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 809

Opinions in f-supp Volume 809

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER I. Background This diversity action for personal injuries was originally filed in New York State Supreme Court and removed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. The plaintiffs Yolanda and Alfred Connaughton were citizens of New York at the time the action was filed. The defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”), which is a federal corp...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for recusal. For the reasons set forth below, the court denies the motion. I. BACKGROUND On October 2,1992, counsel for the plaintiff, Steven M. Kramer, wrote a letter to the court stating that I should recuse myself on two grounds: 1) that Brendan Byrne, counsel for the defendants, appointed me to the. New Jersey S...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 5 (1992) UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO-CLC, Plaintiff, v. NORTH STAR STEEL COMPANY, INC., Defendant. No. 4:CV-91-1179. United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania. December 11, 1992. *6 Mark S. Refowich, Easton, PA, David Goldman, United Steelworkers of America, Pittsburgh, PA, for plaintiff. Vincent Candiello, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, William J. Flannery, Morgan, Le...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiff Ashok Tyagi alleges in this civil rights action that federal agents violated his constitutional rights by seizing records, cash, and diesel fuel oil from two service stations operated by plaintiff in Pennsylvania. One of plaintiffs stations is located in Mill Hall, Clinton County, Pennsylvania. The other is located in Liverpool, Juniata County, Pennsylvania. Pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This is a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1 Plaintiff Walter T. Peters, Jr. (“Peters”) alleges that the defendant Delaware' River Port Authority of Pennsylvania and New Jersey (“DRPA”) has infringed his constitutional rights of freedom of belief and association, by failing to reappoint him as its Secretary solely because he is a member of the New Jersey Republic...
Views: 0
OPINION James Leader has moved, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(d)(1) and Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e), that two rifles seized from his house and forming the basis of the unsuccessful criminal prosecution of him be returned to the alleged owner, Howard Dellmyer.1 For the following reasons, Leader’s motion will be denied. Leader was indicted in April 1991 for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon under 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is a case arising from a high-profile advertising campaign for Diet Pepsi, sprung on the American populace during the 1991 Superbowl after its curiosity had been worked up into an anticipatory frenzy by pre-Superbowl “teaser” advertisements. During the Superbowl, and at what must have been phenomenal per-spot fees, Pepsi-Co had the legendary Ray Charles premiere it...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Application for Stay of the Comptroller of the Currency’s [“OCC”] Suspension Order, and supporting brief, filed November 30, 1992; and Defendant’s Opposition to Plaintiff’s Application for Stay, filed December 4, 1992. There shall be no reply. On December 4, 1992, the Court heard Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order in t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiff has filed a response to defendant’s motion to which defendant has replied. 1 For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is GRANTED. I. BACKGROUND On February 20, 1990, plaintiff, a self-described chronic asthmatic, went to Valerie Latzman’s ho...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss this case pursuant to the abstention doctrine enunciated by the United States Supreme Court in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971). Plaintiff has responded to defendants’ motion, and the matter is now ripe for review.1 For the reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on the Defendant Great American Life Insurance Corporation’s (“Great American”) motion and supplemental motion for summary judgment (docs. 28 and 42), the Plaintiff’s response (doc. 46), Defendant American Packaging Corporation’s (“American Packaging”) motion for summary judgment (doc. 48), Great American’s repl...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 17), the Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance (doc. 31), the Defendants’ Motion in Opposition to the Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance (doc. 32), the Plaintiff’s Reply to the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (doc...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 3), the Defendant’s Brief in Support of its Motion to Dismiss (doc. 4), the Plaintiff’s Reply Memorandum in Opposition to the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 7), and the Defendant’s Memorandum in Response to the Plaintiff’s Memorandum (doc. 8). BACKGROUND T...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO BAR TESTIMONY AT THIS TIME AND ADOPTING A FINAL PRE-TRIAL ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion to Bar Testimony and Strike Evidence (doc. 49), the Defendant’s Response (doc. 51), the Plaintiff’s Reply (doc. 55), the Defendant’s Motion for Leave to file a Response to the Plaintiff’s Reply (doc. 56), and the Plaintiff’s Opposition to this Motion (d...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT NORTHWESTERN’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING JAMES H. FAIRCLOTH’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on Defendant James H. Faircloth’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 21), Defendant Northwestern National Life Insurance *47Company’s (“Northwestern”) Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 35), and the Defendant James H. Faircloth’s Response (d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER August Smith brought this Section 1983 action against the City of Joliet for damages arising from an incident on February 21, 1986. On that day, according to Smith, two Joliet police officers detained him with unnecessary and excessive force, causing mental and physical injury. Smith has forgone suit against the officers themselves, instead suing the City for “engagpng...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is defendant JBS Warehousing, Inc.’s (“JBS”) motion to stay proceedings. The motion is granted for the following reasons. FACTS Plaintiff Lifschultz Fast Freight (“Lifschultz”) is a carrier seeking to collect an unpaid freight bill for freight transported pursuant to the authority issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”) and subject to tariff rates and rul...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER By order dated July 24, 1992, at the request of the parties, Judge Myron L. Gordon referred this case to this court for binding arbitration. The case has been settled except for the entry of a consent decree. The parties disagree as to which one of two consent decrees should be entered, and it is the role of this court to determine which consent decree shall be selected. The par...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 56 (1992) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Kevin COSTELLO and James Thompson, Defendants. No. 92-C-576. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. December 15, 1992. John A. Marrella, Trial Atty., Tax Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for plaintiff. Jacobson, Harwood, Brill & Bennett by Robert S. Brill, Minneapolis, MN, for Costello. Whyte & Hirschboeck b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which plaintiff alleges that his constitutional right of access to the courts has been abridged by defendants. This cause was tried to the court on September 2, 1992 and, after the filing of post-trial briefs and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, is now ripe for determination. Plaintiff, Lonnie L. Hatch, is...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 61 (1992) James L. AFANADOR, Plaintiff, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant. No. C 90-20346 JW. United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division. July 13, 1992. *62 Danette Sakoda, Legal Aid Soc. of Santa Clara County, San Jose, CA, for plaintiff. Gail Killefer, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, CA, for defendant. CORRECTED ORDE...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING INDICTMENT COUNTS I AND III On January 4, 1993, the court held a hearing on defendant Gregory Cook’s motion to dismiss counts I and III of the indictment because these counts do not allege all elements of the offense. The Unit*67ed States admits that the indictment does not allege the statutory sections that Cook refers to, but argues that the omitted allegations are only sentenci...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending before this Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (# 21), which was filed on March 23, 1992. On April 30, 1992, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition (# 26), and on June 1, 1992, Defendant filed a Reply (# 28). I. FACTS In the late 1970’s, Plaintiff Louis Hutchison (“Hutchison”) allegedly developed the idea for “skinless fried chicken” to be sold in fast food restaurants. After i...
Views: 3
ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 109) and Plaintiff’s Statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (# 110), filed on June 25, 1992. On July 17, 1992, Oppositions were filed on behalf of Defendants Clark County, Clark County Sanitation District, and the Las Vegas Valley Water District (# 118); the City of Las Vegas (# 119); and the Cit...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ REQUESTS FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THEIR COMPLAINT AND FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY THIS MATTER comes before the court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Having reviewed all papers filed in support and in opposition, and being fully advised, the court finds and rules as follows: I. BACKGROUND The following facts are alle...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Pao Yuen and Sue E. Shih commenced this action against the defendants Commercial Association for Security and Health (CASH) and Merrill Bostrom Associates (MBA) asserting various state law claims (first and second claims) and claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. (third claim).1 Defendant MBA has filed a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Under consideration by the court is plaintiffs Motion to Order Release of Bond (Doc. 85). The motion seeks an order of this court directing the Clerk of the District Court of Brown County, Kansas, to release to the plaintiff, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for the Bank of Horton, an injunction bond in the amount of $10,000.00 presently held by the clerk. Th...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. The Court, having considered the motions and pleadings, having heard the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, now FINDS and ORDERS as follows: Background Plaintiff Kevin Hein was emp...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Court, having considered the materials in support of and in opposition to the motion, having weighed the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, FINDS and ORDERS as follows: Background Jeraldine Lord (“Lord”) is an employee at Ker...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms as a Party, *93 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, and Defendants’ Motion to Substitute the United States for Special Agent Rogers. I. STATEMENT OF FACTS This case stems from Plaintiff’s conversations with Special Agent Rogers of the Bureau of ...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is presently before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [36]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out *97below, concludes that this action should be dismissed. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs, Dennis R. Davis and Sam P. Hensley, Sr., and Defendant, Great Western Bank, entered into a security agreement in 19...
