Court Cases Court Cases

  Most Popular Cases Tab Overlap Cases with Faces Tab Overlap Cases by Type Tab Overlap Cases by Reporter Tab Overlap Cases by Year Right End

All Reporters → f-supp → Volume 777

Opinions in f-supp Volume 777

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Following entry of this Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated December 10, 1990, 751 F.Supp. 474 familiarity with which is assumed, plaintiff made a timely motion for reargument pursuant to Civil Rule 3(j) of this Court. 1 Upon consideration, the motion for reargument is granted, and judgment for infringement will enter against defendant Sonnab...
Views: 0
OPINION By Memorandum and Order on July 25, 1990, we granted partial summary judgment for plaintiff Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) on its claim for due and unpaid contributions against defendant West Side Bakery, but denied summary judgment with respect to the claim for employer liability against both defendants. See Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. West Side Bakery, (S.D.N.Y.1990) 742 F.S...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, a Vermont corporation engaged in the marketing of materials to assist start-up automobile detailing businesses, 1 *5 brought suit against defendants alleging copyright infringement under federal law and unfair competition under Vermont law. Defendant Greg Dumond, a resident of California, is the sole proprietor of an unincorporated business known as Polish Maste...
Views: 1
ORDER Defendant was convicted of fraud in obtaining home loans, and the court sentenced defendant to twelve months imprisonment and $4,050 in fines on September 23, 1991. The court granted defendant’s request to delay reporting to serve his sentence for thirty days, while the Bureau of Prisons made a designation of institution for incarceration. On October 2, 1991, defendant filed notice of his ap...
Views: 0
*9DECISION AND ORDER Charles Tyler, currently incarcerated at the Waupun Correctional Institution, seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against his former attorney, defendant Jeffery Ku-glitsch, for failing to represent him adequately in connection with an appeal of his state parole revocation. Mr. Tyler has filed a petition for leave to proceed with this action in forma pauperis. During the origi...
Views: 0
777 F.Supp. 10 (1991) Esther LE DUC, Plaintiff, v. Jacqueline BUJAKE, et al., Defendants. No. 90-1813C(6). United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. October 29, 1991. *11 Christopher Carenza, Hoffman & Wallach, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff Le Duc. Kortenhof & Ely, Ben Ely, Jr., St. Louis, Mo., for defendant Bujake. Gary Rutledge, Karen Menghini, Armstrong, Teasdale, Schafly, Davi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 26, 1991, North End Oil, Ltd. (“NEO”) filed a complaint in rem against the vessel M/V Ocean Confidence. This Court issued a warrant for the arrest of the vessel. On March 1, 1991, claimant Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (“Mitsui”), entered a restricted appearance, to defend on behalf of the vessel. Mitsui eventually substituted a...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter came on for trial before the court sitting without a jury on the claim of the Plaintiff, Pamela K. Ferguson, for the recovery of accrued benefits under the provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461, for the failure of the Defendants to provide medical insurance benefits under a group poli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendants Sarkis Soghanalian and Pan Aviation, Inc. 1 were charged with various violations of the United States Arms Export Control Act. The defendants were ultimately convicted of conspiring to export military helicopters to Iraq without applying for, or obtaining, written authorization from the Department of State. Defendants’ activities were violative of 22 U.S.C. § 277...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff, The Timken Company (“Timken”), brought this action to challenge the final results of an administrative review conducted by the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce” or “ITA”), of an outstanding affirmative dumping finding dating back to 1976. Tapered, Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter from Japan; Final Results...
Views: 1
ORDER Upon consideration of the Joint Motion of Plaintiffs and Defendant United States (United States International Trade Commission) to Vacate the July 12,1991, Judgment of this Court and to Dismiss the Complaint in this civil action, it is hereby Ordered, adjudged and decreed that: 1. The Judgment of this Court in American Grape Growers Alliance for Fair Trade, et al. v. United States, et al., C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court are plaintiff Saratoga Development Corporation’s motion for partial summary judgment, defendant United States’ motion for summary judgment, their respective replies, and defendant-in-tervenor Delta Partnership’s opposition to plaintiff’s motion. I. The parties do not dispute the following facts. This is a “disappointed bidder” case in which pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Presently pending is defendant Casey Donszell Green’s (“Green”) motion to dismiss the indictment without prejudice based on the government’s failure to reveal allegedly exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. For the following reasons, Green’s motion is granted. I. BACKGROUND On August 27, 1991, the grand jury returned a one-count indictment against the defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The defendant in this case, Anthony McDonald, is charged in count I with possession with intent to distribute five or more grams of crack cocaine and in count II with possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine within 1,000 feet of a public elementary school. Because of a conflict over appropriate jury instructions, the Court writes briefly to rule on the issue. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The defendant in this case, Anthony McDonald, is charged with one count of possession with intent to distribute five or more grams of crack cocaine (count I) and one count of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine within 1,000 feet of a public elementary school (count II). Because of a conflict over appropriate jury instructions, the Court writes briefly to rule o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Eric Foretich filed this suit on April 5, 1990 on behalf of himself and his daughter, Hilary, and promptly sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the defendants from broadcasting a documentary called “Hilary in Hiding.” Hilary Foretich has been the central subject in a longstanding custody dispute between her parents, Eric Foretich (the other plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION INTRODUCTION Presently before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. This action was brought by plaintiffs Car-Mar Construction Corporation (“Car-Mar”) and its sole owner, Carol Georgalas Pendle-ton (“Pendleton”) against defendants Samuel Skinner in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Transportation, the United States, an...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff has brought this action alleging libel per se, libel, negligence, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress based upon the Defendants’ publication of a letter reporting Plaintiffs alleged neglect of her sixteen-year-old pregnant daughter to the D.C. Department of Human Services. Defendants come before this Court on a Motion to Dismiss Count One of Pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I.INTRODUCTION Before the Court are objections by defendant City of North Adams (“North Adams” or “the City”) to recommendations of Magistrate Judge Michael A. Ponsor (“Magistrate Judge”). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant the government’s motion for partial summary judgment, and deny the City’s motion for summary judgment. United States...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case involves a shareholders’ class action brought by the Plaintiff Amy Green-stone on behalf of all persons, other than the defendants, who purchased common stock of Cambex Corporation (“Cambex”) between November 1,1989 and February 1, *89 1991 (the “class period”). The Defendant Cambex is a corporation which is primarily engaged in the design, development, manufact...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. Factual Background. A. Continental Bank v. Village of Ludlow, Civil Action No. 90-12535-Y Continental Bank National Association (“Continental”), the plaintiff in this first diversity action, seeks a declaratory judgment, as bond fund trustee of the Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company (“the Agency”), that several Vermont *9...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AFTER NON-JURY TRIAL OF CLAIMS BETWEEN ARKWRIGHT-BOSTON MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND INTER-TRANS AIRFREIGHT CORP. Introduction On November 24,1986, the plaintiff, Arkwright-Boston Manufacturer’s Mutual Insurance Co. (hereinafter, “Arkwright”), filed a Complaint in the Suffolk Superior Court against the defendant, Intertrans Airfreight Corp....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a consolidated class action suit in which the named Plaintiffs, 1330 Nineteenth Street Corp., Michael G. Feder, and Sonem Partners, Ltd., are acting on the behalf of all persons, other than Defendants, who purchased the common stock of Healthco International, Inc. (“Healthco”) between November 14, 1990 and February 25, 1991. Plaintiff stockholders allege that ...
Views: 4
ORDER The plaintiffs filed this action against the defendants, the City of Boston, the Boston Police Department, Francis Roache, the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department, the Internal Affairs Department, and several police officers alleging civil rights violations. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and damages. The matter was referred to Magistrate Bowler for a recommendatio...
Views: 1
ORDER The court again has before it plaintiffs motion to remand this civil action to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. Upon originally analyzing plaintiffs motion, the court recognized that remand would be appropriate unless defendant raised an issue of federal law. See generally Order of September 27, 1991. Accordingly, the court ordered defendant to supplement the record. As d...
Views: 0
JUDGMENT This action for violation of civil rights is before us on the defendants’ Motions to Dismiss filed on April 23, 1991 (docket entry 8) and May 21, 1991 (docket entry 14). As set out in the complaint, this action arises from the alleged mishandling of a urine sample given on or about January 12, 1988 by plaintiff Angel Sierra-Serpa, then incarcerated under the custody of the Administration ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER At 5:30 A.M. on March 29, 1988, six Puerto Rico police officers entered the apartment of plaintiff Leonel Buenrostro with neither a search nor an arrest warrant. Buenrostro was arrested in connection with a drug crime in New York. He was held for thirty-one days in horrific conditions in the State Penitentiary in Puer-to Rico before the police realized that th...
