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 → fed-r-serv-2d → Volume 39

Opinions in fed-r-serv-2d Volume 39

This diversity case brings to our en banc consideration questions pertaining to the entitlement of third parties to intervene as plaintiffs in a contract action brought by a local electric utility against its major fuel supplier. The district court denied all requested intervention. The decision of the panel, as modified on rehearing, though declining to disturb both the denial of intervention to ...
Views: 1
732 F.2d 452 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1 NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff,Ernest Morial, et al., Individually and As Representativesof a Class, Applicants for Intervention-Appellants,v.UNITED GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 82-3194. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. May 21, 1984. McGlinchey, Stafford & Mintz, Donald R. Mintz, Constanc...
Views: 1
OPINION Plaintiff Goldie Kaminski was employed by the General Motors Corporation for approximately twenty years, from 1955 until 1975. On August 23, 1978, she commenced this action against defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Metropolitan”) seeking sickness and accident disability benefits pursuant to a certificate of insurance between the General Motors Corporation and Metropo...
Views: 0
OPINION: MOTION FOR RELIEF UNDER RULE 60(b)(1) AND 60(b)(6) Before the court is plaintiffs’ petition for relief under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1) and 60(b)(6). On February 1, 1982, this court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The order granting that motion was received by plaintiffs’ counsel (Smith) in Chicago on February 5, 1982. Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure pro...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER This is an action challenging the constitutionality of recently adopted local rules for the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants denied him his fifth amendment right to due process by not giving him notice and a hearing before establishing requirements for admission to a newly-created trial bar. The defendants h...
Views: 0
*370MEMORANDUM This action involves Plaintiffs’ demand for a jury trial filed with this Court on June 8, 1983, pursuant to Rule 39(b),1 Fed.R.Civ.P. Plaintiffs’ demand was not made within the time period prescribed by Rule 81(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request that this Court exercise its discretion under Rule 39(b) to grant their demand for a jury trial. The pertinent procedural as...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court are three motions filed by defendant SPS Technologies, Inc. (“SPS”): (1) Motion For Summary Judgment on Count V of Plaintiff USM Corporation’s (“USM”) Amended Complaint; (2) Motion For An Order Requiring USM to Account to SPS for Royalties Due Under License Agreement; and (3) Motion for Costs Pursuant to Rule 54(d). Each motion is addressed below. I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION On December 6, 1982, Plaintiff Marty L. Milam filed suit in state court seeking to recover damages for breach of warranty arising out of the sale and use of a hay baler which was purchased by him from Defendant Massey-Ferguson, Inc. The machine had been repossessed by the Defendant, who had sold it on June 4, 1982, in accordance with the terms of the security agreem...
Views: 3
In 1976, Building Engineering Services Co., Inc., (“BESCO”) hired the Montgomery Elevator Company (“Montgomery”) to service and maintain the elevators and escalators in the Louisiana Superdome in New Orleans, Louisiana. Shortly thereafter, a young visitor to the Superdome was injured while using the escalator and a personal injury action was brought against BESCO and Montgomery. Montgomery and ...
Views: 3
A default judgment went against the defendant, Penrod-Stauffer Building Systems, Inc., after which the defendant filed a motion for relief under F.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4). From the denial of that motion, the defendant brought this appeal. We conclude that the judgment was void for lack of personal jurisdiction of the defendant, and reverse. I. On February 28,1983, Armco, Inc. filed a c...
Views: 2
OPINION Plaintiff has moved the court for an order allowing plaintiff to serve defendant Craig by publication “pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 4(e) and ORCP 7(D)(6)(d).” Rule 4(e) allows service of process on a party outside the state to occur in a manner provided for by state law. ORCP 7(D)(6) generally prescribes the manner in which service of process may be effected by publication. In the present cas...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR BIFURCATION OF TRIAL Defendant filed a Motion for Separate Trials on January 27, 1984, seeking a separation of the issues of liability from the damage issues for purposes of trial. The parties have filed written memoranda of law on the motion, and the Court has heard oral argument of counsel. Defendant bases the motion on the grounds that such bifu...
Views: 0
583 F.Supp. 427 (1984) CONTINENTAL CABLEVISION, INC., Plaintiff, v. STORER BROADCASTING COMPANY, Defendant. No. 83-2116C(1) (formerly No. 81-MISC-101). United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. March 30, 1984. *428 Richard Walters, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff. L. William Higley, Carroll J. Donohue, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant. MEMORANDUM NANGLE, Chief Judge. This case is now before t...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiffs filed these product liability actions seeking recovery for injuries suffered from the disease toxic shock syndrome *356(TSS). Plaintiffs allege that TSS was contracted as a result of the use of “Rely” tampons which .are manufactured by the defendant, The Procter & Gamble Company (Procter & Gamble). Plaintiffs intend to offer certain research reports of the Centers for Disease Con...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This patent infringement suit is before the court on two motions brought by plaintiff — a motion to compel under Fed.R. Civ.P. 37(a), and a motion for the issuance of a commission under Fed.R.Civ.P. 28(b). For the reasons stated below, the court grants in part and denies in part plaintiff’s motion to compel and denies its motion for the issuance of a commission. *507P...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In an action for assault and battery which is in this Court because of diversity of citizenship, the defendant has moved for an order (1) permitting the deposition of various clergymen to be taken by the defendant by telephone, pursuant to Rule 30(b)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; (2) appointing the defendant’s attorney, Herbert Monte Levy, Esq., to administer oa...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Three matters are now before this Court, on motions assignment, relating to discovery sought in the District of Columbia of non-parties to an action for defamation now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.1 The Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) has moved for a Rule 26(c) protective order against its production, pursuant to Gen. Westmorelan...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Tri-Ex Enterprises, Inc. (“TriEx”) has applied to the Court for an Order compelling production by Lowe & Knapp, Esqs. (“L & K”) of certain documents within their possession (the “London Documents”) belonging to third-party defendant Alan London (“London”). L & K, London’s former counsel in this action, have asserted an attorney’s lien on these documents in an a...
Views: 0
Petitioner-appellee Emilcar Bermudez, currently serving a five-to-ten year sentence pursuant to a New York State (“the State”) conviction for second degree robbery, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Southern District of New York in January, 1983. The petition was assigned to Judge Charles Stewart, who, on March 29, ordered the State to respond within 30 days. On July 28, 1983,...
Views: 6
These appeals arise from diversity actions involving a non-competition agreement between Bradley R. Janss and Medtronic, Inc. Janss challenges the district court’s order permanently enjoining him from violating the covenant not to compete and dismissing his declaratory judgment action (No. 82-5423) and the district court's order construing the permanent injunction (No. 82-5685). We affirm the j...
Views: 1
This appeal is from the district court’s order staying the parties’ action in federal court pending arbitration, and from the court’s subsequent order denying appellant Commerce Park’s motion to clarify the stay order. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. I. Factual and Procedural Background. Commerce Park is a Texas partnership involved in real estate development. In Octob...
Views: 2
729 F.2d 1371 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 139 Michael SHRODER, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.SUBURBAN COASTAL CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 82-6086. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. April 16, 1984. Spieler & Spieler, P.A., Gregg Spieler, Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs-appellants. Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Culter, P.A., Davisson...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds plaintiffs’ ease barred by the doctrine of res judicata and, therefore, grants defendant’s motion for summary judgment. I. Background Plaintiffs, the Frater...