Views: 0
OPINION Defendant-intervenors SKF USA Inc., SKF France S.A., SKF GmbH, SKF Industrie, S.p.A., SKF (U.K.) Limited and SKF Sverige, AB (“SKF”) move pursuant to Rules 65 and 7 of the Rules of this Court to modify the preliminary injunction issued by this Court on July 14, 1992. SKF requests this Court to modify the preliminary injunction to order the U.S. Customs Service (“Customs”) to relea...
Views: 12
Opinion Plaintiff, Federal-Mogul Corporation (“Federal-Mogul”), moves pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Rules of this Court to consolidate Court Nos. 92-06-00422, 92-07-00506, 92-07-00507, 92-07-00508, 92-07-00509, 92-07-00518 and 92-07-00519 under the name Federal-Mogul Corp. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 92-06-00422. Federal-Mogul argues that consolidation of these cases is warranted because t...
Views: 0
Opinion Defendant, the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“ITA”), requests this Court to grant leave for the ITA to correct alleged ministerial errors contained in An-tifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts ThereofFrom France; et al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews {“Final Results”), 57 Fed. Reg. 28,3...
Views: 1
OPINION Defendant, the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“ITA”), requests this Court to grant leave for the ITA to correct alleged ministerial errors contained in Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France; et al.; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews (“Final Results"), 57 Fed.Reg. 28,360 (1992). BACKGROUN...
Views: 0
OPINION Pursuant to Rule 56.1 of the Rules of this Court, plaintiffs, NSK Ltd. and NSK Corporation (collectively “NSK”), move for an order granting judgment upon the agency record. NSK Ltd. is a manufacturer and exporter of tapered roller bearings (“TRBs”) from Japan, and NSK Corporation is the importer of such merchandise. This motion challenges the final administrative determination of ...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff, The Timken Company (“Timken”), moves pursuant to Rule 56.1 of the Rules of this Court for judgment on the agency record. This motion challenges the final determination of the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administra *122 tion (“Commerce” or “ITA”), in Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter and Certain Components ...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff, Consolidated International Automotive, Inc. (“Consolidated”), challenges the determination of the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce” or “ITA”) in Chrome-Plated Lug Nuts from Taiwan, 56 Fed.Reg. 36,130 (Dep’t Comm. 1991) (final determ. of sales at less than fair value) (“Final Determination”). The investigation covered chro...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), 1 the government’s opposition, and the numerous replies and counter-replies which have been filed pursuant thereto. On April 24, 1991, this Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for a declaration that they are citizens of the Unite...
Views: 2
809 F. Supp. 138 (1992) John BOEHNER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Donnald K. ANDERSON, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 92-2427. United States District Court, District of Columbia. December 16, 1992. *139 Jerry Boykin, Redmon, Boykin & Baswell, Alexandria, VA, John C. Armor, Washington, DC, for plaintiffs. Michael Davidson, Senate Legal Counsel, Steven R. Ross, Gen. Counsel to the Clerk, House of R...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs are the majority of the Board of Governors of the Postal Service Board. *145 The Postal Service is presently a party to litigation pending in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Mail Order Association v. United States Postal Service, Nos. 91-1058, 91-1059, 91-1063, 91-1065, 91-1073, 91-1074, 91-1075, 91-1079, and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) has denied plaintiff’s Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request for the names and addresses of individuals who have complained *149 to that agency about auto safety problems they have experienced. NHTSA asserts exemption 6 of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6), to protect complainants’ privacy. Plaintiff, Center for Auto Safet...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs in this action are the Government of Guam and four Guam corporations that ship goods between Guam and the rest of the United States. Defendants are American President Lines, Ltd. (APL), and Sea-Land Service, Inc. (Sea-Land), the two United States ocean carriers that provide service to and from Guam. Plaintiffs challenge the defendants’ shipping rates under the Shippi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Hill & Barlow, Michael D. Weisman, and Robert A. Bertsche (collectively, “Hill & Barlow”) counsel for plaintiff Scott P. Hammond (“Hammond”), have moved for leave to withdraw, alleging that Hammond failed to cooperate and disregarded fee obligations to the firm. Hammond opposes the motion. * For the reasons set forth below, I conclude that Hill & Barlow m...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM 1 In 1974 Congress enacted the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 88 Stat. 829, as amended, 29 *164 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., implementing a national policy to safeguard employees’ retirement benefits. In 1989, the Massachusetts legislature enacted Mass.Gen.L. ch. 149, § 183, Mass.Stat.1989, ch. 242 § 10, the so-called “tin parachute” law, expressing a commonwealth...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. Background. This case arises from an underground gasoline storage tank leak that occurred sometime in 1987. Following a denial of insurance coverage, Suburban Construction Co., Inc. (“Suburban”) sought a judicial declaration of coverage for claims related to the leak under policies it purchased from Sentry Insuran...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER The plaintiff, Nu-Life Construction Corp. (“Nu-Life”), in its Fourth Amended Complaint, alleged that it sustained damages resulting from the violation of its civil rights under “42 U.S.C. § 1983, et seq” (Fourth Amended Complaint, at ¶ 1). The defendant, Board of Education of the City of New York, which encompasses the Division of School Buildings of the Boar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER In a case of apparent first impression, the Court must determine the applicable statute of limitations for the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988 (“WARN”). The underlying action was commenced pursuant to WARN and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) seeking damages as a result of the allegedly improper closing of a plac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In July of 1991, defendant Henry Orjuela was convicted of one count of conspiring to import five kilograms or more of cocaine. Mr. Orjuela now argues that the government’s misconduct in connection with the grand jury proceeding by which he was indicted entitles him to an order dismissing that indictment. In addition, he moves this court, first, to grant him a new tria...
Views: 0
*203 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In a three-count superseding indictment filed April 23, 1992, the Government charged Stephen Hochman with various offenses arising from his business of supplying electronic components. Specifically, that indictment charges Hochman with violating and conspiring with others to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2512(l)(b) (“surreptitious interception of ... electronic co...
Views: 0
*211 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above-captioned actions, the pro se plaintiff, Lee Sewell, alleges that the defendants discriminated against him in the workplace. Plaintiff brought the first action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the second action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Plaintiff now moves for summary judgment in both act...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND This diversity action arises from a dispute concerning the extent of plaintiff’s easement over land which is located in Schuyler County and owned by one of the defendants, Lynn Bishop (“Bishop”). Columbia Gas is a Delaware corporation with *221 its principal place of business in West Virginia. The defendants are citizens of New York State. The plaintiff utili...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Carol E. Heckman, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for report and recommendation on defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. Magistrate Judge Heckman filed a Report and Recommendation on August 11, 1992 denying defendant’s motion and reversing the Secretary’s determination that plaintiff is not entitled to a waiver of recovery of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Maria Fernandez (“Plaintiff” or “Fernandez”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to challenge the final determination of the defendant, Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Defendant” or the “Secretary”), that Plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work, and thus is not disabled, ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant, The Hearst Corporation, moves to disqualify its former attorney, Jeffrey M. Bernbach, from representing three former employees of Hearst in actions accusing Hearst of various forms of illegal employment discrimination, retaliation and illegal discharge. The court finds that Mr. Bernbach’s representation of these three former employees against Hearst violates D...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM DECISION I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This proposed class action arises out of allegedly deplorable conditions which exist at Weisman’s Rockland Manor (the Manor) in New York City, New York, “an adult care facility established and operated for the purpose of providing long-term residential care, room, housekeeping, personal care and supervision to five or more adults unrelated to...