Views: 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS OPINION AND ORDER. 140 THE MOTIONS. 141 THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD. 141 THE FACTS. 143 TSSTIES. 145 DTSCTTSSTON 145 THE FOURTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS. 145 1. 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 . 145 2. The Constitutional Standard. 146 3. Lack of Section 1983 Claim. 146 a. Treasury Defendants. 146 b. EAL and Security Associates. 147 c. Police Defendants. 147 d. Conclusion. 148 4. ■ Qualified Imm...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, Cooperativa Ahorro y Cré-dito Aguada (“Coop”), is a single-branch savings and loan institution, which brought claims under the Federal Securities Acts, local law fraud statutes, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) against its account representative, Almonte, and his employers Kidder, Peabody & Co. (“Kidder”) and Paine Webber In...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action for trademark infringement and unfair competition filed by So-ciete Des Produits Nestle, S.A. (Nestlé S.P.N.) registered owner of PERUGINA trademarks for chocolate candy in the United States and Puerto Rico, and its wholly owned subsidiary Nestlé Puerto Rico, Inc. (Nestlé P.R.), the exclusive distributor in Puerto Rico, against Casa Helvetia, Inc. and i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has alleged age discrimination in violation of the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (1988). Resolution of this motion requires the Court to apply the Supreme Court’s recommended framework for allocating burdens of pr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), respondent objects to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy M. Boudewyns to the effect that respondent’s motion to dismiss be denied because, according to the doctrine of futility, petitioner Ralph Byrnes need not exhaust his state court remedies before seeking habeas corpus relief in this Co...
Views: 0
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the amended complaint which alleges that the defendants violated the terms and provisions of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1365, by their unpermitted and unlawful discharges of lead from point sources into the Long Island Sound, and that the defendants violated the Resource...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER I. Introduction The plaintiff, Kreindler & Kreindler, known as the “relator” in this type of qui tam proceeding, is a law firm which has filed fraud claims against the defendant, United Technologies Corp. (“UTC”), pursuant to the provisions of the False Claims Act, particularly 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 and 3730. The relator claims that defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above-referenced action, plaintiff United Fence & Guard Rail Corporation (“United Fence” or “plaintiff”) sues D. Lambert Railing Co., Inc. (“Lambert”), Donald Lambert, John Baldwin, Jack Ray-nor, Chestnut Fence and Asphalt Paving Co., Inc. (“Chestnut”), Charles Chestnut, Village Dock, Inc., and Helen Hough (collectively “defendants”), for damages and injunctive relief ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants Michael Bloome, Salvatore Fusco, and Vincent Zappola were convicted at trial of a violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. (count one), and of conspiracy to violate RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (count two). These defendants then executed, pursuant to Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT After a full hearing of this matter by the court, the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations and findings are adopted for the reasons stated in her Report which is attached to, and made a part of, this order. Plaintiffs’ counsel contend that the Magistrate Judge’s award of fees is based on rates that are somewhat low by Manhattan standards. The fees a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The government has moved this court for an order directing that the jury in this case be selected anonymously and that the jury be sequestered. The bases upon which this motion is made are as follows: In an affidavit by Patrick J. Cotter, an Assistant United States Attorney, the government relates that in the course of the trial of the case captioned United...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this action involving bank loans for the refinancing and conversion of two apartment buildings into cooperative units, defendants have moved pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6), 12(b)(1) and 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “Fed.R.Civ.P.”) for an order dismissing the claims in plaintiffs’ amended complaint (“Amended Complaint”). This motion ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER Before this Court are (1) defendants’ motions to dismiss and (2) plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is denied and defendants’ motions are granted. 1 BACKGROUND Plaintiff, the Rawlplug Company, Inc. (“Rawlplug”), is a New York corporation engaged in the manufacture and worldwide sale of fa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Dr. John J. Farber filed this diversity action against defendant Zenith Laboratories, Inc., pursuant to Zenith’s by-laws and New Jersey law. Zenith is a New Jersey corporation that manufactures and markets generic pharmaceutical products. Farber, a New York resident, served as chairperson of the board of Zenith, from 1979-1990. He seeks indemnification for leg...
Views: 0
The Secretary of Health and Human Services determined in 1989 that Roberto Ma-lave was disabled as of March 8, 1987, and awarded him Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) and Social Security Disability Insurance (“SSDI”) benefits from that date forward. Malave seeks review of this decision, asserting that the evidence presented to the Secretary establishes an earlier disability onset date of Jun...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before this court is plaintiff United National Insurance Co.’s (“UNI”) motion for summary judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56, and for a declaratory judgment stating that UNI has no duty to defend or indemnify the defendant Waterfront Realty Corp. (“Waterfront”), and the Tunnel, Inc. (“Tunnel”) in the pending state court action entitled Lourdes Ortiz v. The Tunnel, Inc. and Waterfr...
Views: 0
OPINION Defendants Jerry Schneiderman (“Schneiderman”), Jerry Ranallo (“Ranal-lo”), Larry Butler (“Butler”) and Insertion Advertising Corp. (“Insertion Advertising”) have been charged in a fourteen count indictment with selling and conspiring to sell drug paraphernalia through the services of an interstate conveyance under 21 U.S.C. § 857 and with laundering and conspiring to launder the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this action, plaintiffs Christine and Hasan Alkatabi claim that the Immigration and Naturalization Service (the “INS”) and several INS examiners discriminated against them on the basis of race in violation of the 5th Amendment by delaying the granting of Mrs. Alkatabi’s immediate relative petition on behalf of her husband, Ha-san.1 (Complaint ¶ 18)2. Defendants have moved for...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The instant action arises out of the sale of limited partnership units in Jefferson Hotel Associates Limited Partnership (“Jefferson Hotel Partnership” or “Partnership”), a Connecticut limited partnership. The plaintiffs, Sarah Cohen and Leopold Cohen, investors in the Jefferson Hotel Partnership, bring this suit individually and on behalf of all others similarly situate...
Views: 3
ORDER AND OPINION In these related cases, Linares v. Senkowski (91-CIV-3195) and Munoz v. Keane (91-CIV-0954), petitioners Zoilo Linares (“Linares”) and David Munoz (“Munoz”) seek writs of habeas corpus, primarily on the grounds that their prosecution by an individual not admitted to the bar of New York or any other state violated the due process clause of the federal constitution. 1 Lina...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner, Elite Inc., (“Elite”) moves to vacate an arbitration award issued by the American Arbitration Association (the “AAA”) on November 14, 1990. Respondent, Texaco-Panama Inc. (“Texaco”) cross-moves to confirm that award. For the reasons that follow, petitioner’s motion is denied, and respondent’s motion is granted. BACKGROUND On or about May ...
Views: 0
SENTENCING OPINION Defendant Beverly Maier (“Maier”) pled guilty on April 3, 1990, to one count of distributing and possessing with the intent to distribute heroin, 21 U.S.C. §§ 812, 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C). Pursuant to an opinion dated July 1, 1991, this Court sentenced Maier to 51 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release, subject to modification as a resul...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Raul Rodriguez has moved for disclosure of the entire grand jury record and to dismiss the indictment based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct. In particular, he complains about the way the Assistant United States Attorney questioned him before the grand jury, including a question that contained the phrase “cock and bull story,” which he says reflected improperly the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff and defendants both claim the right to use the service mark “The Five Satins,” a “doo wop” vocal group, 1 based on their original affiliation with that group. Defendants move for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims arising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq., *301 the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is before the Court on defendant’s motion to hold plaintiff in contempt, to obtain for Douglas Brown his full back pay from the date of this Court’s original judgment, and for attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff has also moved for attorneys’ fees. BACKGROUND The events at issue in this case arise out of efforts of the Bakery and Confectionery Workers, Local No. 3, AF...
Views: 0
Defendant Michael Milken moves under Rules 12(b) and 9(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., to dismiss all claims against him in this securities fraud class action suit, and under Rule 12(f) to strike portions of the complaint. 1 For the reasons discussed below, the motion to dismiss and the motion to strike are granted. I. Plaintiffs are shareholders who bought stock in the now-bankrupt Fi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff, a prisoner at the Delaware Correctional Center, has filed suit pro se against various Delaware State officials. The defendants have moved for dismissal of this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In spite of the reams of documentation submitted and the liberal reading of this complaint in the plaintiff’s favor, this Court has...
