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.
20 opinions for “Williams v. Freedman, M.D., P.A.”
Backer Ex Rel. Freedman v. Shahpublic domain
WINTER, Circuit Judge: Mindy Backer appeals from Judge Mauskopfs Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) dismissal of her complaint alleging a Section 1983 violation. In that action, she claimed that the New York State Department of Health (“DOH”) violated the Medicaid Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq., when DOH determined that guardianship fees approved by a state court could not be ded
Fernandez v. Basil Yates, M.D., P.A.public domain
WELLS, Judge. Gwendolyn Fernandez and Sheldon and Lucille Barnes appeal from a final judgment dissolving Professional Institute of Hialeah (“PIH”) a partnership in which they together hold a 50% interest with Basil Yates, M.D. and Kathleen Yates and the Travis Family who together hold the remaining 50% interest. Yates and Travis cross-appeal from that judgment claiming error in the trial court’s refusal to also dissolve Daba
Steven Cohn, P.C. v. Freedmanpublic domain
Steven Cohn, P.C. v Freedman (2025 NY Slip Op 00242) Steven Cohn, P.C. v Freedman 2025 NY Slip Op 00242 Decided on January 15, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary
Freedman v. Federal Elections Commissionpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JOSHUA FREEDMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22-cv-01542 (RCL) ) ) FEDERAL
Katz, Abosch, etc., P.A. v. Parkway Neurosciencepublic domain
Katz, Abosch, Windesheim, Gershman & Freedman, P.A., et al. v. Parkway Neuroscience and Spine Institute, LLC, No. 30, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Biran, J. EXPERT WITNESSES – ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT TESTIMONY – MARYLAND RULE 5-702 – LIMITED REMAND – Respondent filed a lawsuit against Petitioners alleging accountant malpractice and related claims. In the course of discovery, Respondent designated an expert to provide an opinion concerning Respondent’s lost profits resulting from Petitioners
Katz, Abosch, etc., P.A. v. Parkway Neurosciencepublic domain
Katz, Abosch, Windesheim, Gershman & Freedman, P.A., et al. v. Parkway Neuroscience and Spine Institute, LLC, No. 30, September Term, 2022. Opinion by Biran, J. EXPERT WITNESSES – ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT TESTIMONY – MARYLAND RULE 5-702 – LIMITED REMAND – Respondent filed a lawsuit against Petitioners alleging accountant malpractice and related claims. In the course of discovery, Respondent designated an expert to provide an opinion concerning Respondent’s lost profits resulting from Petitioners
Freedman v. Fisherpublic domain
MEMORANDUM J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR., District Judge. An appropriate federal law addresses the problem of “patient dumping,” a practice of some hospitals that, for economic and other reasons, sent prospective patients to another institution without first evaluating that patient’s needs. In brief, the law known as the Emergency Treatment and Labor Act (“EMTALA”), provides that whatever the hospital’s protocol
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 23, 2013 Session IN RE ESTATE OF FRIEDA LINDY FREEDMAN HAROLD FREEDMAN, AS EXECUTOR v. ANITA TARADASH Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 10P695 David Randall Kennedy, Judge No. M2012-01540-COA-R3-CV - Filed March 6, 2013 A beneficiary of the decedent’s estate conten
HARMON PARKER, P. A., F/K/A DAVIS & HARMON, P. A. v. SANTEK MANAGEMENT, L L C A/A/O THE GERBER LAW GROUP, P. A.public domain
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT HARMON PARKER, P.A. F/K/A ) DAVIS & HARMON, P.A., ) ) Appellant/Cross-Appellee, ) ) v.
Robert Freedman v. Sumner Redstonepublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT GREENBERG, Circuit Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Between 2008 and 2011, Viacom Inc. paid three of its senior executives — Board *420 chairman Sumner Redstone, President and CEO Philippe Dauman, and COO Thomas Dooley — more than $100 million in
William J. Focazio, M.D. v. Joseph S. Aboyoun, Esq.public domain
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3587-22 WILLIAM J. FOCAZIO, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION February 24, 2025 and APPELLATE DIVI
Gardberg, Esq. v. Smith, M.D. C/W 83805public domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA MARK J. GARDBERG, ESQ., IN HIS No. 83556 CAPACITY AS RECEIVER FOR, AND ACTING ON BEHALF OF, FLAMINGO- PECOS SURGERY CENTER, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY FiLE COMPANY, Appellant, JUL 0 1 2022
Gardberg, Esq. v. Smith, M.D. C/W 83805public domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA MARK J. GARDBERG, ESQ., IN HIS No. 83556 CAPACITY AS RECEIVER FOR, AND ACTING ON BEHALF OF, FLAMINGO- PECOS SURGERY CENTER, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY FiLE COMPANY, Appellant, JUL 0 1 2022
E. Brooks Wilkins Family Med., P.A. v. Wakemedpublic domain
INMAN, Judge. *568 E. Brooks Wilkins Family Medicine, P.A. ("Plaintiff") appeals from an order awarding attorneys' fees to Inam Rashid, MD, Michele Casey, *569 MD, Monica Oei, MD, and Leslie
Phillip M. Issac and James R.Freedman v. IFTHC, LLCpublic domain
COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE TAMIKA R. MONTGOMERY-REEVES Leonard Williams Justice Center VICE CHANCELLOR 500 N. King Street, Suite 11400 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-3734
Nicholson v. Williamspublic domain
203 F.Supp.2d 153 (2002) Sharwline NICHOLSON, individually and on behalf of her infant children, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and J.A. and G.A., infants on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Nat WILLIAMS, et al. Defendants. Ekaete Udoh, individually and on behalf of her infant children, and J.A. and G.A., infants on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Nicholas Scoppetta, et al.
In re Inquiry Concerning Freedmanpublic domain
*CJP Supp. 227Opinion HORN, Chairperson. Under California law, judges are expected to decide matters submitted to them within 90 days of submission, and are prohibited from receiving their salaries during times when they have undecided matters under submission for more than 90 days. (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 19; Mardikian v. Commission on
Williams v. Levinepublic domain
Williams v Levine (2025 NY Slip Op 02962) Williams v Levine 2025 NY Slip Op 02962 Decided on May 14, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
Freedman v. America Online, Inc.public domain
325 F.Supp.2d 638 (2004) Clifton S. FREEDMAN, Plaintiff, v. AMERICA ONLINE, INC., Defendant. No. 1:04CV475. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. July 12, 2004. *639 *640 Clifton S. Freedman, Pro se. Samir Jain, Joseph James, Charles Colin Rushing, Wilmer Cut
Freedman v. America Online, Inc.public domain
303 F.Supp.2d 121 (2004) Clifton S. FREEDMAN, Plaintiff, v. AMERICA ONLINE, INC., the Town of Fairfield, and Detectives William Young and David Bensey (individually and in their official capacities) Defendants. No. CIV. 303CV1048PCD. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. February 4, 2004. *122 Calvin Kin-Meng Woo, Pepe &a;