Views: 3
OPINION FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Introduction This case originated as a breach of contract suit brought by plaintiff Richardson Greenshields Securities, Inc., a commodities brokerage firm, against four of its account holders who had lost large sums of money trading commodities from January 1983 to August 1984, in the process amassing deficit balances of approximately $167,000. After...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law This is a suit for trademark infringement and false designation of origin in violation of Sections 32(1) and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1) & 1125(a), as well as unfair competition and unjust enrichment under New York state common law, and trademark dilution under New York General Business law § 368-d. The d...
Views: 5
OPINION Defendants City of New York (the “City”), Frank Biehler (“Inspector Biehler”), Karen Pakstis (“Officer Pakstis”), Mitchell Kolpan (“Detective Kolpan”), Robert Viteretti (“ADA Viteretti”), Robert Morgenthau (the “District Attorney”), and Michael Walsh (“Lieutenant Walsh”) (collectively the “Defendants”) have all moved for an order dismissing Plaintiff East Coast Novelty Company’s (...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner, Regina M. Lyons Testamentary Trust (the “Trust”), moves to vacate an arbitration award issued on August 2, 1991 against Respondents, Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. (“Shearson”) and Edward Boznanski, by an arbitration panel assigned by the National Association of Securities Dealers (the “Panel”). For the reasons that follow, the Trust’s motion to vaca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Gund, Inc. (“Gund”) moves, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order enjoining defendant Applause, Inc. (“Applause”) and its agents from directly or indirectly manufacturing, vending, distributing, selling, promoting or advertising a stuffed plush toy dog known as “Skippy,” alleging that Skippy infringes on Gund’s copy...
Views: 0
OPINION Currently before the Court is the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. According to the complaint, the plaintiff, David G. Finch (“Finch”), was discriminated against by defendant, Hercules Incorporated (“Hercules”), because of his age. Docket Item (“D.I.”) 1. Within his complaint, Finch has alleged two counts. His first count arises under the Age Discrimination in Emp...
Views: 1
OPINION This action was first filed on January 9, 1991 in the Law Division of the New Jersey Superior Court, Middlesex County. The action was filed by plaintiff Joseph Harrah, a professional photographer d/b/a as “Photography by Joseph” in South Plainfield, New Jersey, against Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (“3M”), a corporation organized under the laws of Minnesota. The origi...
Views: 1
OPINION Before the court is defendant’s motion for a downward departure from the prescribed sentencing range. Her motion is granted for the reasons hereinafter set forth. Introduction In this matter, the court must determine the appropriate sentence to impose upon a defendant whose criminal activity was driven by fear. A victim of incest from childhood lasting even into her early twenties...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On March 11, 1991, Plaintiffs filed the above-captioned civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343(3) and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, 1986 and 1988, alleging that the Defendants entered into an “unlawful conspiracy ... with the intention of creating the false and damaging appearance that Plaintiff Leininger had committed criminal acts.” (Doc. No. 1, p. 8). A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Gould, Inc., initiated this diversity based action on April 29, 1991, against several Defendant insurance companies seeking coverage and indemnification for the bodily injury claims of Dominick Zaccagnino. (not a party to the present suit). Currently the following motions are pending before the Court: (1) Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment; (2) ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Plaintiff began her employment at Defendant's plant in Archbald, Pennsylvania on April 13, 1956 and continued in that employment until her termination on November 11, 1986. On August 12, 1988, the Plaintiff filed a three-count complaint against the Defendant, alleging causes of action pursuant to (1) the Age Discrimination and Employment Act; (2) Title VII of the Civi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (hereinafter USF & G) brings this diversity based declaratory judgment action against its insureds, Barron Industries, Inc., New York Blower Company, and Mechanovent Corporation (hereinafter collectively referred to as Barron) to determine whether an insurance policy issued by USF & G to Barron affords coverage for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs seek a declaration that Pennsylvania insurance laws regulating its benefits plan are preempted by ERISA, and further seek to enjoin the Commissioner from interfering with their benefits plan. Defendants assert that they are immun...
Views: 0
OPINION On March 26, 1992, Magistrate Judge Hall issued a Report and Recommendation recommending denial of motions for.summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds filed by defendants W. Wilson Goode, Leo Brooks, Gregore Sambor, William Richmond, Frank Powell, William Klein, Morris Demsko, and Richard Reed. 1 The Report and Recommendation concluded that a determination of the...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM In Mr. Murray’s 87th suit before me claiming violations of his civil rights he complains: “Paul Woodburn deliberately pushed my mental button when he knew I was under high stress to trigger me to lightly punch him in the eye. [Tjhen he used the incident to commit me.” The incident apparently took place at Bucks County Prison. Mr. Murray is now at Norristown State Hospital. Mr. Mu...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., filed July 13, 1992. Plaintiff has responded in opposition thereto, and defendant has filed a reply. The matter is ripe for disposition. I. NATURE OF THE CASE Plaintiff, West Raleigh Group (“WRG”) filed this diversity action seeking a declaration that certain prepaymen...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The Republican Party of North Carolina, thirty registered Republicans, nine registered Democrats, and three citizens not affiliated with either party (hereinafter, collectively, “the plaintiffs”) brought this action to challenge the State of North Carolina’s federal congressional redistricting plan. The defendants are various state officials and agencies who participa...
Views: 0
This action is before the court upon motion of the defendant, Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company (Northwestern), for a new trial. Also before the court is the issue, raised by the court sua sponte, of whether the court should instead order a new trial nisi remittitur. For the reasons set forth below, the motion for a new trial outright is denied. However, the court...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 414 (1992) Howard E. AWALT, Plaintiff, v. Patrick WHALEN, Warden, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 91-0474-AM. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. September 28, 1992. *415 Howard E. Awalt, pro se. Richard Cullen, U.S. Atty., Richard Parker, Asst. U.S. Atty., E.D.Va., Alexandria, VA, for defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION HILTON, District Judge. Plaintiff, Ho...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 417 (1992) Albert Russell CLAY, Plaintiff, v. George YATES, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 91-741-N. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. December 15, 1992. *418 Albert Russell Clay, pro se. *419 George Holton Yates, pro se. Conrad Moss Shumadine, John Steven Wilson, Willcox & Savage, Norfolk, VA, for Rosemary Mann. Paul Henderson Ray, pro se. Lawrence ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Edelman (“Edelman”) and Gary Pratt (“Pratt”) appeal the dismissal without prejudice, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 48(a), of criminal complaints against them. Edelman and Pratt argue that the complaints against them should have been dismissed with prejudice because the United States failed to articulate its reasons for seeking dismissal contemporaneously with its moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This § 1983 action presents the threshold question whether police officers from one jurisdiction act “under color of” state law when they use the badges and instruments of their offices to arrest a citizen in another jurisdiction. Two of the defendants, both District of Columbia police officers, have moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that § 1983 does not apply to their ...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 437 (1992) Alfred DEMPSEY v. ARCO OIL & GAS CO., et al. Civ. A. No. 90-3279. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. April 8, 1992. *438 Marshall J. Hough, Hough and Associates, Metairie, LA, for plaintiff. Michael M. Christovich, Charles M. Lanier, Jr., Christovich & Kearney, New Orleans, LA, for defendants. ORDER AND REASONS MENTZ, District Judge. Before the Court is...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of averted liability was decided this date on memoranda. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion is GRANTED, but the Court will hear evidence on the plaintiffs’ skill and efforts in protecting the environment. I. BACKGROUND On November 3, 1990, the M/V LISA C, owned by Childress Co., Inc., was engaged *...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS First National Bank of Louisville (FNBL) commenced a bad faith action against the Aetna Casualty & Surety Company (Aetna) and Federal Insurance Company (Federal) for their refusal to pay FNBL’s claim under the fidelity bond on which they were co-sureties. Almost five years later, 1 FNBL amended its complaint to add Chubb Corporation and Chubb & Son, Inc. as de...
