Cases

POSNER, Circuit Judge. Visteon, a large manufacturer of automotive parts, with manufacturing facilities scattered around the world but its headquarters in Michigan, brought this diversity suit for breach of contract against the National Union insurance company. Visteon had bought a liability insurance policy from National Union providing worldwide liability coverage between 2000

367 F.Supp.2d 1160 (2005) Rose WEST Plaintiff v. VISTEON CORPORATION, et al. Defendants No. 1:04CV2226. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. February 7, 2005. Joseph A. Zannieri, Norwalk, OH, for Plaintiff. *1161 Margaret Mattimoe Sturgeon, Eastman & Smith, Toledo, OH, Jeffrey S. Kopp, Foley &

OPINION McKEE, Chief Judge. The Industrial Division of the Communications Workers of America (“IUE-CWA” or “the union”), as the representative of approximately 2,100 retirees from Visteon Corporation’s manufacturing plants in Connersville and Bedford, Indiana, appeals the district court’s order, affirming the bankruptcy court’s order permitting Vis-teon to

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 10-1944 _____________ In re: VISTEON CORPORATION, ET AL. IUE-CWA, Industrial Division of Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC,

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 10-1944 _____________ In re: VISTEON CORPORATION, ET AL. IUE-CWA, Industrial Division of Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC,

PER CURIAM. Plaintiffs-Appellants, Howard H. Kes-sler and his wife, Jacqueline A. Kessler (“Kessler”), appeal the decision of the district court granting summary judgment to the defendant, Visteon Corporation (“Vis-teon”), on their negligence claims. While making a business visit to a Visteon plant, Kessler was struck by a forklift driven by a Visteon employee. He sought damages

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 08a0318p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X -

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 06a0182p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Plaintiffs-Appellants,

417 B.R. 449 (2009) In re COLLINS & AIKMAN CORP., et al., Debtors. Visteon Corp., Appellant, v. Collins & Aikman Corp., Appellee. No. 07-13714. Bankr.Case No. 05-55927. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. September 29, 2009. *450 Dawn R. Copley, Trent B. Collier, Dickinson Wright, Detroit,

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. This case arises from a series of incidents that occurred while Roberto Alamo, the plaintiff, was a Chicago firefighter. The operative complaint contains claims against the City of Chicago, under Title VII of the. Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and against Lieutenant Charlie Bliss, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for various forms of discrimi

642 F.Supp.2d 381 (2008) EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LE CARBONE LORRAINE, S.A., et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 05-6042 (JBS). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. October 7, 2008. *382 Daniel A. Sasse, Esq., Crowell & Moring, Irvine, CA, and Matthew J. McBurney, Esq., Crowell & Moring, L

LYNCH, Chief Judge. Dragon Systems, Inc. (“Dragon”), a leading voice recognition software company in the late 1990s, needed infusions of capital to continue operations and so sought an acquisition partner. It hired an investment banker, Goldman Sachs (“Goldman”), to assist it. Dragon was acquired in June 2000 by Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V. But Lernout & Hauspie

649 F.Supp.2d 729 (2009) Howard FRANK, et al., Plaintiffs v. DANA CORPORATION, Defendant. Case No. 3:05CV7393. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division. August 28, 2009. *733 Keith W. Schneider, Maguire & Schneider, Columbus, OH, David W. Zoll, Zoll, Kranz & Borgess, Toledo, OH, Mark C. Gardy, Abbey Gardy

566 F.3d 720 (2009) Sharon A. LUCERO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NETTLE CREEK SCHOOL CORPORATION, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 08-2943. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued April 10, 2009. Decided May 29, 2009. *723 Michael C. Kendall, Attorney (argued), Kendall-Hahn & Associates, Carmel,

782 F.Supp.2d 317 (2011) SHELL GLOBAL SOLUTIONS (US) INC., and Shell Oil Company, Plaintiffs, v. RMS ENGINEERING, INC., Tesoro Corporation, and Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company, Defendants. Civil Action No. 4:09-cv-3778. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. March 21, 2011. Order Denying Reconsideration August 15, 2011.

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 22a0231p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ STACKPOLE INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERED PRODUCTS, │ LTD.,

660 F.Supp.2d 1246 (2009) Paul KUNCL, an individual, Plaintiff, v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Defendant. Case No. 08-CV-724-JHP. United States District Court, N.D. Oklahoma. September 23, 2009. *1247 Courtney Michelle Wolin, James Ronald Polan, Michael Paul Womack, Rex Wade Thompson, Riggs

590 F.3d 390 (2009) Janice KONKOL et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DIEBOLD, INC. et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 08-4572. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: October 14, 2009. Decided and Filed: December 22, 2009. *394 ARGUED: Geoffrey M. Johnson, Scott & Scott, LLP, Cleveland Heights, O

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) REINA ELIZABETH RAMIREZ ) MEJIA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-cv-2492 (EGS/GMH) ) CA

OPINION BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR., Circuit Judge. MillerCoors, Miller Brewing Company (“Miller”) and its parent company SABMiller, and Coors Brewing Company (“Coors”) and its parent company Molson Coors Brewing Company (collectively, “the Manufacturers”) appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Beverage Distributors, Inc., Dayton Heidelberg Dist