Views: 0
ORDER This is an action for damages and injunc-tive relief for purported statutory and constitutional violations surrounding the termination of plaintiffs federal workers’ compensation benefits. Plaintiff seeks a preliminary injunction ordering defendants to reinstate her benefits pending a pretermin-ation hearing. Defendants oppose the injunction, and have moved for summary judgment on a...
Views: 0
*359MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This motion presents an interesting test of the value of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended in 1983. The basic question presented is when should a party who has successfully defeated a motion for summary judgment be granted attorneys fees. BACKGROUND The Complaint in this case was filed on January 28, 1983 and contained deficiencies which obviousl...
Views: 1
*98 ORDER STRIKING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS In April of Í981, plaintiff was fired from his job as a bus driver for the North San Diego County Transit District (“Transit District”). The Transit District fired plaintiff at the request of the United Transportation Union Local No. 81 (“the Union”) and pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement bec...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This suit was instituted pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b) and 2671, et seq., (“FTCA”). Plaintiffs, Shirley Dore and her infant son, seek tort damages from the defendants for injuries which, plaintiffs allege, resulted from defendants’ negligent enforcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101, et...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Handelskredit-Bank, A.G. (“HBK”) moves for attorneys’ fees pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 11, 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and the equitable power of the court. Familiarity with my December 21, 1983 Memorandum and Order, reported at 575 F.Supp. 1533, in which I dismissed the complaint as against defendant HBK for lack of personal jurisdiction and- improper venue, is assumed. For the reason...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER This negligence action with jurisdiction predicated upon diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. Section 1332, raises an issue of first impression with regard to recent amendments to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 allowing for service by mail. According to the complaint, (and the dates are important) plaintiff was injured at defendant’s establishment on June 28, 1980. It wasn’t until Ma...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER By minute order dated April 10,1984, the Court requested memoranda of points and authorities on whether the plaintiffs could show “good cause” why sufficient service had not been effected on defendants William Holben Associates, Terrence C. Dreiling, Robert D. Wheat and Lois LaVonne Wheat within 120 days after the filing of the complaint, as provided for in Fed.R. Ci...
Views: 4
OPINION AND ORDER The matters before the court are defendant City of Portland’s motions to quash service of summons and to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiff filed this suit against defendants, City of Portland (City) and individual Portland police officers, seeking compensation for violation of her civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for damages under pendent state law tort claims. Plaintiff’s ...
Views: 3
This action arises from illegal purchases of office supplies by a county official. Al-corn County sued to recover all amounts paid by it in violation of state bidding laws to the defendant USIS. Additionally, the county sought punitive damages under state law and treble damages under 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), the civil remedy provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)...
Views: 5
Cynthia Watson brought this products liability action against several named and identified defendants and one unidentified defendant designated as “John Doe.” After the applicable statute of limitations had expired, Watson discovered the identity of the “John Doe” defendant and moved the court for leave to file an amended complaint identifying the John Doe defendant as Unipress, Inc. Plaintiff’s ...
Views: 1
This is an appeal from a grant of partial summary judgment on a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that two state prison inmates were transferred to out-of-state federal prisons in retaliation for the exercise of rights protected under the first amendment. Appellants Frank Grace and Albert Blake, along with three other individuals, were inmates at MCI Walpole and members of the Associati...
Views: 4
ORDER Appellees in Appeal No. 83-1386 have moved that the appeal filed by Jackson Jordan, Inc. be dismissed on the ground that it was not timely filed within the 30 *1374days required under Rule 4(a)(1) Fed.R.App.P. For the reasons indicated below, the motion is denied. I In July 1982, Jackson commenced a declaratory judgment suit as to the validity and infringement of Plasser’s U.S. Patent No. 3,...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER A hearing was held before the undersigned on February 10, 1984 upon the motion of defendant Burlington Northern Railroad Company for an order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject *277 matter jurisdiction. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). In the alternative, defendant has moved for summary judgment on the following grounds: 1) that plaintiff Reilly Tar i...
Views: 1
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM In this action plaintiff contends that defendants have engaged, and continued engaging as of the date the complaint was filed, in a conspiracy to violate the antitrust law. This memorandum concerns an appeal by plaintiff from an order of United States Magistrate David F. Jordan dated February 22, 1984, “to the extent that the Order limits [plaintiffs] discovery to events oc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM/ORDER * On February 17, 1984, defendant filed with this court a motion to compel appearance at oral deposition. That motion seeks a court order requiring plaintiff to produce *106nine witnesses for depositions within fifteen days of the date of such court order. Attached to the motion is the certification of counsel required by Local Rule of Civil Procedure 24(f), stating that the part...
Views: 1
ORDER The Plaintiff, Howard Greenwald, instituted this suit alleging fraud in the sale of common stock in Integrated Energy, Inc. (“Integrated”). The Defendants are Integrated, its officers and directors Messrs. Waszkowski, Hardin, Phillips, Axford, Holmes, Humphries, Mason, and Mitchell, the underwriter of the subject securities, Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc. (now Prudential-Baehe Securities...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff has submitted to the Court a motion to compel the production of documents addressed to the defendant, defendant responded and oral argument was heard. Defense counsel objected to seven of the eight requests as extremely broad and irrelevant to the subject matter. I am granting plaintiff’s motion as to request number four limited herein and denying the motion as to t...
Views: 1
734 F.2d 463 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 233 James D. Elias, Plaintiff, Appellant,v.FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant, Appellee. Nos. 83-1618, 83-1667. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Argued Feb. 8, 1984.Decided May 15, 1984. Frederic N. Halstrom, Boston, Mass., with whom Peter A. Donovan, Washington, D.C., Barbara A. Smart, Revere, Mass., and The Law Offices of Frede...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER These related cases, hereby consolidated for resolution of pretrial matters, involve the death of Plaintiff Irwin’s decedent and the injury of Plaintiff Kattner upon the Lake O’ the Pines in east Texas on December 21, 1982. G. Brockett Irwin was electrocuted aboard his sailboat when the mast conducted electricity from high voltage lines above the lake. Mr. Kattner was inj...
Views: 0
OPINION .Plaintiff, Sounds Express International Ltd., is a British corporation, which inter alia distributes eight-track tapes. Plaintiff brings this action against American Themes and Tapes, Inc. (“A.T. & T.”), based on the March 1982 shipment of approximately $78,000 worth of tapes from England to California. Plaintiff claims that A.T. & T., through its president, Jack Benanty, in collaboratio...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This action is brought by plaintiff under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against his former employer. Plaintiff alleges that he was discharged from employment with defendant for racially motivated reasons. Plaintiff seeks damages for loss of wages, injury to reputation, embarrassment, humiliation, emotional distress, and mental anguish. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages and attorney’...
Views: 0
We deal today not with substance but with form. On appeal is a two-sentence order dismissing an employee’s claim for sickness and accident benefits assertedly due him from his employer. Because the enigmatic form of this decision by the District Court prevents us from discerning— and thus reaching — its underlying substance, we vacate the order and remand for an explanation of the dismissal. Ne...