Views: 0
RULING Plaintiff, Jewell Thomas, currently an inmate at Winn Correctional Center, has filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his civil rights have been violated because he was denied adequate medical attention while he was being held at the Lincoln Parish Detention Center. The complaint names Charles James, Warden of the Lincoln Parish Detention Center, Renwick Payne, a captain emp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant FirstMiss Fertilizer, Inc. (FirstMiss) to dismiss or, in the alternative, for partial summary judgment. Plaintiff Superfos Investments Limited t/a Superfos Trading, Inc. (Superfos) has responded to the motion and the court, having considered the memoranda of authorities, together with attachments submit...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court on Motion of Defendant International Paper Company for Summary Judgment. Having considered the Motion together with supporting and opposing memoranda, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion is not well taken and should be denied. BACKGROUND Defendant entered into an agreement with Breck Construction Company *459 (“Breck”) wh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on Motion of Third-Party Defendant James S. Crump, Jr., to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Having considered the Motion together with sup *463 porting and opposing memoranda and affidavits, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion is well...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Mark Woody (“Woody”) and Roger Crues (“Crues”) sue defendant City of Dallas (“City”), contending the City is liable for terminating them from employment. The court tried the case in a bench trial on November 16 and 17, 1992. For the reasons that follow, 1 the court finds in favor of the City. I The City hired plaintiffs Woody and Crues in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Now before the Court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss to which the plaintiff has responded. After having reviewed the motion, the response and the applicable law, the Court determines that this motion should be granted. BACKGROUND On or about March 20, 1990, the plaintiff in this action, Mr. Robert Wightman (“Wightman”), filed an action in the United States ...
Views: 0
Defendant’s motion for modification of sentence presents a question of apparent first impression. The court must decide whether, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), it may modify a defendant’s sentence on the basis of the November 1, 1992 amendment to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, which permits a three-level decrease for acceptance of responsibility. The court holds it may not. I On June 19, 1992 the cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND AND OVERRULING DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiffs, all residents and citizens of Venezuela, filed this action in the 136th Judicial District Court of Jefferson County, Texas, on April 15, 1992, alleging jurisdiction based upon the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 71....
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BEFORE THIS COURT is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum of Law in Support, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Memorandum in Support, pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in th...
Views: 0
OPINION ON DISMISSAL 1. Introduction. The City of Houston adopted an ordinance that prohibits smoking in public buildings, including the Harris County jail. *506 Six people who are awaiting trial in the jail have urged that the smoking ban violates their rights. It does not. 2. The Smokers’ Contentions. The smokers contend that: A. They are...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 510 (1992) Celia MUTRUX, Individually, And As Representative of The Estate of William Arnold Mutrux, Deceased, And Marciana Trejo, As Next of Friend For Monica Mitchell Mutrux, A Minor, Plaintiff, v. CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS, Defendant. Civ. A. No. B-90-190. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Brownsville Division. December 29, 1992. *511 Barry Robert Benton, Brownsville, TX, for p...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on motion of Defendants for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pro se Plaintiff, Kenneth Arthur Smith, brought a section 1983 action against Defendants, Fred Shirley, Gary Lowry, and Mike Harper, who are jailers at the Barren County Correctional Facility claiming that during his incarceration Defendants i...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 517 (1992) Nancy ROY, Plaintiff, v. RUSSELL COUNTY AMBULANCE SERVICE, Board Steve Kerr, Chair Winston Roy, Sherry Daniels, and Bobby Bernard, Defendants. No. C91-0080-BG(H). United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Bowling Green Division. December 30, 1992. *518 Edward E. Dove, Lexington, KY, for plaintiff. Robert L. Bertram, Bertram & Wilson, Jamestown, KY, O. Lee Cave, III, ...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 523 (1992) UNITED STATES FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 692, Michigan Electrical Employees Pension Fund, National Electrical Benefit Fund, Michigan Electrical Employees Health Plan and Bay City Joint Electrical Apprenticeship and Training Committee, Plaintiffs, v. HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Nos. 91-CV-10299-BC, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In 1989, R.C. Hendrick & Son, Inc., as prime contractor, entered into a contract for improvements of the Wurtsmith Air Base Rehabilitation Gym and Annex, Buildings 300 and 306. The prime contractor retained Fortier Electric as subcontractor to perform subcontract electrical work on the project. Fortier engaged a number of electricians as employees to perform the subcontract wor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. This is a personal injury action brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671 et seq. Plaintiff, Lawrence Weaver (Weaver), was severely injured in a diving accident while swimming in the Pine River where it is crossed by Low Bridge Road in the Manistee National Forest in Manistee County, Michigan. 1 Weaver claims that the Unite...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter is before the Court following a trial to the Court on March 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9, 1992. In rendering our decision of this matter, we have considered the testimony of the witnesses, the documents admitted into evidence, the Plaintiff’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (doc. 68), and the Defendants’ proposed findings of f...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 546 (1992) Dale WINNINGHAM, Plaintiff, v. NORTH AMERICAN RESOURCES CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. No. C-1-91-447. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio W.D. April 9, 1992. *547 *548 James Burdette Helmer, Jr., Helmer, Lugbill & Whitman Co., Cincinnati, OH, Meredith Lynn Lawrence, Lawrence & Schletker, Covington, KY, for plaintiff. Frederick Mason Morgan, Jr., Montgomery, R...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RECONSIDER This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration *556(doc. 33), the Plaintiffs’ Response (doc. 34), and the Defendants’ Reply (doc. 35). BACKGROUND General Motors Corporation (“GM”) hired George Smith in October 1965. Mr. Smith is illiterate. Mr. Smith was a United Auto Workers (“UAW”) member, and therefore the UAW-GM collective barg...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon defendant Swallen’s and defendant West-felt’s motion for summary judgment (docs. 14 and 19), plaintiff’s response (doc. 15 and 20) and the defendants’ replies (doc. 17 and 21) . In addition, Oral Argument on the motions was heard on December 10, 1992. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Th...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 21), the Defendants’ Amended Page 8 (doc. 24), the Plaintiffs’ Response (doc. 25), the Defendants’ Reply (doc. 31), the Defendants’ Motion to Strike (doc. 32), the Plaintiffs’ Response to the Defendants’ Reply (doc. 35),1 the Plaintiffs’ R...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 567 (1992) UNITED STATES of America v. Michael CORRIGAN. No. 3:90-00204. United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division. December 7, 1992. Robert J. Washko, Asst. U.S. Atty., Nashville, TN, for plaintiff. Thomas W. Watson, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Nashville, TN, for defendant. OPINION AND ORDER JOHN T. NIXON, Chief Judge. At a hearing on November 30, 1992, the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this diversity case, plaintiffs USG Corporation and USG Interiors, Inc. (USG) seek indemnification from defendants (Brown), pursuant to a merger agreement, for costs incurred as a result of alleged violations of environmental laws and regulations prior to the merger date. Before us now is USG’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Article 4(d) of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Arnie F. Bryant (“Bryant”) filed suit against Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation (“METRA”) bringing claims for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991; the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and the First and Fourteenth Amendments t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Unlike the other currently pending alder-manic remap cases (Barnett v. Daley and Smith v. Daley), the case at bar was brought by a group of Hispanic, registered voters in the City of Chicago. Although Bonilla was reassigned to this court on relatedness grounds, it has never been formally consolidated with either Barnett or ...
