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. January 5, 2007. Before WM. TERRELL HODGES, Chairman, D. LOWELL JENSEN, J. FREDERICK MOTZ, ROBERT L. MILLER, Jr., KATHRYN H. VRATIL, DAVID R. HANSEN and ANTHONY J. SCIRICA, Judges of the Panel. TRANSFER ORDER WM

785 F.Supp.2d 394 (2011) H. Cristina CHEN-OSTER; Lisa Parisi; and Shanna Orlich, Plaintiffs, v. GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO. and the Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Defendants. No. 10 Civ. 6950 (LBS) (JCF). United States District Court, S.D. New York. April 28, 2011. *397 Adam T. Klein, Esq., Cara E, Greene, Esq., Jennifer L. Liu, Esq., M

OPINION CHARLES SCHWARTZ,' Jr., District Judge. This matter came before the Court on April 22,1993 as a bench trial on the issue of liability. To the extent any of the findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopted as such. To the extent any conclusions of law constitute findings of fact, they are so adopted. FINDINGS OF FACT These

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) INTERNATIONAL TRADING AND ) INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT ) COMPANY (f/k/a/ INTERNATIONAL ) TRADING AND INVESTMENT ) COMPANY), ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) INTERNATIONAL TRADING AND ) INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT ) COMPANY (f/k/a/ INTERNATIONAL ) TRADING AND INVESTMENT ) COMPANY), ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v.

OPINION OF THE COURT AMBRO, Circuit Judge. Table of Contents I. Factual and Procedural Background.190 A. The Tanker and Its Charters.190 B. The Accident.192 C. The Cost of the Accident. 193 D. Control of the Waters.:.193

750 F.Supp.2d 125 (2010) PCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. CASUALTY & SURETY, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 08-00282 (CKK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. November 15, 2010. *128 Robert Holt Myers, Jr., Cindy Chang, Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.

763 F.Supp.2d 12 (2011) INTERNATIONAL TRADING AND INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT COMPANY (f/k/a/ International Trading and Investment Company), Petitioner, v. DYNCORP AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY et al., Respondents. Civil Action No. 09-791 (RBW). United States District Court, District of Columbia. January 21, 2011. *15 Christopher Ryan Hart, Joh

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PCH MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 08-00282 (CKK) v. CASUALTY & SURETY, INC., Defendant. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (November 15, 2010) This action arises out of an alleged brea

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 11-1112 JAMES E. KILLIAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONCERT HEALTH PLAN, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. No. 1:07-cv-04755 — Gary S. Fe