Views: 5
*660OPINION AND ORDER Norton Company and Textron, Inc. appeal from an order of Judge Burton Lifland of the Bankruptcy Court denying their request pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) to be permitted, in spite of the bankruptcy stay, to take discovery of Johns-Manville Corp. in connection with actions pending against them in Louisiana. I find that the appellants have made a powerful showing in support of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Magistrate is plaintiff’s motion to compel the defendant, pursuant to Rules 34 and 37, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to produce: “All investigative reports with reference to the incident of June 4, 1980, that is the subject of this action, and not otherwise privileged, and that were filed with: (a) The head administrator of St. Eliza-beths Hospital; *69...
Views: 0
The issue before us is whether the district court1 erred in denying a motion for relief from a final judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a) and 60(b)(6). Plaintiff’s attorneys received a copy of the district court’s memorandum opinion in this action but no notice of the entry of judgment, and did not learn that final judgment had been entered until inquiring 77 days later. We conclude that the di...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION In this action brought under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-16 (1982), plaintiff Sharon Jennings alleges that defendant D.H.L. Airlines discriminated against her because she is a woman. She claims that *550D.H.L. permitted her male coworkers to sexually harass her and fired her because she complained about sexual harassment and because she became involved in a physical alt...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S DEMAND FOR A JURY TRIAL AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ITS COUNTERCLAIM Facts and Procedure Defendant, S.B. Thomas, Inc. (Thomas) is a New Jersey corporate manufacturer of baked goods. Plaintiff, Harris Baking Company (Harris) is a Maine-based manufacturer and distributor of baked goods. From about June 30, 1981, to December 3...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs sued George L. Campbell, M.D., alleging that he negligently diagnosed and treated plaintiffs wife, thereby causing her death. The district judge directed a verdict for defendant at the close of plaintiffs’ case in chief. We affirm. I. Statement of the Case Anita Tubbs, wife of plaintiff, was significantly overweight and sought intestinal bypass surgery as a means of reducing her we...
Views: 0
732 F.2d 1468 1985 A.M.C. 2069, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 281 EMERSON G.M. DIESEL, INC., Plaintiff,v.ALASKAN ENTERPRISE, Official No. 595760, Her Engines,Tackle, Apparel, Furniture and Equipment, In Rem; OffshoreFisheries, Inc., a Washington corporation; MillerIndustries, Inc., a Washington corporation; and Francis L.Miller, In Personam, Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs Appellees,v.GENERAL MOTO...
Views: 1
When the United States is sued in admiralty, the libelant must “forthwith serve a copy of his libel on the United States attorney for [the appropriate] district and mail a copy thereof by registered mail to the Attorney General of the United States.” (Emphasis added.) 46 U.S.C. § 742. Lawyers unfamiliar with the ways of admiralty or careless on their watch will encounter this statute...
Views: 1
732 F.2d 1218 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 298 Maryam Jamilah ZAIDI, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Harriet Joan EHRLICH, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 83-2726 Summary Calendar. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. May 9, 1984. Maryam Jamilah Zaidi, pro se. Javier Aguilar, C.J. (Neil) Calnan, James R. Gough, Asst. U.S. Attys., Houston, Tex., for defendants-a...
Views: 2
delivered the opinion of the Court. The question to be decided is whether a judgment in a class action determining that an employer did not engage in a general pattern or practice of racial discrimination against the certified class of employees precludes a class member from maintaining a subsequent civil action alleging an individual claim of racial discrimination against the employer. ...
Views: 16
Five separate diversity actions were filed against American Cyanamid Company, along with 29 other suppliers of materials, for personal injuries the plaintiffs allegedly sustained while working for American Cyanamid in Fort Worth, Texas. The cases were consolidated for discovery and pre-trial. Following a significant amount of discovery the plaintiffs, intervenors, and most defendants settled an...
Views: 3
The narrow issue before us on the plaintiff Verret’s appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Verret’s motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to vacate a prior unopposed judgment that had dismissed his suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm. I. Based on diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), the plaintiff Verret, a Louisiana domiciliary,...
Views: 1
736 F.2d 380 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 314 Robert MADDOX and Margaret Maddox, Plaintiffs-Appellees,Cross-Appellants,v.KENTUCKY FINANCE COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. Nos. 82-5719, 82-5739. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit. Argued April 6, 1984.Decided June 18, 1984. J.R. Bartholomew, Richard W. Hill, Louisville, Ky., Bert Combs (argued), D.G. ...
Views: 2
OPINION Plaintiff, Young G. Han, t/a Han’s Farm Market, brings this civil action against the United States for a review of a decision of the Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) withdrawing his authorization to participate in the Federal Food Stamp Program, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2011, et seq. Plaintiff, the owner of Han’s Farm Market in Trenton, New Jersey, was authorized to accept ...
Views: 1
Petitioner Herbert Espey is a Florida prisoner who filed a pro se 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief with the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. His petition alleged the following six grounds for relief: (1) denial of the effective assistance of counsel; (2) insanity at the time of the crime and of his trial; (3) improper prosecutorial comments;...
Views: 3
Appeal from a Final Judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered September 9, 1982, and ordering the government to return to Robinson $82,603 and other personal property it had seized. We affirm. Background On September 11, 1981, Robinson was arrested upon arrival in the United States from Nassau, Bahamas for allegedly making a false s...
Views: 3
Milburn and Thompson appeal the March 22, 1983 order of the District Court dismissing with prejudice their complaint against the United States. We vacate and remand. Background Milburn and Thompson jointly owned an aircraft. They rented it to a pilot, who flew it to the Turks and Caicos Islands, British West Indies (Islands). On May 6, 1981, the Islands' government seized the airc...
Views: 2
In this patent infringement case, the court substitutes the following opinion for publication in place of its previous unpublished opinion, without any change in its holding or in the reasoning utilized. Appellants Stearns and Ramin’ (Stearns) appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, holding U.S. patent No. 4,022,065, issued to Ramin’ and St...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM I. Introduction Before the court for disposition is a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). The motion was filed on behalf of defendant Harry V. Pfautz, D.O., a private physician who allegedly rendered medical treatment to plaintiff Mark T. Kline between February 8 and 15, 1982. For the reasons discussed hereinafter, the motion is denied. II. Background P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER This action was commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Oneida County, by service of the summons and complaint on October 18, 1983. On November 14, 1983 the action was removed to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). Plaintiff subsequently moved to remand for “equitable reasons” but adjourned the motion, and in the interim filed a new motion see...
Views: 1
Plaintiff brought this action alleging breach of contract and patent infringement. After plaintiff presented its evidence to the jury, the trial court directed verdicts in favor of the defendant on both counts. Defendant sought leave to file a motion for costs and attorney’s fees. The motion was denied. Plaintiff appeals from a final judgment entered on the directed verdicts and defendant cross...
Views: 2
OPINION OF THE COURT Edward C. McGarr, on his own behalf and as parent and guardian of his minor son, appeals from an order entered on September 15, 1983, dismissing with prejudice his complaint against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) (1982). The United States cross-appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in reentering its order o...
Views: 3
736 F.2d 912 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 346 Edward C. McGARR, Parent and Natural Guardian of EdwardChristopher McGarr, a minor, and Edward C. McGarr,in his own right, Appellants in No. 83-1710,v.UNITED STATES of America, Appellant in No. 83-1729. Nos. 83-1710, 83-1729. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued May 17, 1984.Decided June 15, 1984. Lawrence E. Grant, E...