Views: 2
ORDER INTRODUCTION On May 28, 1992, plaintiffs William and Linda Johnson filed a two-count complaint in the Circuit Court of the 19th Judicial Circuit, McHenry County, Illinois, against defendant Safeco Insurance Company of America. The cause was subsequently removed to this court, defendant having invoked diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. In Count I, plaintiffs se...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On November 27, 1992 the jury in this personal injury action stemming from a taxicab-automobile collision returned a verdict against plaintiff John Bachenski (“Bachenski”) and in favor of the then sole remaining defendant, Mark Malnati (“Malnati”). Bachenski’s counsel has filed a timely post-trial motion for judgment n.o.v. (see Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 50(b)) or alternat...
Views: 0
OPINION The question: “Is fetal calf blood a constructive dividend?”. The vehicle: Cross motions for summary judgment. I. BACKGROUND This action arises out of a dispute between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant regarding the proper classification of income derived from the sale of fetal calf blood for income tax purposes. The McCabe Packing Company is a slaughterhouse locate...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On May 28, 1992, pro se petitioner, Lonnie Wickliffe, also known as Mutee El-Amin, an inmate at the Indiana State Prison, filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The return filed by the respondents on August 27, 1992, demonstrates the necessary compliance with Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir.1982). Th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This cause is before the court on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the court finds that the defendant are entitled to summary judgment on all remaining claims. I. Mr. Sivard originally brought a diversity suit, under state law only, against Pulaski County, Indiana, the Pulaski County Sheriff’s Department, Pulaski Coun...
Views: 2
809 F.Supp. 643 (1992) ESTATE OF Albert A. WOLL, by David WOLL Co-Trustee of the Third Restatement of Inter Vivos Revocable Trust for the Benefit of Albert A. Woll, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. No. EV 91-190-C. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Evansville Division. July 2, 1992. Alan N. Shovers, Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn, Evansville, IN, for Albert A. Woll Estate. S...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 646 (1992) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. WEDZEB ENTERPRISES, INC.; William E. Daniels; Westinghouse Electric Corporation; General Electric Company; Doerr Electric Corporation; Sprague Electric Company; Crouse-Hinds Company; and Federal Signal Corporation, Defendants. No. IP 90-1877C. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. December 9, 1992. *647 *6...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 659 (1992) Bernice INMAN, Plaintiff, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant. No. NA-91-87-C. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, New Albany Division. December 17, 1992. *660 Jamie Andree, Bloomington, IN, Kenneth J. Falk, Indianapolis, IN, Gill Deford, Kim Savage, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff. Jeffrey L. Hunter, Asst. U.S. Atty., India...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On May 7, 1992, the petitioner, Charles E. Ferguson, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2242 and 2254. By decision and order dated June 10, 1992, the court dismissed the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Mr. Ferguson subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration; by decision and order dated June 23, 1992, the court denied t...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Charles Ferguson, currently incarcerated at the Milwaukee County House of Corrections, seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 from the above named defendants. Mr. Ferguson’s civil rights complaint is accompanied by a petition to proceed in forma pauperis. This petition will be denied. In order to authorize a litigant to proceed in forma pauperis, the court must make two...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Presently before the court in the above-captioned action are two motions. The first motion, filed by the plaintiff, Nalco *674 Chemical Company [Nalco], is for partial summary judgment. It will be granted in part and denied in part. The second motion, filed by the defendants, is for leave to file a surreply to the reply brief filed by Nalco in support of it...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is a civil action for declaratory relief. Maryland Casualty Company seeks a declaration that it has no obligation to defend or indemnify Wausau Chemical Corporation or its president, James E. Cherwinka, in connection with claims asserted against Wausau Chemical by the United States and State of Wisconsin that were resolved in a consent decree. Wausau Chemical filed ...
Views: 1
*701 ORDER Plaintiff Richard Nielsen brought this action for damages stemming from Defendant Crane Co.’s (“Crane”) alleged wrongful termination of Plaintiff. Defendant has moved for summary judgment, and Plaintiff has resisted the motion. Oral argument was heard by the court October 15, 1992. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Richard Nielsen worked as a purchasing manager for Def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Court on defendant/counterclaim plaintiff United States of America’s (“United States”) motion for partial summary judgment (1) upholding the administrative actions of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”); (2) finding plaintiff/counterclaim defendant Gary Slagle- (“Slagle”) liable on the United State...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants the plaintiffs’ motion. BACKGROUND The parties do not dispute the facts underlying this case. Since 1937, the price of raw milk has been extensively regulated by the federal government pursuant to the Agricul...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 725 (1992) BARNES HOSPITAL and Washington University School of Medicine, Plaintiffs, v. SANUS PASSPORT/PREFERRED SERVICES, INC., General American Life Insurance Co., Bryan S. Buettner, and Lewis E. Buettner, Defendants. No. 4:92CV00519 ELF. United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. September 8, 1992. *726 S. Sheldon Weinhaus, Partner, Weinhaus and Dobson, St. Louis, MO, for pl...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 729 (1992) CHEMTECH INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. GOLDMAN FINANCIAL GROUP, INCORPORATED, et al., Defendants. No. 4:92CV00035 GFG. United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. December 22, 1992. *730 Fred A. Ricks, Jr., Associate, Robert W. Stewart, Partner, McMahon and Berger, Albert E. Schoenbeck, Partner, Daniel M. Zureich, Schoenbeck and Schoenbeck, St. Louis, MO, f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court upon claimants’ Motion to Quash Seizure Warrant and to Dismiss Forfeiture Action. In the above-styled cause, plaintiff instituted a forfeiture proceeding against the defendant property pursuant to the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970. A seizure warrant was issued pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.Pro. 41 based upon an ex parte determination by a jud...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Duane Ross and others (Ross) are members of the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe (Tribe) living outside the boundaries of Moody County, South Dakota. The Tribe entered into a gaming compact with the State of South Dakota, and has established the Royal River Casino as a tribally owned gaming business on tribal trust l...
Views: 1
OPINION Plaintiffs, The Association of National Advertisers, et al., bring this action against defendant Daniel Lungren, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California. 1 Plaintiffs challenge section 17508.5 of the California Business and Professions Code, which regulates certain environmental claims used in advertising, on the grounds that: (1) the sta...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT I. Plaintiff 1 brings this action for a refund of federal income taxes. The claim for refund arises from a charitable contribution deduction which plaintiff claimed on its 1987 income tax return. The charitable contribution was for plaintiff’s alleged donation of real property to the State of California in 1987. Defendant denied the charitabl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This action was commenced on May 17, 1991, when the original Plaintiffs, Dorothy Canada (aka Dorothy Spinola) and Paula Ervin, filed their Complaint (# 1). Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint (# 2) on August 22,1991, and added Sandra Millspaugh as a Plaintiff. Plaintiffs named The Boyd Group, Inc., Boyd Enterprises Inc., Califo...
Views: 3
ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff MGM Desert Inn, Inc.’s (“MGM”) Motion for Summary Judgment (# 36), filed November 17, 1992. Defendant William E. Shack, Jr. filed an Opposition (#41) on December 7, 1992, and MGM filed its Reply (#44) on January 4, 1993. During the months of July and August, 1990, Shack negotiated, executed, and delivered eight checks to the Desert Inn Hotel & Casino. These che...
Views: 0
OPINION The matter before the court is the motion of the defendant, Danny Kyllo, to suppress evidence (# 30) on the following three grounds: (1) law enforcement officers lacked probable cause to search his home and misled the magistrate judge with deliberate false statements and omissions of fact in order to obtain a search warrant; (2) the use of a thermal imaging device constituted an impermi...