Views: 0
OPINION The plaintiff-patentee Imperial Chemical Industries, PLC (“ICI”), is a British corporation having its corporate offices and principal place of business in Imperial Chemical House, Millbank, London, England. Consolidated Pretrial Order (“P.T. Order”) filed March 6, 1991 at p. Ill — 1. The defendant Danbury Pharmacal, Inc., (“Danbury”), is a corporation organized and existing under ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Leon Hess (Hess) and Harold Ackerman (Ackerman) have filed motions for summary judgment. They also request that sanctions be imposed upon plaintiff, Doris McKinney Gambrell (Gambrell), pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and that she be enjoined from filing further actions against them pertaining to her termination of employment from the ...
Views: 0
OPINION Before the Court is plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC’s”) motion for summary judgment on its foreclosure action and on defendant Leon Minassian’s counterclaim. Minassian’s cross-motion for partial summary judgment on one count of *387 his counterclaim is also before the Court, For the following reasons, the RTC’s motion will be granted, and Minassian’s mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. INTRODUCTION On October 25, 1991, the Independent Oil Workers Union (the “Union”) asked this court to enjoin the Mobil Oil Company (“Mobil”) from unilaterally implementing a random drug and alcohol testing program in its Paulsboro Refinery pending arbitration of the matter pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The Union also asked ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The captioned action was tried to the court in a nonjury proceeding on March 18, 1991. The plaintiff, Lloyd E. Spinner (Spinner), and defendants Dolores A. and Bernard B. Fulton (the Fultons) are, respectively, the surviving husband and parents of Ylynne M. Fulton (“decedent” or Ylynne Fulton), who died in Philadelphia on April 5, 1988. Spinner was married to but separated from...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Federal Kemper Insurance Company (“Federal Kemper”) filed this declaratory judgment action 1 against Frederick Hanes, individually and t/a Blue Spruce Farms, and Daniel Jones to ascertain its obligations under a comprehensive general liability policy issued to Hanes. 2 Jones was *407 injured in a November 25, 1985 farm accident...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM The instant case is a diversity action brought by plaintiff through a six count Complaint alleging strict liability, breach of contract, breach of express and implied warranties, and negligence against defendant. Presently before this court is defendant’s motion to dismiss Counts I and V of the Complaint, which are plaintiff’s tort claims. For the reasons that follow, defendant...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM ORDER Presently before the Court is the motion of Movant Rocco Bucci to Return One Hundred Fifteen Thousand Five Dollars in United States Currency to his possession and the Motion of the United States Government to Dismiss Movant’s motion. I. Background On February 12, 1991, the Pennsylvania State Police, citing violations of the Pennsylvania gambling laws, obtained a search warrant for...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Factual Background: The above-captioned matter is a negligence/products liability action. Between 1952 and 1956, P. Lorillard, Inc., predecessor to defendant Lorillard, Inc., manufactured Kent cigarettes with an asbestos-containing filter — the “Micronite” filter. Defendant Hollingsworth & Vose (“H & V”) supplied the asbestos containing filter med...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before us is plaintiffs Motion for Rescission of Order Based Upon Newly Discovered Evidence and plaintiffs Motion For Leave to Amend Complaint and to Name Charles W. Chewing, Jr. as an Additional Defendant. For the following reasons, we will grant plaintiffs motion for rescission and grant plaintiffs motion to amend in part. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY O...
Views: 2
ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiff Sidney W. Fox’s motion for a temporary restraining order filed September 4, 1991. Pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and with notice to all parties, this court conducted a hearing on September 17, 1991. Both parties concurred in proceeding with the matter as a request for a preliminary injunction without furth...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and on defendant’s motion to dismiss. Both motions have been fully briefed and argued and are ripe for disposition. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337, and on 49 U.S.C. § 11503. Motion for Preliminary Injunction Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction restraining a...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REMEDY PHASE A. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT In view of the holding of the Fifth Circuit in Chisom v. Edwards, 839 F.2d 1056 (5th Cir.) cert. denied sub nom. Roemer v. Chisom, 488 U.S. 955, 109 S.Ct. 390, 102 L.Ed.2d 379 (1988), this court assumed that its path was rather clearly staked by the appellate court. However, on May 11, 1990, the decision of the ...
Views: 2
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Supreme Court has held plainly and clearly as to the election of justices of the Louisiana Supreme Court, in Chisom v. Roemer, — U.S.-, 111 S.Ct. 2354, 115 L.Ed.2d 348 (1991) that: ... Congress made clear that a violation of § 2 could be established by proof of discriminatory results alone. It is difficult to believe that Congress, in...
Views: 2
This matter is presently before the Court on the motion of plaintiffs for a temporary injunction to enjoin proposed OCS Sale 135 scheduled to be held August 21, 1991. After a consideration of the evidence presented, the argument of counsel, and a review of the applicable law, it is the opinion of this Court that the motion for temporary injunction must be denied. In Canal Authority v...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS The Court was presented with dual motions for summary judgment, in the above captioned case, by both defendants, Aetna Finance Company (“Aetna”) and Credit Bureau, Inc. of Georgia (“CBI”). For the reasons stated below, this court grants summary judgment in favor of both defendants. *491 FACTS ITT Consumer Finance Corporation (“ITT”) was listed on plain...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is defendant's motion to reconsider the Court’s Order dismissing the RICO counterclaims, specifically those defendant asserts as assignee of its customer Harris Well Service. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is DENIED. I. The underlying dispute in this case is between two insurance intermediaries who are feuding over premiums owed. The Court...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiffs, Alden Crochet and Ruth Crochet, seek damages allegedly resulting from an accident that occurred on the evening of December 14, 1988 while Alden Crochet was employed by Citgo Petroleum Corporation as a pipefitter. One of Mr. *499Crochet’s duties was to connect flow lines on barges docked at Citgo’s Lake Charles refinery to receive product from Citgo. Plaintiffs accident allegedl...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court in the above styled cause are the motions of the defendants to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, alternatively, for summary judgment. Defendants contend that all of plaintiffs’ claims are barred by applicable statutes of limitations. Having reviewed the motions, the pleadings, memoranda and arguments of the parties, and evidence submitted, this court is pe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is a class action suit brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The named plaintiffs, two “BankAmericard” bank cardholders, sued the defendant national bank which issued the bank credit cards contending that certain charges made by defendant bank were usurious under the National Bank Act, 12 U.S.C. §§ 85 and 86. This case was appealed to the Fifth Circuit Co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, Alternatively, Motion for Summary Judgment, filed June 17, 1991; Defendants’ Supplemental Affidavit in Support of Motion to Dismiss, filed July 9, 1991; and Plaintiff’s Response, filed July 30, 1991. In addition, the Court has received a letter from Plaintiff dated and filed July 22, 1991. I. BACKGROU...
Views: 0
*527 MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER The Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) instituted this action seeking to obtain an order to compel former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives James C. Wright, Jr. (“Wright”), to answer questions submitted to him by the Commission pursuant to the authority of 2 U.S.C. § 437d(a)(1). Subject matter jurisdiction exists by vi...
Views: 1
ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, or, to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim for which the Court can Grant Relief. On May 17, 1991, the FDIC brought a legal malpractice lawsuit against Shrader & York. The FDIC’s claims are based on the law firm’s alleged negligence in failing to advise two savings and loan associations, City Savings and Loan ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the defendant Township’s Motion to Dismiss. Once again, this Court is confronted with a zoning dispute over which it has no jurisdiction. For the reasons which follow, the motion is GRANTED. I. This is a dispute concerning the interpretation of a Township zoning ordinance which does not permit manufacturing on property zoned R-l, agricultural...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before me is plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on Count II of the Complaint. Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) is the holder of a $10.5 million promissory note assigned to and assumed by defendant Hershiser Signature Properties (“Hershiser Signature Properties”) and personally guaranteed by the individually-named defendants. There is no quest...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ NATIONAL STARCH & CHEMICAL CORPORATION AND BEAZER EAST, INC. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNT I, PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Nicolas Kaliardos filed this complaint on September 14, 1988, charging General Motors Corporation and BASF Corporation with infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 3,959,530 and 4,356,036. In February 1990 plaintiff added claims o...
Views: 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION. 554 II. FINDINGS OF FACT. 555 A. Background. 555 1. Ownership. 555 2. Contamination. 555 3. EPA’s response. 556 4. Stipulations. 556 B. Ownership by Ott I: 1957 to 1965 . 557 C. Ownership by Ott II: 1965 to 1972 . 557 1. Acquisition of Ott I. 557 2. Board of directors. 558 3. Management. 559 4. C...