Views: 2
ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS This matter came on for consideration of plaintiff’s motion to certify action as a class action (doc. 12), defendant’s memorandum in opposition (doc. 18), and the reply memorandum of the plaintiff (doc. 23). For the reasons hereinafter stated, we conclude that this action should be conditionally certified as a class action. The class shall include: All persons, firms or ent...
Views: 3
Plaintiff Renita Love appeals the district court’s denial of class certification in this action challenging the constitutionality of the SSAT-I (State Student Assessment Test), a basic skills test administered to eleventh graders throughout the state of Florida. The SSAT-I is designed to identify students who have not mastered one or more of the minimum performance standards defined in regulations...
Views: 3
733 F.2d 1562 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 358 Renita LOVE, on behalf of herself and others similarlysituated, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Ralph D. TURLINGTON, as Commissioner of Education; FloridaState Board of Education, Governor Robert Graham,Etc., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 82-3142. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. June 11, 1984. Stephen F. Hanlon, Robert S...
Views: 3
Appellant Ruth Gilchrist filed suit against William Bolger, Postmaster General, under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17, alleging individual and class-wide race and sex discrimination at the United States Post Office in Augusta, Georgia. After a. bench trial, the district court entered judgment for defendant. Gilchrist appeals, contending that the court erred i...
Views: 6
Kenneth Leventhal & Co. (Leventhal) appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Charles S. Haight, Jr., Judge, dismissing Leventhal’s third-party complaint for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. Appellees are the nine captioned third-party defendants; most are liquor suppliers and t...
Views: 3
736 F.2d 29 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 364, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 91,498 KENNETH LEVENTHAL & COMPANY, Appellant,v.JOYNER WHOLESALE CO., Charles Jacquin Et Cie., Inc., Jos.Schlitz Brewing Co., Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.,Falstaff Brewing Corp., Federal Wine & Liquor Co., AmericanSales Co., Warren Adler, Ltd., Spaulding Distributing Co., Appellees. No. 1205, Docket 84-7007. Unite...
Views: 1
OPINION OF THE COURT Herbert Sellers appeals from an order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for relief from a judgment on the ground that the defendants fraudulently concealed material evidence. In a prior appeal, Sellers v. General Motors Corp., 720 F.2d 666 (3d Cir.1984) we affirmed a judgment in favor of the defendant, General Motors Corporation, entered on a jury verdict in Sellers’ ...
Views: 2
This appeal arises from an action brought by a multiemployer employee benefit fund and its trustees against an employer for delinquent contributions to the fund. The appeal presents questions involving appellate jurisdiction and the means of enforcing an employer’s duty to contribute to such a fund, as well as a request for double costs and attorney’s fees on appeal under Fed.R.App.P. 38. Plain...
Views: 2
733 F.2d 656 116 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2422, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 368,101 Lab.Cas. P 11,041 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGE, STRUCTURAL, ORNAMENTAL,AND REINFORCING IRONWORKERS' LOCAL UNION 75,Petitioner/Appellant/Cross-Appellee,v.MADISON INDUSTRIES, INC., an Arizona Corporation,Respondent/Appellee/Cross- Appellant. Nos. 82-5985, 83-1644. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. ...
Views: 3
735 F.2d 118 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 372 COLEMAN, Kaseem, a minor, by his mother and next friend,Delores LEE; and Mattox, Aaron, a minor, by his mother andnext friend, Doris Mattox; Wiggins, Lawrence Lee, andWiggins, Freddie Lee, minors, by their mother and nextfriend, Barbara Wiggins, on their own behalf and on behalfof all others similarly situated, Appellees,v.Joseph H. STANZIANI and Lawrenc...
Views: 2
This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky (Allen, J.) granting a preliminary injunction mandating the third party defendant-appellants, the Corrections Cabinet of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (the State), to reduce the number of convicted felons confined in the Jefferson County Jail and to transfer each convicted felon confined ther...
Views: 7
735 F.2d 1369 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 377 DiLucav.Lykes Bros. SS. Co., Inc., 83-1884 United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. 4/27/84 1 N.D.Cal. AFFIRMED ...
Views: 0
This case involves the propriety of a grant of partial summary judgment entered in favor of the liquidators of a failed Bahamian bank against three' of its former officers and control persons who used bank funds to purchase stock for their own accounts without repaying the bank. We affirm. I. Background Defendants Tazwell W. Pearson, Robert N. Bussey, and Donald R. Baker established the British-Am...
Views: 1
This appeal involves plaintiff Jose A. Fonseca’s five and one-half year struggle to recover a misdirected suitcase and its contents — $250,000—from the United States Government. Fonseca seeks relief from two judgments rendered against him in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, 98 F.R.D. 694 (Costantino, J.), the first dismissing with prejudice his claim for manda...
Views: 1
732 F.2d 850 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 378 Graham C. GARNER, etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.Tazwell W. PEARSON, individually and as Trustee for PhilipTheodore Pyfrom and Lissay Pyfrom, minors, RobertN. Bussey, Donald N. Baker, Defendants-Appellants,andWilliam M. Bussey, et al., Defendants. No. 82-5746. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. May 21, 1984. Micha...
Views: 0
734 F.2d 944 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 378 Jose A. FONSECA, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Donald T. REGAN, Secretary of the Treasury of the UnitedStates, et al., Defendants-Appellees.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.UNITED STATES CURRENCY AMOUNTING TO the SUM OF TWO HUNDREDFIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($250,000.00) MORE OR LESS, Defendant,andRepublic of Colombia and the State of New York, Defendant...
Views: 1
... „ , Broadcastaf. Company Inc., (NBC) and various individuals who are , , „ Payees (collectively referred to as NBC) appeal a * of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, T.F. Gilroy Daly, Ch. J„ deny-^g an application to inspect and copy mate-rial obtamed or. felated to’ electronic surveillance conducted pursuant to Title III of the 0mmbus Crime Control ...
Views: 1
468 U.S. 364 (1984) FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION v. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA ET AL. No. 82-912. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 16, 1984 Decided July 2, 1984 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA *365 Samuel A. Alito, Jr., argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Lee, Assistant *366 ...
Views: 19
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Presently before this Court is plaintiffs’ motion for certification of a defendant class consisting of all partners in Fox & Company (“Fox”) who were partners between March 21, 1977 and April 15, 1982, inclusive (“the class period”). This case is one of several related cases allegedly arising out of a plan and course of conduct to misrepresent the financial condition ...
Views: 4
732 F.2d 1559 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 399 William THIEM, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.The HERTZ CORPORATION, d/b/a The Hertz Corporation CarLeasing Division, Defendant-Appellee. No. 83-5194. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. May 29, 1984. Leslie King O'Neal, Orlando, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant. Betsy Hartley, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellee. Appea...
Views: 1
732 F.2d 1554 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 400 Joseph HEWITT, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.The B.F. GOODRICH CO., a foreign corporation and T.G. & Y.Stores, Co., a foreign corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. 83-3174. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. May 29, 1984. Larry Klein, West Palm Beach, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee. Chris W. Altenbernd, Tampa, Fla., f...