Views: 2
ORDER I. INTRODUCTION THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal of Counts I and II of the Superseding Indictment pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 29. Count I charged that the defendant, not being a licensee or permit-tee under the provisions of Chapter 40 of Title 18, knowingly transported and shipped and caused to be transported and shipped in foreign comme...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Jodi Bonser brings this action for breach of a collective bargaining agreement under federal labor law and breach of contract under state law. Defendant Safeway, Inc. moves for summary judgment, contending that Bonser’s federal claim is defective because she did not exhaust her contractual remedies. In addition, Safeway argues that Bonser’s state law...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants move for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claim under section 14(a) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. § 78n(a) (1990) (the section 14(a) claim). Oral argument was heard on December 22, 1992. I will grant summary judgment on plaintiffs’ section 14(a) claim. I decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ state law claims. The...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Shawn P. Slater commenced this civil rights action against the defendant King Soopers, Inc. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. Plaintiff has not responded to that motion. The issues have been fully briefed and oral argument would not assist decision. Subject matter jurisdiction is contested. A. Summary Judgment Mot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 7) and motion to reconsider (Doc. 15). In the latter motion, the defendant seeks reconsideration of a prior order granting the plaintiff an extension of time in which to respond to the motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has filed its response to the motion to dismiss. Therefore, the motion for reconsiderat...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendant Steven G. Nusz, by his court-appointed counsel, has moved pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3006A for an order appointing Howard Brodsky, Ph.D., to conduct a psychological evaluation of the defendant for purposes of sentencing. The motion states that the evaluation is necessary because the court detained the defendant following his conviction and, in doing so, expressed a concern that the d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a trademark infringement action brought under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq., and the common law. The matter is now before the court on motions for partial summary judgment by the plaintiff and the defendant. Plaintiff moves for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. 1 (Doc. 102). Defendant moves for partial summary...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs, Rhonda Zywicki individually and as administrator of the estate of Dathan Zywicki, brought this medical malpractice action against the United States of America. Plaintiffs allege that Dr. Steven Yount, who was at that time an Air Force physician, committed malpractice in the treatment of Rhonda Zywicki’s son, the decedent, Dathan Zywicki. The action was brought p...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 829 (1992) AUSTIN FIREWORKS, INC., Plaintiff, v. T.H.E. INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 90-1341-FGT. United States District Court, D. Kansas. December 8, 1992. *830 Alvin D. Herrington, McDonald, Tinker, Skaer, Quinn & Herrington, Wichita, KS, for Austin Fireworks, Inc. David J. Morgan, Hershberger, Patterson, Jones & Roth, Wichita, KS, for T.H.E. Insurance Co. MEM...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 6, 1989, Lance Foster, a student at the University of Kansas, was injured when a “large coke machine” fell on him at his scholarship hall. Foster was transported to Lawrence Memorial Hospital (LMH) in Lawrence, Kansas. At LMH, Foster received treatment from Dr. Michael Geist. Foster was later “life-flighted" to the Kansas University Medical Center in Kansas Cit...
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 839 (1992) Sandra Jean GRIFFITH, Plaintiff, v. MT. CARMEL MEDICAL CENTER, a Kansas Corporation; Eugene Carl McCormick, an Individual; Physician Staffing Resources, Inc., a Texas Corporation; and Judith Ulery, an Individual, Defendants. No. 92-1141-MLB. United States District Court, D. Kansas. December 15, 1992. *840 John W. Johnson, Render, Kamas & Hammond, Wichita, KS, Richard W....
Views: 0
*844 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On July 17, 1992, defendant Michael Anthony Thurmond filed a motion to declare unconstitutional the sentencing provisions of Title 21, United States Code § 841(b)(l)(A)(iii) and the Sentencing Guidelines as to cocaine base, § 2D1.1. Defendant Michael Dwayne Harris joined in defendant Thurmond’s motion. On August 17, 1992, following oral argument on defendants’ motion...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted in 1985, of one count of rape, two counts of aggravated sodomy, and five counts of indecent liberties with a child. Petitioner was sentenced to three concurrent terms of thirty...
Views: 0
*852MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court for resentencing of the defendant Thomas A. Burger. The court previously sentenced the defendant on August 1st, 1991. The defendant appealed the court’s sentence and the Tenth Circuit remanded for resentencing. The Tenth Circuit stated: We hold that Burger is entitled to a resentencing during the course of which he shall have the opportunity...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the El Dorado Correctional Facility, El Dorado, Kansas, was convicted in 1976, of aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary. Petitioner was sentenced to a controlling term of twenty (20) years to life imprisonment. In this action, petitioner ch...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 856 (1992) FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, Receiver, For and on Behalf of HERITAGE BANK AND TRUST, Plaintiff, v. John W. LOWE, Defendant, and John W. Lowe and R. Clark Arnold, formerly doing business as Lowe & Arnold, Defendants. Civ. No. 90-C-388W. United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D. February 26, 1992. Mark E. Friedman, Robert C. Weaver, Renee E. Rothauge, Portlan...
Views: 4
*861ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT EMMETT A. LARKIN CO.’s MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Sitting by Designation. The above-entitled matter having come before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff's Motion in Opposition To Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and defendant Emmett A. Larkin Co.’s Motion To Strike Affidavit of Plaintiff Brian Burns, and the Court having reviewe...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 865 (1992) JANE L., et al., Plaintiffs, v. Norman BANGERTER, et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 91-C-345G. United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D. December 17, 1992. *866 *867 Janet Benshoof, Rachael Pine, Eve Gartner, New York City, Jeffrey Oritt, Howard Lundgren, Salt Lake City, UT, and Simon Heller, New York City, for plaintiffs. Mary Anne Wood, Anthony Quinn, James Soper, Paul Durh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION IN LIEU OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW On July 6 and 7, 1992, the court tried Plaintiffs’ securities fraud claims. After hearing the testimony and assessing the evidence, the court took the matter under advisement. Jeffrey B. Brown of Brown & Brown in Salt Lake City, Utah, tried the matter on behalf of the Plaintiffs Mary Márchese, Frank Márchese, Mary Márc...
Views: 1
ORDER On February 25, 1987, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the 1983 order of this court temporarily requiring, with regard to each rank within the Alabama state trooper force, that the Alabama Department of Public Safety promote black officers on a one-to-one basis with white officers until such time as either approximately 25% of the rank is composed of black officers or the De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Now before the court are several motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs and defendants in these consolidated cases over an eighteen-month period. Also pending is defendants’ motion for reconsideration of certain portions of this court’s October 15, 1990 order and plaintiffs’ motion to reopen discovery. BACKGROUND In 1934, J. Lamar Burford, Sr. founde...
Views: 0
*925 MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Cathleen V. Cronin has brought this lawsuit claiming that, while employed at a convenience store in Montgomery, Alabama, she was sexually harassed to the extent that she was forced to resign. She has named the following as defendants: United Service Stations, Inc., the owner of a number of convenience stores including the one where Cronin worked;...
Views: 1
ORDER This order memorializes the Court’s oral ruling of November 23, 1992, granting defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal. After hearing the evidence presented by the Government and argument on the motion, the Court concluded that the Government failed to establish that a reasonable juror could find beyond a reasonable doubt that the telephone calls charged in the indictment facilitated...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 939 (1992) Antoine AGAPITOS, et al. Plaintiffs, v. PCM INVESTMENT COMPANY, et al. Defendants. CIV. No. 89-261-3-MAC(DF). United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Macon Division. December 8, 1992. *940 Taylor W. Jones, Atlanta, GA, for plaintiffs. Ronald Clyde Thomason, Macon, GA, Karen B. Bragman, Frank N. White, J. *941 Randolph Evans, Atlanta, GA, for defendants. FITZPATRICK, Di...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 950 (1992) Gary Wayne THOMPSON, et al., Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 91-254-4-MAC(DF). United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Macon Division. December 16, 1992. *951 James E. Butler, Jr., Peter J. Daughtery, Charles Frederick Overby, Columbus, GA, for plaintiff. Robert C. Norman, Jr., Howard Jerome Strickland, Jr., Macon, GA, for defendants. ...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 959 (1993) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. AMTRECO, INC., et al., Defendants. Civ. A. 90-31-VAL (WDO). United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Valdosta Division. December 22, 1992. As Corrected February 9, 1993. *960 *961 Frank L. Butler, III, Macon, GA, Valerie Ann Lee, Heidi E. Weckwert, Washington, DC, for U.S. Howard Bridges Slocumb, Berrien L. Sutton, Homerville, GA,...
