Cases

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re: SILVER LAKE GROUP, LLC No. 23-15822 SECURITIES LITIGATION, ______________________________ D.C. No. 4:20-cv- 02341-JSW WALLEYE OPPORTUNITIES MASTER FUND LTD.; WALLEYE MANAGER OPPORTUNITIES LLC, OPINION Lead Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SILVER LAKE GROUP, L.L.C.; SLP III INVESTMENT HOLDINGS S.A R.L.; SILVER LAKE P

DE MUNIZ, P. J. Defendant Washington County (county) and Intervenor Baker Rock Crushing Co. (intervenor) appeal from the peremptory writ of mandamus and supplemental judgment awarding attorney fees to relators in this mandamus action under ORS 215.428(7). We affirm. On October 28, 1994, relators applied to the county to subdivide a 9.2-acre lot into nine one-acre parcels, which would eventually be put to res

361 F.Supp.2d 1260 (2005) FRIENDS OF THE EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH TRAIL, Cascade Land Conservancy, Robert W. & Bente K. Pasko, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF SAMMAMISH, Defendant, and East Lake Sammamish Community Association, Intervenor-Defendant. No. C03-2793C. United States District Court, W.D. Washington, At Seattle. January 5, 2005. Order Denying Reconsideratio

246 P.3d 343 (2011) The PLANNING GROUP OF SCOTTSDALE, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company; and Altair, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. LAKE MATHEWS MINERAL PROPERTIES, LTD., a California limited partnership; James D. Holmes and Jane Doe Holmes, husband and wife; Shirley Smith and John DOE SMITH, wife and husband; Randy Evers and Jane Doe Evers, husband and wife; Integrated Resources, Inc., a Califo

135 F.Supp.2d 1071 (2001) WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, INC., Plaintiff, v. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, Defendant. No. C98-0433 TEH. United States District Court, N.D. California. March 20, 2001. *1072 *1073 Richard A. Holderness, Mitchell H. Segal, Seyfarth Shaw, San Francisco, CA,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EAST BAY SANCTUARY COVENANT; Nos. 18-17274 AL OTRO LADO; INNOVATION LAW 18-17436 LAB; CENTRAL AMERICAN RESOURCE CENTER, D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellees, 4:18-cv-06810- JST v. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, President of the ORDER AND United States; MERRICK B. AME

ACCEPTED 12-11-00303-cv TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 3/13/2015 4:46:09 PM

*940 O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge: In this action brought under the Sherman Act by an unregulated competitor against a natural gas distributor, we must explore the interplay between state public utility regulation and federal antitrust law. I Cost Manageme

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EAST BAY SANCTUARY COVENANT; Nos. 18-17274 AL OTRO LADO; INNOVATION LAW 18-17436 LAB; CENTRAL AMERICAN RESOURCE CENTER, D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellees, 4:18-cv-06810- JST v. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, President of the ORDER AND United States; MERRICK B. AME

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge. In 2005, several individual plaintiffs and organizations commenced a lawsuit against the Defendants the County of Nassau (the “County Defendant”), the Incorporated Village of Garden City, and the Garden City Board of Trustees (collectively, the *294“Garden City Defendants”). Briefly, the Plain

673 F.Supp.2d 1144 (2009) Louis DOODY, Plaintiff, v. PENGUIN GROUP (USA) INC., a Delaware corporation; Sandecker, RLLP, a Colorado Limited Liability Limited Partnership; Clive Cussler; Dirk Cussler; John Does 1-10, Jane Does 1-10; Doe Corporations 1-10; Does Partnerships 1-10; and Doe Associations 1-10, Defendants. Civil No. 08-00285 JMS/BMK. United States District Court, D. Hawaii.

OPINION ROTH, Circuit Judge. The Mead Corporation appeals several orders of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in a CERCLA 1 contribution action brought by Beazer East, Inc. The main issue presented in these appeals is whether the District Court, over Mead’

Grosse, J. — In this action brought under the Growth Management Act, chapter 36.70A RCW (GMA), we must decide three issues which we resolve as follows: First, the GMA provides that a comprehensive plan and development regulations are presumptively valid upon adoption. This presumption applies even though Whatcom County had previously gotten a declaration from the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board declaring cert

*1192ORDER DENYING NISQUALLY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDG- ■ MENT AND GRANTING SQUAX-IN’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Court on Nisqually Indian Tribe’s (“Nisqually”) and Squaxin Indian Tribe’s (“Squaxin”) Cross-Motions for Summary

OPINION OF THE COURT Vito M. DeStefano, J. Motion sequence No. 1 by the defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. doing business as Audi of America, Inc. (Audi) pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7) for judgment dismissing the instant action insofar as asserted against it is granted to the extent that the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against it, except as to the ninth cause of action, with

861 A.2d 1160 (2004) 272 Conn. 81 Constance GORDON v. H.N.S. MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC. Granville Downs et al. v. H.N.S. Management Company, Inc. No. 17139. Supreme Court of Connecticut. Argued September 20, 2004. Decided December 21, 2004. *1162 Richard C. Mahoney, with whom, on

ACCEPTED 05-15-00495-CV 05-15-00495-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 4/17/2015 8:35:00 AM LISA MATZ

CATHELL, J. This case arises from the denial of a motion for preliminary injunction. On May 7, 2004, Eastside Vend Distributors, Inc. (“Eastside”), petitioner, filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against Coca Cola Enterprises, Inc. (“CCE”), The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. (“PBG”), and Mars *223Super Markets, Inc. (“Mars”). As relevant to this part

*992TABLE OF CONTENTS ORDER PAGE Order on Motion for Reconsideration (1/9/13) 993 Order on Motion for Referral to Settlement Judge (2/1/13) 994 Order on Suquamish Motion for Reconsideration (2/5/13) 994 Order on Lummi Motion for Reconsideration (2/15/13) ' 996 Memorandum a

622 F.Supp.2d 276 (2008) NATIONWIDE CONTRACTOR AUDIT SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL COMPLIANCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 08-08. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. June 10, 2008. *278 Joseph Decker, Patrick R. Malone, Rachel E. Brown, Babst, Calland, Clements & Zomnir, Pittsbur