Views: 3
732 F.2d 1238 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 406 Sheldon ENGEL, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.TELEPROMPTER CORPORATION, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 83-1618, 83-1798 Summary Calendar. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. May 25, 1984. Farrow, Schildhause, Wilson & Rains, Lynne A. Armstrong, Thomas A. Seaton, Harold R. Farrow, Richard Calabria Moore, ...
Views: 1
732 F.2d 1233 34 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1566,34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,405, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 410 Dorothea N. HORNBUCKLE, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.ARCO OIL & GAS COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 83-1435. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. May 24, 1984. Frank P. Hernandez, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiff-appellant. Thompson & Knight, Bennett W. Cervin, A...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION Before the court is defendant’s amended motion for order compelling physical examination or the production of fingerprints (doc. 51). Plaintiff has responded and opposes such motion (doc. 52). Plaintiff contends the motion should be denied because his fingerprints are not relevant to the case, because the requested discovery is not of the sort contemplated by the Federal Rules ...
Views: 1
ORDER In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action the court in an opinion dated December 12, 1983, see Appendix, rejected as frivolous the two arguments offered by defendant City of Atlanta supporting the city’s motion to dismiss. The city’s argument which suggested that dismissal was appropriate because the city had not received ante litem notice of this suit as required by O.C.G.A. § 36-33-5 (1982) w...
Views: 0
ORDER The defendants and their counsel have moved for reconsideration of this Court’s order of June 9, 1983 which assesses against them sanctions for discovery abuse. The matter has been exhaustively briefed and argued and, for the reasons stated below, the June 9th Order will be modified, in part, to reflect (1) the new evidence regarding production of the Mad-sen memo and (2) the appropriate st...
Views: 1
ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS This matter is before the Court on the Motion of defendant Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to certify a class for purposes of settling claims arising out of the use of the product known as Bendectin. Before dealing with the specific prerequisites to a class action as set forth in Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, some background of this litigation should be...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER This case comes before the Court on the Plaintiff’s motion, filed on March 5, 1984, for relief from a Judgment or Order of this Court. Plaintiff’s complaint was filed on July 14, 1983, and was followed by the filing on July 29,1983, of the answer of the Defendants. A preliminary pretrial conference was held before the United States Magistrate on November 22, 1983. ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION OF DEFENDANT POWER ANCHOR CORPORATION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) This case comes before the Court on the motion of Power Anchor Corporation as Third-Party Plaintiff against Third-Party Defendant Roberge Construction, Inc., filed on April 26, 1984, for relief from a judgment or order of this Court granting the said Third-Party ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case, involving a highly contentious conflict over a union organizing campaign, presents important questions regarding the scope of discovery and the rights of participants in discovery to comment on matters involved in litigation. On December 20, 1983, this Court entered a protective order suspending discovery for a period of ninety days because the Court found that discovery pro...
Views: 1
Jeannette E. Hummel appeals from a summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health and Human Services in her action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Supp. V 1981), for review of the denial of disability benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1385 (1976 & Supp. V 1981). Hummel contends that the district court erred in concluding that the Secretary’s decision ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The above-captioned action came before this Court upon defendants’ motion for trial by jury. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion is denied. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, a prisoner, commenced this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for damages arising from an alleged beating by certain prison guards, on November 5, 1981, by filing the complaint herein. Defendant...
Views: 0
733 F.2d 634 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 475 In re Benjamin J. GUTHRIE, Clerk, U.S. House ofRepresentatives, Petitioner.In the Matter of George H. BENFORD, Plaintiff,v.AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., a New YorkCorporation; Mrs. Isaac (Betty) Hamburger; MissKathleen T. Gardner; Mrs. Lillian M.Teitelbaum; David L. Holton;Margaret Osmer, Defendants. No. 83-1653. United States Court of...
Views: 0
This is an appeal from the district court’s denial of plaintiff's Rule 60(b) motion for relief from a judgment of dismissal. Plaintiff, a Massachusetts resident, filed this contract action in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts against Mast Road Grain and Building Materials Company, Inc., a New Hampshire corporation, and Harvey Dupuis, the president of the corpora...
Views: 2
738 F.2d 429 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 481 Carterv.Medical Center Hospitals 83-1947 United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. 6/28/84 1 E.D.Va. AFFIRMED ...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff has appealed from (moved to retax) the costs taxed by the Clerk of Court. Particularly at issue are the Clerk’s disallowance of expert witness fees and the travel costs of Plaintiff to attend her own deposition. After a hearing, the Clerk refused to tax any of Plaintiff’s travel costs and allowed only statutory per diem attendance fees and travel allowances for Plaintiff’s two exp...
Views: 1
Dr. David Yashon, the plaintiff, appeals from a district court order granting summary judgment to the defendants in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This is the second time that this case has come before this court. On the first appeal, the plaintiff challenged a district court judgment holding that .the defendants had afforded him due process in deciding not to reappoint him t...
Views: 4
This action by a former member of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Bernstein, against the Exchange and one of its clearing members, Lind-Waldock, raises intricate questions of federal jurisdiction, involving the timeliness of the appeal, the removability of the action, and the doctrine of pendent-party jurisdiction, as well as substantive issues under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and the...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER The matters before the court are defendants’ motion for a protective order and plaintiff’s motion to compel. *11Defendants filed a motion for a protective order in response to a deposition subpoena served on Russell A. Powell, the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act Reviewing Officer for defendant Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), Central Office, located in Washing...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant has objected to the magistrate’s report and recommendation that defendant be compelled to answer interrogatories and requests to produce propounded by the plaintiff and that defendant’s motion for a protective order be denied. Defendant is a West German corporation that manufactured a machine in which plaintiff’s son was killed. This action, brought by plaintiff as the...
Views: 3
This antitrust suit under section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, pits a building-materials dealer, Walters, against a manufacturer of prefabricated farm buildings, Morton. The complaint, filed in 1978, alleges that Morton tied building components to its trademark, assigned its franchised dealers (one of whom was Walters) exclusive sales territories, limited the prices the dealers could charg...
Views: 1
ORDER Presently pending before this court is defendant’s Objection to Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs. Defendant objects' to three costs taxed to him: (1) travel expenses for witnesses ($523.00); (2) costs incident to taking of depositions ($883.45); and (3) computer research charges ($1,182.00). *580A. Travel Expenses ($523.00) Plaintiff - seeks to recover the costs of transporting two witnesses to Atl...
Views: 1
Philip Kain, doing business as BrockKain Company, was a wholesale distributor of bulk liquid hair spray and shampoo, which he sold to beauty salons in Wichita, Kansas. Kain brought suit against Peel’s Friendly Supply, Inc., another wholesale distributor of hair spray and related products in Kansas. Joined as a party defendant was Winslow Manufacturing, Inc., described as a subsidiary and alter ego...
Views: 0
OPINION OF THE COURT Before us is a Petition for Mandamus filed by representatives of a national class action brought under the antitrust laws against the fifteen major oil companies on behalf of their lessee dealers. Petitioners seek the writ to direct the district court to vacate its orders compelling production of certain memoranda prepared by petitioners’ counsel that petitioners contend are ...
Views: 0
ORDER On September 30, 1983, the Court dismissed the claims against Timex Corporation subject to plaintiff’s right to amend within fifteen days. 571 F.Supp. 1188. Plaintiff did not amend the complaint within the time allowed. On January 6, 1984, the Court directed the entry of final judgment of dismissal as to Timex. After judgment was entered, Timex filed its bill of costs. Presently bef...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER This matter comes before the court upon defendant Lurie, Eiger, Besikof & Co.’s (Lurie Eiger) motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s entire claim for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Defendant Lurie Eiger also moved to dismiss the state law claims for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and (2), to dismiss the securities...