Views: 2
OPINION AND JUDGMENT Defendant moves to dismiss plaintiff’s appeal of the antidumping margin found by the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (Commerce) in its final affirmative anti-dumping determination: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Nepheline Syenite from Canada, 57 Fed.Reg. 9237 (March 17, 1992). Defendant contends that plaintif...
Views: 2
Opinion and Judgment Plaintiffs, former employees of Micro Energy International, Inc., Roswell, New Mexico, challenge the determination of the Secretary of Labor (Labor) that they are ineligible for trade adjustment assistance under 19 U.S.C. § 2271 (1988), as amended by section 1421(a) of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-418, 102 Stat. 1107, 1242-43 (1988) (Omni...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER I. Introduction This is a class action lawsuit charging Brown University, its President, and its Athletic Director (collectively “defendants” or “Brown”) with discriminating against women in the operation of its intercollegiate athletic program, in violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. (“Title IX”). T...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS TANGIBLE EVIDENCE The indictment in this case, returned by the Grand Jury on September 24, 1991, charges defendant Joseph J. Santopietro (“Defendant”) with two counts of conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371, seven counts of corrupt receipt of payment, 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B), two counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, eight counts of embezzlement of federal funds, 18 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
*1010 RULING ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS The indictment in this case, returned by the Grand Jury on September 24, 1991, charges defendant Joseph J. Santopietro (“Defendant”) with two counts of conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371, seven counts of corrupt receipt of payment, 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B), two counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, eight counts of embezzlement of federal f...
Views: 1
RULING ON BATSON CHALLENGE Relying on Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), the defendants in this action have lodged an objection to the government’s use of peremptory challenges at the February 4, 1992 jury selection in this criminal case. Specifically, defendants contend that the government’s alleged use of seven of its nine challenges to strike minorities ...
Views: 0
ORDER 4/29/92: After review and absent objection, the magistrate judge’s recommended ruling is affirmed, adopted and ratified. SO ORDERED. RECOMMENDED RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS MARGOLIS, United States Magistrate Judge. On October 15, 1990, plaintiff John Doe filed his pro se complaint (Dkt. # 1). Court-appointed counsel filed an amended complaint on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Introduction Petitioner George Gatto seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging various constitutional infirmities in connection with his murder conviction. 1 For the reasons set forth below, the petition is denied in its entirety. Background A. Procedural History On June 17, 1986, after a jury trial in ...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This action was commenced November 14, 1991, pursuant to § 505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the “Clean Water Act” or “Act”), as amended, 33 U.S.C.A. § 1365 (West 1986 and Supp. 1992), which authorizes citizens to commence actions (“citizens suits”) against persons alleged to have violated “effluent standards or [other limitations on the release o...
Views: 0
*1050 OPINION AND ORDER Giuseppe Gambino (“Joseph Gambino”) was arrested on December 1, 1988, and released after executing a $1,000,000 bail bond, dated December 16, 1988, which was co-signed by certain individuals, including his wife, Maria Gambino, and secured by certain parcels of real property. Joseph Gambino also executed an additional $2,000,000 appearance bond on May 17, 1989. Giovanni...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On September 28, 1992, a Grand Jury filed the ninth superseding indictment (the “indictment”) against the defendants in this case. The indictment alleges that the defendants participated in the illegal activities of an international criminal organization known as “the Mafia” or “La Cosa Nostra,” which allegedly includes groups in both the United States and Sicily. More s...
Views: 1
OPINION Plaintiffs in the Alberti action (the “Alberti Plaintiffs”) have moved for the court to reconsider its order of November 18, 1991 (Morin v. Trupin, 778 F.Supp. 711 (S.D.N.Y.1991)), dismissing Robert Abrams, Stuart Becker and Stuart Becker & Co., P.C. (the “Becker Defendants” or “Becker”), and Mintz, Fraade, and Zeiger, P.C., Frederick M. Mintz and ...
Views: 1
OPINION Defendant Stuart Becker & Co., P.C. (the “Becker Defendants”) has moved to dismiss the plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint for failure to plead fraud with particularity pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 9(b) and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6). Defendant Eisenberg, Honig & F...
Views: 3
OPINION The Defendants Nicholas F. Brady and Shirley D. Peterson (collectively, the “Federal Defendants”), joined by the Defendant League of Women Voters Education Fund (the “League”), have moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and (6), Fed.R.Civ.P., for an order dismissing the First Amended Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) of Plaintiffs Lenora B. Fulani and Lenora B. Fulani for President (c...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER On October 20, 1992 United States Magistrate Judge Mark D. Fox signed a Report and Recommendation after conducting an evidentiary hearing, in which he recommended denial of an application by the United States that remaining unexpended escrow funds posed as bail in this case by others than the defendant, be applied to satisfy certain outstanding restitution obligations of ...
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 1130 (1992) E. Steven DUTTON, Plaintiff, v. Robert C. WOLHAR and Wolhar and Gill, P.A., Defendants. Vicki O'DELL, Plaintiff, v. Robert C. WOLHAR and Wolhar and Gill, P.A., Defendants. Civ. A. Nos. 91-455 MMS, 91-478 MMS. United States District Court, D. Delaware. November 24, 1992. *1131 *1132 S. Scott Lowicki of UAW Legal Services Plan, Newark, DE, for plaintiffs. Robert C. Wolhar, J...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 1142 (1992) Eugene CHUDZIK and Barbara Chudzik, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF WILMINGTON, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 91-610 LON. United States District Court, D. Delaware. December 30, 1992. *1143 John J. Sullivan, Jr., Law Offices of Sylvia E. Hall, Wilmington, DE, for plaintiffs. Eric L. Episcopo, City of Wilmington Law Dept., Wilmington, DE, for City of Wilmington defendants. Jeffre...
Views: 0
OPINION In his amended complaint, the plaintiff, Warner Paul, claims he was denied promotion in violation of his civil rights. Docket Item (“D.I.”) 10. His claims arise under both Title VII and section 1981. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 2000e-2(a)(2) (1988). Under Title VII, the plaintiff has advanced two legal theories of discrimination, a disparate impact theory and a disparate treatment theory. The de...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The motion raises the question whether an inmate is precluded from litigating in federal court constitutional issues that were decided against him by the state court on appeal from a prison disciplinary hearing. For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum and Order, issued without oral argument pursuant to ...
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 1172 (1992) Albert HESS, Plaintiff, v. PORT AUTHORITY TRANS-HUDSON CORPORATION (PATH), Defendant. Civ. A. No. 90-2150 (AJL). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. December 21, 1992. *1173 Patrick Henigan, Coffey & Kaye, Bala Cynwyd, PA, for plaintiff. Hugh H. Welsh, Donald F. Burke, Newark, NJ, for defendant. OPINION LECHNER, District Judge. This is a personal injury actio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a “Bivens” — type civil rights action 1 in which the plaintiff, Richard Young, alleges federal prison officials violated his constitutional rights during his period of confinement as a pre-trial detainee at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania (“Lewisburg”). This matter comes before the court on cross-motions for summ...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 1202 (1991) Cathy Ann BUTLER, Administratrix of the Estate of Charles Raymond Butler, Jr., deceased, Plaintiff, v. NAVISTAR INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORP., Defendant. Civ. A. No. 89-0064-H. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division. October 18, 1991. *1203 *1204 Mary Ann Barnes, Martin J. McGetrick, Chandler, Franklin & O'Bryan, Harrisonburg, VA, Pete...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter is before the court for review of the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger, submitted in his capacity as Special Master pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(5). The Equal Opportunity Commission has filed an objection to the report. This action arises from charges filed by intervenor, Debra ...