Views: 8
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal from a decision of the Administrator of the Health Care Financing Administration (“Administrator”) acting on behalf of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) denying plaintiff’s claim for provider cost reimbursement under the Medicare Program, 42 U.S.C. § 1395 et seq. Plaintiff The Ohio State University, d/b/a O...
Views: 0
*592MEMORANDUM OPINION These three petitions ask this court to quash summonses issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to the law firms of Ritchie, Fels & Dillard, P.C. and Harwell, Baumgartner & Willis, P.A. (hereinafter “the law firms”). The petitioners are unnamed clients of the two law firms and the petitions are said to arise under 26 U.S.C. § 7609. The two law firms themselves have als...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is a motion to dismiss filed by defendants CNA Financial Corp. (“CNA”), Edward J. Noha, Lawrence A. Tisch, Dennis H. Chookaszian, Thomas R. Igleski, Barbara Demytrasz, and Chrissy Gresey (collectively, “CNA defendants”). The motion is directed at plaintiff Mark Stephenson’s three-count employment discrimination complaint. As set forth below, t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”). The EEOC claims that the defendant, Consolidated Service Systems (“Consolidated”) engaged in a continuing pattern and practice of illegally ...
Views: 1
*611MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Lake Forest Academy (“Lake Forest” in this opinion, though the parties’ agreements refer to it as “The School”) filed a Complaint (the “Complaint”) against American Language Academy (“American” in this opinion, though the parties’ agreements and the Complaint refer to it as “ALA”) in the Circuit Court of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Illinois, seek...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Antonia Moore, a resident of Illinois, filed suit against The Wausau Club (“Wau- *620 sau”), a Wisconsin corporation with its principal place of business in Wisconsin, for injuries arising from her performance at the club as a member of the Dick Judson Orchestra. Wausau subsequently filed a third party complaint against the Orchestra, an Illinois Corporation with ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ *624 complaint for breach of contract. Defendant seeks dismissal pursuant to 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is denied. BACKGROUND The plaintiffs are Zack Stamp, Illinois’ Director of Insurance and ...
Views: 0
*631 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I.INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Home Life Insurance Company (“Home Life”) has filed a complaint for foreclosure relating to property located at 300 North Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. Plaintiff alleges that defendants American National Bank and Trust Company (“American National”) and 300 Michigan Associates Limited Partnership have defaulted on a Mortgage ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before KANNE, Circuit Judge, NORGLE, District Judge, and CONLON, District Judge. In these consolidated cases, the court is called upon to select a congressional redistricting plan for the State of Illinois. Following the tabulation of the 1990 decennial census, the Office of the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives informed the Governor of ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the following reasons, the motion is denied.1 FACTS The plaintiff, Michael Shanahan (“Shana-han”), was demoted on December 15, 1990 from the position of director of the Department of Apparatus Maintenance, Repair and Supply within the Chicago Fire Department, his job since 1983, to the position of commander of a firefighting company....
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 27, 1988, in the late morning, Constance Williams was driving east on Old McHenry Road in a car owned by the Williams Insurance Agency. Loren Kapou-las was driving his tractor/trailer westbound on Old McHenry Road. Both were approaching the T-intersection of their road with Darlington Road. There were no traffic stop lights or signs on Old McHenry. The ...
Views: 0
OPINION Antitrust case — 17 Plaintiffs — 11 Defendants — 69 lawyers — and literally a half-ton of pleadings. First of all, Plaintiffs’ counsel accepted this case with a foreseeable conflict. But Defendants waited until 3 years into this major antitrust action before moving to disqualify Plaintiffs’ lead counsel (and his firm) on the grounds that Defendants intend to call him as a witness to...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the United States’ motion for summary judgment, motion to dismiss, supplemental motion to dismiss, and request for certification of questions to the Arizona Supreme Court. The parties have fully briefed the issues. Discussion Plaintiff’s decedent, Timothy E. Sullivan, died on September 19, 1988 in Allen County, Indiana. Allegedly, Sul...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the court on Defendants Rampart Air and Connelly/Osth & Co.’s 1 motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) and on Defendant Rampart Air’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Also before the court is plaintiff’s motion for default judgment under Rule 55(a). Factual Background In September 1988, Rampa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING COURT’S DISPOSITION OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNTS III, IY AND Y OF PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT Each of the matters discussed below is before the court on defendants’ motions to dismiss, filed May 30, 1989 and August 5, 1991. I. Motion to Dismiss Count III Count I of plaintiff’s complaint states a claim for damages resulting from d...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Before the Court are: 1) the plaintiffs motion to enjoin prosecution of the defendant’s later-filed action; and 2) the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff's de*738claratory judgment proceeding in the Eastern District of Wisconsin, or in the alternative, to transfer it to the Northern District of Ohio pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Janet R. Johnson brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for review of the final decision of the defendant Secretary of Health and Human Services. Specifically, the plaintiff appeals the determination by the Secretary that her Social Security Old Age benefits are subject to a reduction as a result of her entitlement to a pension from the State of O...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment. The motion will be granted. FACTS Plaintiff Master Distributors, Inc. (MDI) manufactures and sells leader splicing tape under the trademark “Blue Max.” Leader splicing tape is a product used by minilabs in processing photographic film. The tape is used to attach undeveloped f...
Views: 0
777 F.Supp. 750 (1991) John G. SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GENELCO, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 90-1714C(1). United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. June 10, 1991. *751 Nicholas Higgins, Whaley, Higgins & Associates, Clayton, Mo., for plaintiffs. Timothy Kellett, Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly, Davis & Dicus, St. Louis, Mo., for defendants. MEMORANDUM NANGLE, District Judge....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff William A. Webb, d/b/a Blue Circle Tavern & Restaurant, brought this action against the State of Missouri and the City of St. Louis and its Excise Commissioner Robert Kraiberg after he was denied a Sunday liquor license for his business. He alleges a denial of equal protection of the laws. This matter is before the Court upon the motion to dismiss of the State of Missouri, De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff has filed a § 301 hybrid wrongful discharge/breach of duty of fair representation claim against his former employer, McDonnell Douglas and his union, District Lodge No. 837, IAM, AFI^CIO (Union). Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that plaintiff’s claim is barred by the applicable six-month statute of limitations. In addition, defendants aver that th...
Views: 0
ORDER Five motions are pending before this court. They are intervenor plaintiff San Marcos Treatment Center’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed May 31, 1991; defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Claims of Plaintiff Tarra Lynne Coonce, filed June 14, 1991; defendants’ Motion for Summary Judg *762 ment on Intervenor San Marcos Treatment Center’s Compl...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. FACTS On June 26, 1987, in this Court, a jury found defendant, Terrance Kenneth Provost, guilty of aggravated sexual abuse for sexually abusing his half-sister Loretta Lee Stone, a ten year-old child, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 2245(2)(A). Defendant’s subsequent motions for judgment of acquittal, arrest of judgment, and new trial based upon newly d...
Views: 2
ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On April 10, 1991, this Court heard oral argument on the following motions: plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint; defendant’s motion to amend the original answer, add affirmative defenses and counterclaims, and for an extension of time for discovery; defendant’s motion to compel joinder of a necessary party; and lastly, plaintiff’s motion for appo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that its hotel video-movie viewing system does not infringe defendants’ copyrights in the movies shown through the system. All but one of the defendants have joined to counterclaim for damages for copyright infringement by plaintiff’s system. 1 Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue of lia...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER sitting by designation. These cases require the court to revisit the issue of jury selection by a magistrate in a felony trial.1 These are two motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 by two defendants in the same underlying criminal case to vacate their convictions because jury selection in their case was conducted by a magistrate. *792BACKGROUND Movant English filed his motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION THIS MATTER came before the Court on July 12, 1991, upon separate motions by plaintiffs to dismiss the punitive damage claims filed by injured crew members and the estates of nine deceased crew members. For the reasons stated on the record at the conclusion of the hearing, plaintiffs’ motions were GRANTED and all punitive damage claims were STRICKEN. This memorandum opi...