Views: 3
*720ORDER This matter comes before the court upon plaintiffs appeal from the order of Magistrate Brian P. Short dated October 26, 1983. That order required plaintiff to produce Schedule D of his federal tax returns for the years 1976 through 1979. Defendant Lurie, Eiger, Besikof & Co. opposes the appeal. Defendant Lurie Eiger moved to dismiss the complaint in lieu of an answer. Shortly before the...
Views: 0
OPINION Presently before us is the Motion of Defendant, Ashland Oil, Inc. (“Ashland”) to set aside a default judgment entered pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b). Plaintiff is a Pennsylvania resident and was an employee of Volkswagen of America, Inc. (“Volkswagen”), in New Stanton, Pa. Defendant Ashland is a Kentucky corporation with its principal place of business in Ohio. Plaintiff alleges in his Com...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. Procedural Background This Memorandum and Order resolves a series of issues raised in motions filed herein in the course of ongoing discovery. On July 1, 1983, Plaintiff John Xaphes filed a motion in this Court for a default judgment against Defendant Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (Merrill Lynch) or, in the alternative, for sanctions *547pursuant to Rule 37 o...
Views: 2
*221 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Three separate appeals from decisions and orders of the Honorable Burton Lif-land, Bankruptcy Judge, are before this Court for determination. They arise out of the proceedings pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, initiated by Johns-Manville Corporation (“Manville”). Since these are related matters, we consider them together. After more tha...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is a Petition to Set Aside Default Judgment filed by Defendants. In light of relevant law, we hereby deny Defendants’ Petition. This Court’s decision is governed by Rule 55(c) and Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 55(c) provides that, “(f)or good cause shown the court may set aside an entry of default and, if a judgment by default has b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Edna Johnson and Jerome Montgomery have moved to maintain this suit as a class action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs’ motion is hereby granted. Background Named plaintiffs Edna Johnson and Jerome Montgomery bring this action to challenge certain interrelated regulatory policies of defendant, the Secretary of the D...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs Paula Renfroe and Nancy Deitchman have brought pharmaceutical products liability actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, against E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. (Squibb) and other drug companies for injuries allegedly caused by in útero exposure to the drug diethylstilbestrol (DES). Paula Renfroe, born in 1964, has an ad...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM The plaintiff, Anthony C. Baran, has filed a motion for new trial pursuant to Rule 59, Fed.R.Civ.P. *273Plaintiff was treated for heart trouble at Presbyterian University Hospital by Randolph A. Miller, M.D. and Barry Uretsky, M.D. Subsequent to said treatment, plaintiff filed a malpractice action against the hospital and doctors. A directed verdict was granted on behalf of the hospita...
Views: 3
Plaintiffs-appellants Stephen Davidson and Mary Parshall appeal from the dismissal of their § 1983 civil rights action in the Eastern District of New York, Glasser, J. Defendants-appellees Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office, Suffolk County Department of Civil Service, and Joseph Keenan, an employee of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office, cross-appeal from the denial of their motio...
Views: 1
740 F.2d 129 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 585 Stephen DAVIDSON and Mary Parshall,Plaintiffs-Appellants/Cross-Appellees,v.Joseph KEENAN, Suffolk County District Attorney's Office andSuffolk County Department of Civil Service,Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants. Nos. 1058, 1214, Dockets 83-9065, 84-7005. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued April 12, 1984.Decided July 18, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This action was brought by the plaintiff, Acme Markets, Inc. (“Acme”) seeking reimbursement for damage to 25,000 pounds of carcass beef, and 14,000 pounds of smoked cured meat which were damaged as a result of the defendant’s alleged negligence or carelessness in the shipping and storage of the beef and meat. Subsequent to the loss, Acme presented a claim to its insurance carri...
Views: 1
Appellant Marc Rich & Co. A.G. (“Rich & Co.”) appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern Dis *835 trict of New York, Leonard B. Sand, Judge, entered March 14, 1984, issued pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a) “to clarify and remove any ambiguity and mistake inadvertently contained” in a prior order of the court, dated September 13, 1982, and to ...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION Plaintiff on 5 April 1983 filed a complaint against defendant. The plaintiff is a lessee and occupant of premises owned by a third party. Plaintiff alleged in the complaint that extensive water damage was caused to plaintiff’s property as a result of defendant’s faulty repairs to the roof of the leased premises. It sought damages, inter alia, as an alleged third party beneficiary...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and a putative class, allege that defendant, a manufacturer and distributor of copper water tubing, conspired with others in the copper tubing industry to fix prices in violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1337. Plaintiffs’ pending motion to certify a class pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of th...
Views: 2
Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge DAVIS. Appellants challenge orders of the District Court, 1 99 F.R.D. 582, granting appellees’ motion to compel compliance with four subpoenas duces tecum on the grounds that the attorney-client and work product privileges had been waived by prior disclosure. We affirm. I Appellees, movants below, are seeking cop...
Views: 4
Whittaker and its subsidiary, Dynasciences, (hereinafter referred to as Whittaker) brought this action alleging that Execuair and a related enterprise, EMC Manufacturing Co., (hereinafter referred to as Execuair) and Execuair’s founder Larry Manhan misappropriated trade secrets, improperly “palmed off” Execuair’s product as Whittaker’s and infringed on Whittaker’s trademark. Whittaker appeals a...
Views: 4
743 F.2d 739 35 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1163,36 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 35,068, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 624 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellantand Cross-Appellee,v.ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY, now BurlingtonNorthern Railroad Company, Defendant-Appellee andCross-Appellant. Nos. 83-1072, 83-1127. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. July 13, 1984. ...
Views: 1
OPINION OF THE COURT This is a suit by a number of former employees of Gould Inc. against Gould and the First Trust Company of St. Paul Minnesota (“First Trust”), Gould’s pension plan trustee, alleging that Gould violated the plaintiffs’ rights by underfunding the Gould pension trust and that, despite their long service to the company, the plaintiffs have consequently been deprived of any pension...
Views: 0
Appellant trustees 1 of the Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund, Welfare Trust Fund, Annuity Trust Fund, and Legal Services Trust Fund appeal from various judgments and orders2 entered in the Eastern District of New York after a bench trial by Judge Jacob Mishler finding them jointly and severally liable for losses incurred by the Local 282 Pension Trust Fund (“Pension Fund”) on account of brea...
Views: 3
This is an action by a charter company to recover damages for breach of contract from a carrier airline. Plaintiff I.L.T.A., Inc. appeals from a judgment of the District Court for the Western District of New York (Michael A. Telesca, J.) granting summary judgment for the defendant United Airlines. The district court held that the airline did not breach its contract with I.L. T.A., Inc. when it ...