Views: 0
809 F.Supp. 1229 (1992) Seshadri RAJU, M.D. v. Robert S. RHODES, M.D. Civ. A. No. J92-0206(L)(N). United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Jackson Division. November 20, 1992. *1230 *1231 *1232 Ed Davis Noble, M. Curtis McKee, Fuselier, Ott, McKee & Shivers, George H. Ritter, George Q. Evans, Wise, Carter, Child & Caraway, Jackson, MS for plaintiff. Samuel L. Begley, John Maxey, Ma...
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 1246 (1992) SWEET JAN JOINT VENTURE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Sunbelt Savings Association of Texas; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Manager of the FSLIC Resolution Fund, Successor to FSLIC in its Corporate Capacity; and Sunbelt Savings, FSB, Defendants. Civ. A. No. CA3-89-1757-D. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this action, defendant Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC-Receiver”) as Receiver for Sunbelt Savings, FSB (“New Sunbelt"), moves the court for summary judgment on all of plaintiffs’ claims. Defendant Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Manager of the FSLIC Resolution Fund (“FDIC-Corporate”), moves the court to clarify or reconsider its June 24, 1992 m...
Views: 0
*1262 OPINION AND ORDER This Opinion holds that a group of 298 investors who purchased unit interests in a 474-room resort hotel (“The Registry Hotel”) in Naples, Florida (and who began a lawsuit in this court entitled “Richard C. Becherer, Lawrence Milton Richard, Robert A. Horvath and Shirley L. Horvath, and Henry V. Denolf and Joann L. Denolf, individually, and on behalf...
Views: 2
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon the motion of Defendants Theresa Holbrook and the Brown County Department of Hu *1294 man Services (BCDHS) for summary judgment (document 22). The Plaintiffs have filed a response incorporating by reference the arguments asserted in their memorandum in opposition to a motion for summary judgment previously filed by Defendants Sergean...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon the motion of Defendants Todd Cribett, Jack Mackey, and the Brown County Board of Mental Retardation (MRDD) for summary judgment (document 25). The Plaintiffs have filed a response incorporating by reference the arguments asserted in their memorandum in opposition to a motion for summary judgment previously filed by Defendants Sergeant Lee Meyer ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action for alleged breach of contract, violations of the Uniform Commercial Code, products liability, and breach of express and implied warranties brought by plaintiff General Electric Company against G. Siempelkamp GmbH & Co., a German corporation. Plaintiff’s claims arise out of the sale by defendant to plaintiff of two heavy duty presses designed...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the court are the objections of plaintiff, Harp Advertising Illinois, Inc. (“Harp”), to Chief Executive Magistrate Judge Joan H. Lefkow’s Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), submitted to this court on October 23, 1992. For the reasons that follow, the Report is adopted in its entirety, and defendant’s motion for summary judgement is granted and Harp’s motion for summary judgment...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In these consolidated cases, two separate groups of plaintiffs challenge the redistricting of Chicago’s wards. In Barnett, a group of African-American, registered voters in the City of Chicago (the “Barnett Plaintiffs”) allege that both the redistricting process and the resultant map are unconstitutional and violate the Voting Rights Act. In ...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 1333 (1992) Grace Rodela FUJA, Plaintiff, v. BENEFIT TRUST LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. 92 C 7542. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. December 22, 1992. *1334 *1335 Eugene A. Schoon, Amy D. Mayber, Sidley & Austin, Chicago, IL, for plaintiff. Daniel A. Engel, Joseph J. Hasman, Peterson & Ross, Chicago, IL, Raymond J. Lester, Benefit Trust Life Ins. Co...
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 1343 (1992) Julian RIDLEN, Executor of the Estate of Robert Shay, deceased, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FOUR COUNTY COUNSELING CENTER, et al., Defendants. No. S92-352S. United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division. November 24, 1992. *1344 Robert L. Justice, Logansport, IN, for plaintiffs. Michael L. Carter, David J. Mallon, James V. Donadio, Richard A. Smikle, Steven J....
Views: 1
809 F.Supp. 1360 (1992) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Kurt Henry VAN ENGEL, Lyle Van Engel, Bernard K. Van Engel, Joseph L. Palmisano, Barbara A. Schwellinger, Howard F. Schaefer, Eugene E. Knoll, Larry J. Pitzen, and James A. Walker, Defendants. No. 91-Cr-5. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. December 21, 1992. *1361 *1362 Paul Kanter, Asst. U.S. Atty., and Eric J. Klumb, De...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is then the standard of behavior. As to this there has developed a tradition that is unbending and inveterate. Uncompromising rigidity has been the attitude of courts of equity when petitioned to undermine the rule of undivided loyalty by the ‘disintegrating erosion’ of particular exceptions, [cite omit...
Views: 2
809 F. Supp. 1393 (1992) Lou SHAW v. Richard LINDHEIM et al. No. CV 87-6926 AHS. United States District Court, C.D. California. September 4, 1992. *1394 *1395 Lawrence P. Grassini, John C. Torjesen, Hurley Grassini & Wrinkle, North Hollywood, CA, for plaintiff. Louis P. Petrich, Edward A. Ruttenberg, Gary M. Grossenbacher, Leopold Petrich & Smith, Los Angeles, CA, for defendants. OPINION ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The United States brought this action on behalf of Donald and Patricia Haberer, sellers of a residential property, alleging violations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. *1406 § 3601 et seq. The United States alleged that the defendants, who are homeowners in the Larmer Addition of the City of Russell, Kansas, violated several provisions of the Fair Housing Act by actions th...
Views: 0
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS OPINION, ORDER AND JUDGMENT The matter before the Court is a garnishment proceeding against Farmers Insurance Company, Inc., following a trial verdict against the insured, Teresa Hagedorn Fosha (Fosha), and the entry of judgment in excess of the policy coverage limits and in favor of plaintiff, Kevin L. Stetler (Stetler). The garnishment arises from a per *141...
Views: 7
*1457 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The court has before it for consideration the claims of Plaintiff, Michael O. Tatum, against Defendants, Philip Morris Incorporated (“Philip Morris”), Philip Morris Management Corp. (“Philip Morris Management”) and Ralph Rayburn (collectively “Defendants” unless specified). Mr. Tatum has alleged claims against Defendants for (i) violation of Title...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 1473 (1992) C. Frank BRADFORD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Lorin L. MOENCH, Robert B. Beckstead, Snell Olsen, Richard Moench, John M. Taggart, Copper State Thrift & Loan Company, a Utah corporation, Copper State Financial Corporation, a Utah corporation, John & Jane Does, 1-10, Defendants. No. 87-C-0078-S. United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D. October 26, 1992. *1474 *1475 *...
Views: 1
809 F. Supp. 1501 (1992) Tony PICKERING, et al., Plaintiffs, v. USX CORPORATION, Defendant. Lynn A. BARNEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. USX CORPORATION, Defendant. Reldon C. KENNEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. USX CORPORATION, Defendant. Civ. Nos. 87-C-838J, 88-C-763J and 91-C-636J. United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D. November 3, 1992. *1502 *1503 *1504 *1505 *1506 *1507 Lynn C. Harris, Provo, UT, ...
Views: 0
*1572 ORDER OF JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Notice by Petitioner, the United States of America, of Non-Compliance with this Court’s Order of Civil Contempt and Request by Respondents, Frank Kowalik and Karen Kowalik, for Hearing and for an In Camera Ex Parte Review in the above-captioned proceeding. Having already been found in Civil Con...
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