Views: 0
*798 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Sara Stump and Andrew Ocrant commenced this action asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state tort law. Defendants are: (1) Sueann Ocrant; (2) the Arapahoe County Coroner’s Office, and Dr. Jill Gould in her official capacity as Arapahoe County Coroner (collectively "Arapahoe County”); and (3) the City of Greenwood Village, Rolli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Sara Stump and Andrew Ocrant commenced this action asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for denial of the right of access to the courts (first claim), conspiracy (second claim) and defamation (third claim). Plaintiffs further assert pendent state law claims for civil conspiracy (fourth claim), gross negligence (fifth claim), defamation (sixth cla...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Robert and Eleanor Isham (the Ishams) move for judgment on the pleadings, contending that plaintiff’s action for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty is preempted by 12 U.S.C. § 1821(k) of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). The Ishams also contend that C.R.S. § 11-5-107 requires dismissal. Defendant ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Ben P. Dreith, a Colorado resident, commenced this action asserting *834 claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (first through fifth claims), and a claim for outrageous conduct (sixth claim). Defendant National Football League (NFL), an unincorporated association with its principa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Dolly Barciak, a Colorado resident, commenced this action against United of Omaha Life Insurance Company (United), a Nebraska corporation, in the state district court for Boulder County, Colorado. Plaintiff asserts claims for breach of contract (first claim), breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing (second claim) and emotional distress (third cla...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Plaintiff Studio 1712, Inc. (Studio 1712) commenced this action asserting, inter alia, trade dress infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Defendants are Etna Products Co., Inc. (Etna), Harriet Carter Gifts, Inc. (Harriet Carter) and Hanover House Industries, Inc. (Hanover House). Currently pending is the plaintiff’s motion for prelim...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this employment discrimination case, the third amended complaint of plaintiff Hieu Smith (Smith) contains ten causes of action, six based on Colorado state law and four based on federal anti-discrimination statutes. Defendant Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG) moves to dismiss the state causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, i...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case comes before the court, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b), upon Gerald Carlos’ petition to review the order of detention entered by Magistrate John B. Wooley on March 5, 1991. In that order, Magistrate Wooley concluded that the defendant had not rebutted the presumption that he posed a flight risk and a danger to the safety of the community and ordered the defendant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On February 27, 1987, Frank Rosile, a Boeing employee, died. This ease arises out of Carolyn Rosile, Frank Rosile’s wife’s, action to recover life insurance benefits under a group plan life insurance policy issued by Aetna Life Insurance Company (Aetna) to The Boeing Company (Boeing). Rosile’s claim for benefits arises out of the Employee Retirement Income Security Ac...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff proceeds on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff *876complains he was wrongfully disciplined for obtaining junior high school directories and then writing letters to several female students listed therein. Specifically, plaintiff claims the disciplinary proceeding violated his right to due process because: (1) the evidence did not support a finding of guilt on ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on remand from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals to make specific findings on whether attorney’s fees should be imposed personally against defendant Harold Goodman (“defendant Goodman”) as trustee of defendant Automation, Incorporated Pension Plan and Trust (“the Plan”), under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1). Plaintiffs prevailed on the issue of defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case was tried to a jury beginning April 8,1991, until June 21,1991. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff on all of her claims against defendant American Family Mutual Insurance Company (“AFM”). 1 Several matters remain for the court’s consideration. The court must determine the amount of punitive damages to be awarded on plaintiff’s mal...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case is before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Beech Aircraft Corporation (“Beech”), EDO Corporation (“EDO”), and the Commissioner of Patent and Trademarks each filed motions for partial summary judgment in Case No. 91-4038-S (Docs. 14, 17, 25). This case was originally filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, but has since ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on motions to dismiss by defendants Emil Tobia-son, Wayne Loseke, Don Jacobson, and Todd Tobiason (Doc. 105), defendants Terry Vavrina, Kenneth Bach, Daniel Kellner, James Kellner, Thomas Kaiser, LaVine Kumm, and Thomas Mrkvicka (Doe. 136), and defendant Charles Allphin (“Allphin”) (Doc. 124). Defendants Terry Vavrina, Kenneth Bach, Dan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on motion of defendants Designer Phosphate & Premix International, Inc. (“DPPI”), Tim Tobi-ason, Wayne Loseke, Donald Jacobson, Todd Tobiason, and Emil Tobiason to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The court notes that its previous order entered November 12,1991,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is currently incarcerated at Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas. Respondents filed an answer and return to the petition. Petitioner filed no response. The matter is ready for disposition. The court determines that an evidentiary hearing is not ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL The subject of this Opinion is defendant’s motion, filed September 26, 1991, for judgment of acquittal following discharge of the jury, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29(c). A trial in this case was held on September 16, 17, 19, 20 and 23, 1991. The jury returned its verdict on September 24, 1991, convicting on one count and acquit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER came on for consideration of the defendants’ Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, or, In the Alternative, For a New Trial, filed February 11, 1991. The Court has reviewed the memoranda submitted by the parties and the relevant authorities. The Court has further examined those sections of the file pertinent to the issues presented, the p...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter comes before the Court upon the motion of the defendants, Jack E. Black, A.D. Black, Don Cies, George L. Cross, Raymond T. Foor, Charles Hooper, Jerry D. Alley, E. Koehler Thomas and William R. Bourn, to dismiss counts I, II and VI of the First Amended Complaint of the plaintiff, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The defendants seek to dismiss counts I, II ...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ motions. The Court, having considered the materials on file both in support of and in opposition to the motions, having considered the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, FINDS and ORDERS as follows: BACKGROUND The plaintiffs’ claims arise out of the purchase and consumption of the dietary supplement known as...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on the question whether this Court may exercise in personam jurisdiction over the defendants. For the following reasons, this Court finds that the exercise of in person-am jurisdiction over the defendants in this case is proper. I. FACTS On March 21, 1989 this personal injury action was removed to this Court on the basis of both federal question and div...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS This cause of action is before the Court on Defendants, Amelia Investments, Inc. (hereafter “Amelia”) and Clearwater Hotel Associates Limited Partnership’s (hereafter “CHA”), motion to dismiss Count II of the Complaint, filed on August 26, 1991, and *933opposition thereto, filed on September 30, 1991. A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unle...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDMENT TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DENYING RELIEF BASED ON AMENDMENT TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS This cause is before the court on the following: Dkt. 89 Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Amendment to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed May 16, 1990. Dkt. 90 Response in Opposition to Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANTS HOLT, RASTRELLI, SMITH, SKI, AND MOORE AS TO COUNTS IV, V, AND VI OF PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count IV (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress), Count V (Loss of Consortium), and Count VI (Conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985) of Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Comp...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment and Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Affidavit in Support of their summary judgment motions. Defendant General Felt Industries contends that Plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies prior to bringing this ERISA action. Defendant Northwestern National Life Insurance Company contends that i...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is before the Court on seven motions for summary judgment filed by the Plaintiff in this action for declaratory judgment. The motions, however, rely on substantially similar legal positions and will therefore be consolidated for the purpose of this Court’s discussion. This action arises out of a companion case pending in this Court and styled Greg Simms and Nort...
Views: 1
ORDER These cases are consolidated for the purposes of the pending motions which raise identical issues. The cases are before the Court on Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint. A hearing on the issues raised by Defendant’s motion was held on Tuesday September 10, 1991, and a decision reserved pending this Court’s receipt of further written arguments...
Views: 0
ORDER The initial complaint in this action was filed on April 21, 1986, by plaintiff Davis Hogan. This complaint was cast as a bilateral class action. Class plaintiffs were Georgia residents who had borrowed money from Landbank Equity Corporation (“Landbank”), giving mortgages on Georgia real estate as security for such loans. Defendants were purchasers of the Georgia Landbank loans in th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Introduction This case comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Defendants (“Neman Brothers” or “Neman”) claim that the case should be time barred by 19 U.S.C. § 1621 because they never received acknowledgement of their proposed waiver of the statute. In *963 the alternative, defendants argue that the government's...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION The defendants have moved for summary judgment in this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) suit challenging the Department of Commerce’s (“DOC”) nondisclosure of certain documents responsive to the following request: All documents, drawings, technical data, designs, formulations, blueprints, engineering and process drawings given to Mr. Steve Lacy, Bureau of Ex...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction This case presents the Court with an overriding issue: are insurance companies *970 required to indemnify policyholders for expenditures made by them to remedy environmental damage caused by a third party? The plaintiff, a large electric utility which primarily serves the District of Columbia and parts of Maryland, purchased twenty...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION (Pepeo II) In our previous memorandum opinion of September 30, 1991, 777 F.Supp. 968, {Pep-eo I), we considered and acted upon five dispositive motions. The underlying facts which led to this litigation have been previously set forth and will not be repeated. Still pending are five additional dispositive motions, all of which were filed by one or more of defe...
Views: 1
OPINION Plaintiff, Paul Bachman, brought suit against the Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., alleging *991 racial discrimination in UDC’s failure to promote him to the rank of Full Professor. A two-week bench trial was conducted in September 1988. The...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiffs, three incumbent officers in the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (“UBCJA”) and eight affiliated union councils, bring this action to prevent the Defendants from installing newly-elected officers prior to the expiration of the incumbents’ terms. The parties agreed to maintain the status quo penden-te lite, and agreed to consolidate the Plaintiffs’ request ...