Views: 1
Jacob and Rachel Gutwein 1 appeal from a grant of summary judgment on their claim that a drug manufactured and distributed by the defendants caused Mr. Gutwein’s blindness. Because the Gutweins were not afforded the full ten-day notice period required by Rule 56(c), Fed.R.Civ.P., *94 before the district court granted summary-judgment, we reverse and remand. BACKGROU...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION On or about September 8,1982 defendant Anheuser-Busch served a notice of deposition and for production of documents directed to Alimenta (U.S.A.) and its attorney of record, John G. Parker, Esq., and a subpoena directed to Jan Muis “and his attorney, John G. Parker, Esq.” Plaintiff filed a motion to quash and for protective order on September 20,1982, which this court denied on...
Views: 1
Ten locals of an international labor union filed a petition to compel arbitration of a dispute with an employer concerning the meaning and effect of a provision in their collective bargaining agreements. The dis*1373puted provision requires the employer to continue to make trust fund contributions on behalf of employees who initially work within the bargaining unit but are subsequently transferred...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Presently before the court is defendant’s1 motion for reconsideration of the Court’s February 24, 1984 Order pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or in the alternative defendant’s motion to amend the Order setting forth the basis of its decision pursuant to Rule 52(b). The motions are addressed seriatim. The Order of February 24, 1984 granted plaintiff’...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This Court’s May 16, 1984 opinion (the “Opinion”) rejected the extensive but wholly ill-founded summary judgment motion filed by SFM Corporation (“SFM”). Sundstrand Corporation (“Sundstrand”) has now moved under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 11 for an award of its substantial attorneys’ fees incurred in resisting SFM’s motion. SFM counters by saying the Opinion made its motio...
Views: 0
In this declaratory judgment action, we examine whether the district court erred in denying Nathan Overstreet’s motion to compel Eugene Westrope to submit to further deposition. The district court improperly ruled upon Overstreet’s motion. We therefore reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Commercial Union Insurance Company (Commercial Union) and remand to the district cour...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This ease concerns the Aurora Parc housing project (Aurora Parc) in Aurora, Illinois. Plaintiff, Shape of Things to Come, Inc. (STC), served a subpoena duces tecum on the office of U.S. Representative Thomas Corcoran (Rep. Corcoran), seeking the production of all documents in Rep. Corcoran’s files which relate to Aurora Parc. Rep. Corcoran opposes production o...
Views: 0
736 F.2d 160 35 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 345,34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,530, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 670 Joan Rance VUYANICH, Plaintiff-Appellee Cross-Appellant,andMarisu Fenton, Intervenor-Appellee,Marjorie Lee Jackson and Dorothy Hooks, Intervenors-Appellants,andPortia Williams and Martha Davis, Movants-Appellants,v.REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK OF DALLAS, Defendant-AppellantCross-Appellee.Ellen JOHNSON, Pl...
Views: 2
dissenting: The majority opinion aptly describes Louisiana law as it pertains to foreseeability in products liability for design and manufacturing defects. The opinion misses the mark, however, in applying these principles indiscriminately to this case, which is predicated not on a design or manufacturing defect, but on a marketing defect, namely the failure to warn of the then unforeseeable inher...
Views: 0
The trial court found certain mineral leases valid and enforceable. Finding no error, we affirm. Facts , On May 14, 1975, Fredrick M. Gorenflo and his co-owners in indivisión, granted an oil, gas, and mineral lease to Texaco, Inc., covering a 76.2 acre tract in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. The lease had a primary term of five years during which Texaco subleased a por...
Views: 0
The district court granted summary judgment for McCloud River Railroad Company on its claim against Sabine River Forest Products to recover unpaid freight charges. The court also dismissed with prejudice Sabine’s counterclaim for damages because of its failure to prosecute. On appeal, Sabine contends that the district court did not follow the procedural requisites of Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) for gran...
Views: 1
*317 MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, William J. Feinaugle, brings this action against defendant, The Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad Company, alleging that defendant’s supervisor unreasonably harassed and intimidated him as a means of requiring him to appear as a witness in a co-worker’s Federal Employees Liability Act (hereinafter referred to as “FELA”) lawsuit. Plaintiff asserts that he was...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking to have the court’s order of December 7, 1981, vacated. FACTS Plaintiff Soletanche and Rodio, Inc. (“plaintiff”), an American corporation, brought this suit against defendant for patent infringement. Plaintiff is the exclusive U.S. licensee of a French patent owned by Soletanche Societe Anonyme, a French corporation. This company, Soletanche ...
Views: 2
This is an appeal by June Phillips from the denial of her motion to intervene, individually and on behalf of a class of black parents and children, in this long-pending litigation concerning the desegregation ■ of the Caddo Parish school system. We sustain the district court’s ruling, holding that it did not abuse its discretion in determining that Ms. Phillips’ motion was untimely. This litigatio...
Views: 0
Arturo Perez brings this attempted appeal from the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We dismiss the appeal because no timely notice of appeal has been given. On November 5, 1981 Perez pleaded guilty to Counts 4 and 6 of a multi-count indictment, Count 4 charging conspiracy to possess, with intent to distribute, marihuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §...
Views: 3
This appeal presents the single issue of whether the district court abused its discretion in dismissing appellant Stripling's counterclaim as a sanction under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2) for failure to comply with a discovery order. 1 Holding that it did, we reverse and remand this case for reinstatement of Stripling’s counterclaim. This lawsuit was commenced by Allied Marine to recov...
Views: 2
Patricia Gorman appeals from the district court’s denial of her petition to intervene in a lawsuit between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Eastern Airlines in which the EEOC alleged that Eastern had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., by not hiring Gorman and 22 other women as flight attendants. Gorman and several other of th...
Views: 5
The plaintiff-appellant Van T. Junkins and Associates, Inc. (Junkins) claims in this appeal that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendants-appellees, U.S. Industries, Inc., A & S Building Systems, Inc., and others (A & S). To support its motion for summary judgment, A & S filed the deposition of Junkins, President of plaintiff. Prior to the hearing on A & S’s motion, ...
Views: 0
L.A. Draper & Sons, Inc. 1 (plaintiff in the action below) appeals a directed verdict on its antitrust claim against defendants, Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc. (referred to as “Whiffy”) 2 , Hessco Industrial Supply, Inc. (“Hessco”), and Fred Hester 3 , and the *417 dismissal without prejudice of its pendent state unfair competition claims. The antitru...
Views: 4
Appellants, Jack and Shirley Rothenberg, appeal from the district court’s award of attorneys’ fees to appellees, Security Management Co., et al. Both Jack and Shirley had filed individual actions, on their own behalf, and derivative actions, putatively on behalf of the corporation, against appellees. Their derivative actions were dismissed, and the district court awarded attorneys’ fees to appe...
Views: 1
ORDER Upon consideration of appellants’ suggestion that rehearing be withdrawn, and of the responses thereto, and it appearing that on March 28, 1984 this Court directed that supplementary briefing and oral argument be deferred pending the disposition of the Supreme Court in Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, and it further appearing that the latter case was decided by the Supreme Court, — U.S. ...
Views: 2
ORDER ON MOTION FOR ORDER OF SUBSTITUTION On June 5, 1984, a hearing was held on this motion. On June 16, 1983, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 200, § 1, movant John Legasey was appointed to act as Receiver of the Estate of Howard Slater by the Probate and Family Court Department of the Trial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. M.G.L. c. 200, § 1 et seq. provides for the appointment of a receiver w...