Views: 0
OPINION Now before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss. On consideration of the *1004 entire record, the Court grants the motion in part and denies it in part. Background This is an action alleging discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 et seq. (1977). Plaintiff asserts pendent state la...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This claim was brought by a young professional basketball player and his wife— *1007Reginald and Kathy Williams — against a financial advisor and his associated companies to recover $50,000 that the Williams had entrusted to the defendant, Waymon Hunt through one of his affiliated companies. Plaintiffs also seek to recover certain costs and expenses that the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON STIPULATED RECORD This case involves an action for severance pay for over one thousand striking members of Local 14 of the United Paper-workers International Union and Local 246 of the International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers (hereinafter “the Unions”). The action arises under the terms of the International Paper Company Androscog-gin Mill Severance Benefit Pla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Middlesex Savings Bank, commenced this interpleader action in the state court after foreclosing a lien against real estate owned by defendant Raymond Johnson (“Johnson”) at 27-29 Crane Ave., in Maynard, Massachusetts. The foreclosure resulted in surplus proceeds of $56,115.11, to which Middlesex Savings Bank makes no claim. Excluding Johnson, 1 s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case arises from a so-called “citizen suit” brought by the Plaintiff Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group (“MASSPIRG”) against the Defendant ICI Americas, Inc. (“ICI”), for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act also known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (“FWPCA” or “Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq. The Defendant ICI operates a ma...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (“Commonwealth”) cleaned up a hazardous waste site in North Attleboro, Massachusetts, and now seeks to recover the cleanup costs from several defendants 1 pursuant to *1038 CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601, et seq., and its Massachusetts equivalent, Mass.Gen.L. ch. 21E. The parties’ summary judgment motions are befor...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to remand and an opposition thereto filed by *1041 defendants. This case was commenced by plaintiff Oliver in the Ponce Superior Court on September 24,1990, and removed by the defendants Mrs. Haas and the Haas Estate to this court on March 25, 1991. The issue is whether, in an action brought initially in state court and subsequently rem...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER After eight years of litigation and a seven-week jury trial, the court now faces defendants’ motion for a directed verdict pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50. A full history of the case can be culled from two published opinions, Rodríguez v. Banco Central, 727 F.Supp. 759 (D.P.R.1989), and Rodri *1047 guez v. Banco Central, 917 F.2d 664 (1s...
Views: 3
OPINION Plaintiff, Laz-Karp Realty, Inc., entered into a purchase and sale agreement with defendant, James F. Gilbert, on February 8, 1989. The agreement provided for the sale of land and buildings located in the central business district of the City of Providence. Laz-Karp was in the business of operating parking garages and planned to construct and operate a parking garage on the site. Laz-Karp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is presently before the court on defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). Plaintiff David A. Pacheco (“Pacheco”), a former employee of defendant Raytheon Company (“Raytheon”), alleges that Ray-theon discharged him in retaliation for his reporting of safety and security violations at Raytheon’s Submarine Signal Divisi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Bethphage Lutheran Service, Inc. (“Beth-phage”), a Connecticut not-for-profit corporation, brings this action for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment against Governor Lowell P. Weicker, Jr., Toni Richardson, the Commissioner of the Department of Mental Retardation, and Audrey Rowe, the Commissioner ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above referenced case, plaintiff Sidney Grossman (“plaintiff”), seeks to enjoin the New York State Employees Retirement System (“NYSERS”), the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office (“District Attorney”) and their officers, agents and employees from forcing him to either change pension plans or give up his job. He brings this action under the Age Discriminat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff/counterclaim defendant Irwin Plotkin (“Plotkin”) brings this action against defendant/counterclaim plaintiff Bearings Limited (“Bearings” or “the company”) as well as defendants John Bauer (“Bauer”), Michelle Saunders (“Saunders”), Jeff D. Feldman and Martin Granowitz, (collectively “defendants”), alleging, inter alia, violations of the Employee Retirement Incom...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant has moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is denied. BACKGROUND In November, 1984, plaintiff was appointed to the administrative position of Director of Pupil Personnel Services (“DPPS”) by the defendant Board of Education of the Hempstead School Dis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER Plaintiff Eligió Castro, a former probationary High School Spanish teacher employed by defendant New York City Board of Education (the “Board”), brings this pro se action challenging the termination of his employment as being in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Castro seeks compensatory and punitive damages, ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action for employment discrimination. Mildred McKenzie, pro se, was formerly employed as a coach cleaner for defendant Amtrak. She alleges that, as a result of her race and national origin, she was wrongfully denied the opportunity to work on holidays in April and July 1984, despite a “bumping rights” policy which allegedly permits employees to substitute for others...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree pr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided f...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree pr...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by *1135 the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The C...
Views: 2
*1140 OPINION Plaintiff, Alaska Textile Co., (Alaska), seeks $95,538 in damages from Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., (Chase), for the alleged wrongful dishonor of two letters of credit issued by Chase to Alaska as beneficiary. As Chase is a corporation organized under the laws of the United States the court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 632. Alaska is a small business ...
Views: 0
*1144 OPINION Plaintiff Rye Psychiatric Hospital Center (“Rye Psychiatric”) originally commenced this action against defendants Richard C. Surles and Cesar A. Perales to challenge New York’s Medicaid reimbursement system as applied to private psychiatric hospitals as violative of the Boren Amendment to the Medicaid Act. Plaintiff presently seeks injunctive relief from this court ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Neat-N-Tidy Co, Inc. (“Neat-N-Tidy”) brings this action to recover damages for breach of contract, tortious interference with business and contractual relations, and conspiracy to interfere with business and contractual rights, and alleges jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Presently before the Court are defendants Tradepower (Holdings) Ltd.’s (“Tr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Medical Society of the State of New York et al. (“Plaintiffs”) move for summary judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56. Plaintiffs contend that Chapter 572 of the Laws of New York (codified at N.Y. Public Health Law § 19) is (1) preempted by the Health Insurance for the Aged Act (“Medicare Act;” the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 1395 et seq. and (2) viol...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Martin B. Sloate (“Sloate”) to dismiss the Complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) against Sloate and three other defendants, Robert H. Willis (“Willis”), Howard Kaye (“Kaye”), and Kenneth Stein (“Stein”), who are no longer parties to the suit. 1 The action was brought by ...
Views: 0
OPINION Our federal court system is being brought into ridicule and our Constitution is being debased by persons who proclaim themselves to be its strongest supporters: civil rights advocates and attorneys purportedly working in the public interest. By attempting to elevate mere personal desires into constitutional rights and claiming denial of their civil rights whenever their desires are not ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER This is a petition by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”) to terminate the captioned retirement benefit plans and to fix July 24,1991 as their termination date, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1342(c). The stated ground for termination is that both plans are underfunded and there is no prospect that their funding can be brought current, with the result that PBGC will hav...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The last phase of this pension benefits case is plaintiffs application for counsel fees, most of which were incurred after plaintiff was offered and declined the identical relief she won after more than a year of additional litigation. Because I do not read the Equal Access to Justice Act to require that defendants subsidize such profligacy, plaintiffs counsel will recov...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER A class of private plaintiffs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis*1191sion (“EEOC”) brought two civil rights actions in 1973 against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (“NMDU” or “Union”) and more than fifty news publishers and distributors within the Union’s jurisdiction. Both suits charged that the Union, with the acquiescence of the publ...
Views: 0
OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW INTRODUCTION Dr. Leonard Naphtali (“Naphtali”), 58 years of age at the time of his application for a position with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), brings this employment discrimination action against the EPA alleging “disparate treatment” on the basis of age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION Introduction Plaintiff, born in France, the daughter of an American World War II soldier, has been denied United States citizenship. Plaintiff’s parents were unmarried, and her father returned to the United States after the war. Plaintiff’s mother, a French citizen, remained in France with her daughter. In order for plaintiff to have been eligible for citizen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiff Technographics, Inc. filed this action on June 19, 1989, alleging that defendant Mercer Corporation (“Mercer”) sold a defective coating machine to it in October of 1987. Technographics contends that the machine was negligently designed and manufactured, and that the sale of the machine violated the implied warranties of fitness of purpose and merchanta...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action for wrongful discharge and defamation brought by a pilot formerly employed by defendant Wayfarer Ketch Corporation (“Wayfarer”). Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss for, inter alia, lack of in personam jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2). For the reasons stated below, I grant de *1219 ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant seeks summary judgment against plaintiff on the ground that plaintiff’s negligence cause of action alleged in his complaint falls within the purview of the Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act. For the reasons stated below, I grant defendant’s motion. I. Summary judgment is appropriate if there exists no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is enti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I will grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss because: (a) the statute precludes judicial review; and (b) the political question doctrine forecloses judicial intervention. A. THE STATUTE PRECLUDES JUDICIAL REVIEW Plaintiffs have asserted that their right to judicial review for Counts I and II arises under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C....
Views: 0
OPINION On October 11, 1991, in Easton Pennsylvania, this court, sentenced the defendant James A. Bordinaro to twelve months imprisonment and imposed a fine of $55,000 based on a two-count guilty plea. After reviewing the presentence report, counsel’s memoranda, and all arguments presented at the sentencing hearing, the court made specific findings on the record and imposed sentence pursu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is a contract dispute over whether or not an arbitration clause appearing on the back of the buyer’s purchase order is part of the agreement between the seller and the buyer. After the product sold to the buyer failed to live up to the buyer’s expectations, the buyer filed for arbitration. The seller moved to enjoin the arbitration. I denied the seller’s motion for ...
Views: 0
OPINION Presently before the Court are several motions for summary judgment. Every party, except the plaintiff, has moved for summary judgment against every other party. These motions are the culmination of months of discovery disputes and motions for sanctions. Specifically, the tedious and tortured path of this case has now led to the following motions: 1) Defendants/third-par...
Views: 0
OPINION Ellen Campbell was tried and convicted of the charges contained in a three count bill of indictment. At the conclusion of the trial, she moved for a judgment of acquittal on all three charges and her motion was denied as to the charge of causing a false HUD-1 Statement to be filed with a government agency (18 U.S.C. § 1001) as alleged in Count III. The court reserved ruling on the...
Views: 2
ORDER Former state legislator Benjamin J. Gordon, Jr. and seven individuals residing in Gordon’s state house district seek a declaration that House Rule 3.12 adopted by the South Carolina House of Representatives, under which Gordon was suspended upon being indicted, and under which his seat was later declared vacant upon his conviction of federal criminal charges, was implemented without necessar...
Views: 0
ORDER In this matter, the petitioner is seeking attorney fees, costs, and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The petitioner, George H. Thomason (“Thomason”), represented the plaintiff, Linda Joyce Johnson (“Johnson"), in an action to obtain Social Security disability insurance benefits. Johnson filed applications for disability insurance benefits and su...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion to remand this case back to state court. This case and a related case, Sheppard v. Wire Rope Corp., 777 F.Supp. 1285 (E.D.Va.1991), were removed to federal court on or about September 20, 1991. For the reasons stated below, the plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Willard R. Saund...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion to remand this case back to state court. This case and a related case, Saunders v. Wire Rope Corp., 777 F.Supp. 1281 (E.D.Va.1991), were removed to federal court on or about September 20, 1991. For the reasons stated below, the plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Willard R. Saund...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motions to arrest judgment, notice of counsel issue, legal reason why sentence cannot be pronounced: regulation lacking legal force and effect, and declaration of legal cause to show why judgment should not be pronounced against him on *1291 verdict of conviction. For the reasons discussed below, the defendant’s motions wil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant, Robert C. Gates, Jr., was tried and convicted of two counts of making false statements to a firearms dealer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), and two counts of making false statements in a firearms record, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A). On July 24, 1991, post-conviction but before sentencing, the court revoked defendant’s in forma paupe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This civil rights action was filed February 25, 1986 on behalf of children in foster care under the supervision of the Louisiana Department of Health and Human Resources (“DHHR”). An amended complaint was filed on April 28,1986. Plaintiff children challenged the adequacy of Louisiana’s child welfare system under the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (“...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a motion for reconsideration of a previous judge’s ruling denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment and his alternative motion to dismiss under F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6). Upon reconsideration, and for the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to plaintiff’s state law and § 1983 false arrest claims, her § 1983 malicious pr...
Views: 0
Before the court are Defendant’s and Plaintiff’s Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. The matter is before the court on briefs, without oral argument. Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an arbitration award. The challenged arbitration proceeding was conducted by Arbitrator Leeper on February 8, 1991. That proceeding concerned an Employee Attendance Improvement Program (the Program) at Plaintiff’s r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”) applies for *1351 a preliminary injunction precluding plaintiff Frank C. Ruscitto (“Ruscitto”), a former account executive employed by Merrill Lynch, from soliciting and accepting business from certain clients whom he served while a Merrill Lynch account executive and using, disclosing,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Applicants, Ebel Gaitan-Campanioni, Carlos Alberto Prado Tórnente, and Victor Kessel Rodriguez (collectively, “applicants”) are Mariel Cubans who arrived on the Freedom Flotilla of Cubans to this country in early 1980. Currently, they are being detained in federal prison, by order of the Attorney General, pending their return to Cuba. Cuba, however, refuses to take them...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS Came on to be considered the “Joint Motion to Reconsider Memorandum Opinion And Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss” filed by the plaintiff, Mildred Antoine, and defendant, Zapata Haynie Corpo *1362 ration on October 4, 1991. All parties appeared through counsel on November 12, 1991, and the court heard oral arguments on this motion to reco...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before me is Wayne County’s Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why This Court Should Not Take Jurisdiction Over Certain Limited Issues Related to Time and Manner of Compliance with Respect to Certain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permits Involving Combined Sewer Over Flows. A hearing was held on this matter on November 1, 1991. After careful ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ SEPTEMBER 6,1991 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment September 6, 1991. Plaintiff filed a response September 18, 1991; and defendants filed a reply October 2, 1991. Federal jurisdiction is proper because of complete diversity of citizenship between p...
Views: 0
*1375 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S OCTOBER 3, 1991 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S SEPTEMBER 19, 1991 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Marshall H. Anderson brought this action against defendant Great West Life Assurance Company (“Great West”) to recover benefits for nursing services pursuant to a health benefit plan sponsored by the M...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS This matter is before this Court for consideration of the defendants' motion to dismiss (doc. 20). The plaintiff has filed a memorandum in opposition to that motion (doc. 23), and the defendants have replied (doc. 24). A hearing on this matter was convened June 25, 1991. The plaintiff, Margaret LeMasters, is a board certified physician in obstetrics...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT, OPINION AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter is before the Court pursuant to remand by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. 925 F.2d 954 Pursuant to such remand a hearing was held in open court on September 13, 1991. No limitation was placed on the nature of evidence and testimony to be presented. In accordance with Rule 52, Fed.R.Civ.P., the Court does here...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION sitting by designation. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought this action under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.) charging defen*1390dant Imperial Management Company, a/k/a Hardaway Management Company (collectively referred to as “Hardaway”), apartment complex managers, with sex discrimination. The EEOC alleges that the d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Pasquale Marcy and Fred Roti have filed several motions to dismiss, which we address in the following order: (1) the motion to dismiss Counts I and II; (2) the motion to dismiss racketeering acts 2(EHH) and 3, and Counts VIII, IX, X, XI, and XIII; and (3) the motion to dismiss Count III. For the reasons set forth below, all three motions are denied. I. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 20, 1991, we denied various motions to dismiss filed by defendants Pasquale Marcy and Fred Roti, including Mar*1399cy’s motion to dismiss racketeering act 3 and Count XIII. United States v. Marcy, 777 F.Supp. 1393 (N.D.Ill.1991). We rejected Marcy’s contention that as a private citizen he “must be legally incapable of committing extortion ‘under color of offici...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Pasquale “Pat” Marcy and Fred Roti have filed a motion to dismiss the indictment and to suppress all wiretap evidence against them. Marcy and Roti submit various theories as to the impropriety of certain wiretap authorizations secured by the government in connection with its investigation underlying this case. Specifically, they argue that the government ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This legal malpractice action turns on the intricacies of antitrust law. A.O. Smith Corporation (“Smith”) and 16752 Corporation, formerly known as Sterling Electric, Inc. (“Sterling”), lost an antitrust tying case in which members of the firm of Lewis, Overbeck & Furman (“Law Firm”) served as Sterling’s trial counsel. Law Firm failed to raise a certain legal a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), brings this action against defendant, State of Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES), for injunctive relief, pursuant to Rule 65(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, declaratory relief, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, and costs, claiming Section 900 D of the State of Illinois Insurance Act (Ill.Rev. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, Richard B. Hensley [“Hensley”], filed this action against defendants, Soo-Line Railroad Company (“Soo-Line”) and Mid-South Corporation (“Mid-South”) pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 [“FELA”], and the Federal Safety Appliance Act, 45 U.S.C. § 2 [“FSAA”], for damages arising out of injuries suffered on June 1,1988. Originall...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The City of Chicago has made several attempts to dispose of Dennis Brennan’s claim that the City improperly considered political affiliation in filing the position of hoisting engineer apprentice in violation of Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County, 435 F.2d 267 (7th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 909, 91 S.Ct. 1383, 28 L.Ed.2d 650 (1971). This Court de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is a dispute over the size of Nick Russo’s pension check. He is now paid, and will be as long as he lives, about half the amount he believes is his due. The facts,1 in brief, are these: *1430Nick Russo was a teamster, covered under Local 705 Pension Fund. The Fund is a multi-employer pension system organized under the terms of ERISA. Benefits are paid under a plan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER There are two distinct but related motions pending before this court. The first is a motion by defendant Albert J. Bruno to open and vacate the confession judgment entered against him, and to permit him to file an answer to the complaint. The second is original plaintiff Cosmopolitan National Bank of Chicago’s (“Cosmopolitan” or “bank”) motion to strike portio...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. For the following reasons, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. FACTS Plaintiff Cory D. Chan (“Chan”) has been a Chicago police officer since 1973. 1 In July 1984, he was assigned to the Intelligence Section of the Chicago Police Department, Organized Crime Division, Bu...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER This action was originally filed in Wisconsin circuit court. In the original complaint, plaintiff Todd Shanks asserted that defendant Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wisconsin (“Blue Cross”), administrator of a group health benefit plan in which he was a participant, had in bad faith refused to pay his health benefits claim. On January 9, 1991, the defendant removed the acti...
Views: 0
ORDER On November 14, 1991, the above-named parties filed a stipulation and proposed order in which they requested this court to enter an order: (1) Dismissing all claims raised by the pleadings in the above-captioned action including, but not limited to, amended claims, counterclaims and third-party claims, on the merits and with prejudice; (2) Denying attorneys fees and costs to any of the above...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND On August 19, 1991, plaintiff Bernard S. Kubale (“Kubale”) commenced this action in Milwaukee County Circuit Court on behalf of Foley & Lardner, a law partnership, against defendant DeSoto, Inc. (“DeSoto”), a Delaware corporation. In his complaint, Kubale seeks to recover fees and expenses for legal services that Foley & Lardner allegedly provided to DeSoto at DeSoto...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION A trial before the court was held on the above styled forfeiture action on August 8, 1991. Upon completion of the testimony the court took the case under advisement and directed the parties to submit briefs to the court. The court has received the briefs from the parties and a partial transcript submitted by the government. This matter is now ripe for consideration. The Claimant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In July, 1989, the James River Paper Company placed one of its black women employees, Pamela Mumphrey, on a year’s probation. During that year, Ms. Mum-phrey alleges, her supervisor continually harassed her, sexually and otherwise, and treated her differently from whites and men. In July, 1990, just before the year expired, the company fired her, citing as its reason he...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant’s and plaintiffs’ cross-motions for *1465 summary judgment. Based on the file, record and proceedings herein and for the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion will be granted and plaintiffs’ motion denied. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs James and Kathleen Erickson (“plaintiffs”), parents and natural guardians of Christoph...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on plaintiffs’ motion to transfer venue and defendants’ motion to dismiss. Based on the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted and plaintiffs’ motion to transfer venue is denied. BACKGROUND Defendant Upper Great Lakes Pilots, Inc. (“UGLP”) is a Minnesota corporation ...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on a motion to supplement the record made by the plaintiffs in Five Smiths and the defendants in McNeil (“the NFL parties”). Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court denies the NFL parties’ motions. BACKGROUND In an order in the McNeil case dated May 23, 1991, the court held that the National Football League Players ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this action removed from state court, the basic issue on plaintiff’s motion for remand is whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts plaintiff’s retaliatory discharge claim pursued under authority of a Minnesota statute which prohibits employers from retaliating against “whistle blowing” employees. The court finds ERISA preempts pl...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff originally filed a four-count complaint asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The § 1981 claims (Counts III and IV) were dismissed by this Court on July 22, 1991. The remaining Title VII claims, contained in Counts I and II, remain. Count I alleges discrimination in plaintiff's job conditions and her ev...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT JAMES R. WINING Findings of Fact 1) Omaha Indemnity Company (“Omaha Indemnity”) is an insurance company incorporated under the laws of Wisconsin with its principal place of business in Omaha, Nebraska. Omaha Indemnity is a wholly owned subsidiary of Mutual of Omaha, an insurance company incorporated under the laws of Nebras...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION These consolidated actions challenge and seek to enjoin the implementation of the testing components of the Veterans Administration Drug Free Workplace Plan adopted by the Veterans Administration, 53 Fed.Reg. 11970 (the “Plan”) in response to the provisions of Executive Order 12564.51 Fed.Reg. 32889. This court has previously granted preliminary injunctions res...
Views: 2
ORDER Plaintiff seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”), denying plaintiffs claim for disability insurance benefits. Presently before the court are plaintiff’s motion to remand and defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Having considered the parties’ moving papers and the arguments contained therein and for good cause appearing, it ...
Views: 0
OPINION On July 26, 1990, defendant Steven M. Marshank and two co-defendants were indicted and charged with federal statutory violations related to their alleged membership in an organization which imported large amounts of hashish and marijuana into the United States. 1 Marshank brings this motion to dismiss the indictment against him, alleging that the United States governmen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER This case presents the question whether a warrantless probable cause search of an impounded vehicle is constitutionally justified if not conducted approximately contemporaneously with the vehicle’s seizure, but is conducted a week later. The court holds that the search is valid. I. BACKGROUND The defendant, Gary Lee Spires, is charged with possession of methamphetamine, use of fir...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the court is the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. 1 Plaintiffs’ suit attacks the adoption of regulations implementing the Reclamation Reform Act (“RRA”) on the grounds that prior to adoption the Bureau of Reclamation was required to perform an Environmental Impact Study (“EIS”) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 ...
Views: 0
*1544 OPINION The matter before the court is the motion of plaintiffs to amend or alter judgment and for reconsideration based on newly found evidence (#233). BACKGROUND On January 16, 1986, a helicopter piloted by Russell Leroy Cruse crashed killing Cruse and giving rise to this litigation. Plaintiffs, Western Helicopter Services, Inc., Edwina Marie Cruse, and the Esta...
Views: 0
OPINION The matter before the court is the motion of plaintiff, Jan Wroncy, for a temporary restraining order. INTRODUCTION Wroncy brings this action against the defendant, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), alleging that it violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., and the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq., when it failed to ...
Views: 0
*1551 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Plaintiff, an assignee of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), filed this action against defendants on June 7, 1991. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The complaint sets forth five causes of action: 1. A suit for collection of a promissory note, No. 1026712, dated June 14, 1...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL This Cause was originally filed in the Florida Circuit Court in and for Hillsbor-ough County. Plaintiff Jodi Sue Henry’s (“HENRY”) amended complaint seeks a declaratory judgment of her rights under an insurance contract pursuant to Florida Statutes 86.011 (1989), and damages in contract and in tort against Defendants Ro-bey-Barber Insurance Services Corporation (“ROBEY-BARBER...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DEFENDANTS’ SEPARATE MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS OR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF STANDING I. STANDARD OF REVIEW This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment filed February 11, 1991, memoranda in support thereof filed February 11, 1991 and February 13, 1991, and ...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants, Anthony Velardocchia and Nancy Velardocchia, and Third Party Defendant, Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”). Both Defendants and Third Party Defendants filed supplemental memoranda in support of the pending motions. I. STANDARD OF REVIEW This circuit clearly holds that summary judgme...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and Plaintiffs’ response thereto. FACTUAL SUMMARY 1. As of March, 1987, Defendant was the general partner in a partnership which owned a mobile home park in Cocoa, Florida. On March 18, 1987, Defendant mailed out brochures describing the property and announcing that it ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1.The Plaintiffs, as evidenced by copyright registration certificates and assignments, are the owners of the copyrights of the following musical compositions: [[Image here]] 2. The Plaintiffs are also members of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (“ASCAP”), an unincorporated association of more than 48,000 writers an...
Views: 0

Non-Government Works Copyright © 2001-2026 Think Computer Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

About   Apps, Extensions & AI   System Status   Privacy   Security   Contact Us

ⓘ Information Facts

Sign In Sign Up
Issues Laws Cases News Firms Entities Pro
Sign In Sign Up