Views: 0
This is an appeal from the district court’s denial of a motion for intervention as of right under Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2) and for permissive intervention under Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(b). Because we hold that appellants were entitled to intervene as of right, we do not discuss the permissive intervention issue. Appellants, nine members of the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes of Oklahoma, own restricted Indian ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDA OPINIONS AND ORDERS I. The defendant seeks a protective order, Rule 26(c), F.R.Civ.P., requiring the plaintiff (whose principal-place-of-business is in California) to take the depositions of three of its officers and agents in this District instead of in Los Angeles, California. Such motion lacks merit. It is well-settled that the deposition of a corporation, through its officers and ag...
Views: 0
This three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of these appeals. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Tenth Circuit R. 10(e). The causes are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. These cases are cross-appeals taken following the appeal filed by plaintiff, Leon H. Savage, our No. 83-1950. The court directed the defendant...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER On July 22, 1983, plaintiffs, all participants or beneficiaries of a salaried employees’ termination pay plan, filed their complaint in this case, alleging principally that the defendant employers acted with malice and in bad faith by making termination payments based not on established base salaries but on plaintiffs’ temporarily-reduced salaries. Plaintiffs claim that this al...
Views: 0
The First Assembly of God Church, students, and parents of students of the Church’s Christian Academy, in Alexandria, Virginia, (collectively, the “Church”), appeal from the order of the district court granting summary judgment to the City of Alexandria and members of the City Council (collectively, the “City”), in this action challenging the constitutionality of the City’s zoning regulations. We...
Views: 2
591 F. Supp. 136 (1984) Joseph F. ARROYO, James P. Mastelotto and Thomas E. Nevis, Plaintiffs, v. Robert D. WHEAT, Lois LaVonne Wheat, Terrence E. Dreiling, Paul H. Metzinger, William Holben Associates, Harry P. Holman, Ryder-Scott Company, Birr Wilson & Company, Inc. and Dominion Bank of Denver, Defendants. No. CV-R-83-181-ECR. United States District Court, D. Nevada. May 22, 1984. *137 Rich...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Defendant Ryder-Scott Company has moved to dismiss the action against it or, in the alternative, to require the plaintiffs to replead their complaint against it with particularity. Its contentions are that: 1) Plaintiffs have not alleged a claim for relief under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) or Rule 10b-5 promul...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Presently before the court are: (a) five motions to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint against third-party defendants1; (b) plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend its complaint2; and (c) defendants’ motion for leave to file a third-party complaint.3 The foregoing motions are addressed seriatim. All five motions to dismiss will be consolidated for discussion. Consistent with this me...
Views: 0
OPINION This is an action brought by plaintiff, Nitto Boseki Co., Ltd., against defendant, Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 146 and 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), to review the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences of the United States Patent Office (the “Board”) which awarded priority to the defendant on count 1 of three counts that were the subject of the interference proc...
Views: 0
Appellant Wayne Investment brought an action against Gulf Oil Corporation (Gulf) alleging that Gulf had violated § 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 1 §§ 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Mass.Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 93A, and the common law of fraud by making false and misleading statements in connection with a tender offer. The district court dismissed the complai...
Views: 3
DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND This action, originally filed in the Texas State Court for Hidalgo County, arises out of injuries that resulted in the deaths of Jose Rodriguez and Juan Olivarez while they were employed by the defendant, Marks Brothers Pickle Company, Inc. In their original petition, plaintiffs, the surviving widows and minor children of the decedents, alleged that the injuries were...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On June 17, 1982, the Cleveland Press Publishing Co. (“Press Publishing”) and its president, Joseph Cole, closed Cleveland’s daily afternoon newspaper, the Cleveland Press (“Press”). Hundreds of employees lost their jobs and Cleveland was left with only one daily newspaper. The Plain Dealer Publishing Company (“Plain Dealer”), publisher of the surviving paper, purchased the P...
Views: 0
TXO Production Corporation appeals from the District Court’s order dismissing without prejudice Frances Kern’s action against it. TXO claims that the dismissal, which came after the trial had begun, should have been with prejudice, or, in the alternative, should at least have been conditioned on the payment by plaintiff of its costs and lawyers’ fees. We cannot agree that it was an abuse of dis...
Views: 2
The suit underlying this appeal arose after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) began advertising a nonjudicial foreclosure sale on the Little Earth housing project in Minneapolis, Minnesota. To block the foreclosure, appellants Little Earth of United Tribes, Inc. (Little Earth), owner of the project, and Little Earth Residents Council (Residents Council) brought suit against HUD...
Views: 0
738 F.2d 310 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 830 LITTLE EARTH OF UNITED TRIBES, INC., a Minnesota NonprofitCorporation, and Little Earth Tenants' Committee, Appellants,v.UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,Samuel R. Pierce, Jr., in his capacity as Secretary, UnitedStates Department of Housing and Urban Development, (HUD),John Doe and Mary Roe, Agents and Officials of HUD, andDonald ...
Views: 3
738 F.2d 82 116 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3243, 75 A.L.R.Fed. 225,39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 834, 18 Ed. Law Rep. 587 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellee,v.PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Appellees,andKatherine Knight, individually and as President of theLittle Rock Classroom Teachers Association, etal., Appellants. No. 84-1686. United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. ...
Views: 4
739 F.2d 962 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 837, 10 Media L. Rep. 2305 Michael J. MORRISSEY, Appellant,v.WILLIAM MORROW & CO., INC., Bantam Books, Appellees. No. 82-1213. United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. Argued Dec. 8, 1983.Decided July 26, 1984. W. Jeffrey Edwards, Richmond, Va. (D. Alan Rudlin, Hunton & Williams, Richmond, Va., Michael J. Morrissey, Washin...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this mortgage foreclosure action Southeast Englewood Associates (“Associates”) have returned to this Court, invoking virtually every subpart of Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 60(b), to ask the setting aside of the August 5, 1983 Decree of Foreclosure (“Decree”) foreclosing the mortgage of the Perry Village Apartments (“Apartments”).1 Associates contend officials of the mort...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION This litigation, now entering its second decade, has recently been transferred to me. The allegations of the second amended complaint thrust in several directions, but the general tenor is of unfair competition through price discrimination between aircraft distributors (wholesalers) and retail dealers. It is contended that the distributors actually...
Views: 1
In August, 1981, Daniel Quinn sued his union, Local 31 of the Tile, Marble, Terrazzo Finishers and Shopmen, AFL-CIO (“Local 31” or “the Local”) and two of its officers, Joseph DiGiulian and Dennis Baugh, alleging that when he announced his decision to run as a candidate for business agent of Local 31 against the incumbent DiGiulian, he became the target of a relentless campaign of harassment — ...
Views: 5
We issued a rule to show cause why the appeal in this matter should not be dismissed because the notice of appeal had been filed by the defendant before the district court decided the plaintiff’s motion under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to alter the court’s judgment. Such a notice of appeal has no effect. See Rule 4(a)(4) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; ...
Views: 2
OPINION Ray Marchitello, a newspaper reporter for The Yonkers Home News & Times, has moved to intervene in this action, asking that the Court allow him to make a tape recording of the proceedings by the use of a miniature cassette recorder. The motion for intervention for this limited purpose is granted, and the application is denied on the merits. Courtroom tape recording...
Views: 1
In this case plaintiff/appellant Keith Fulton & Sons, Inc., is challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (MPPAA) as applied to it. The MPPAA amended various provisions of the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. The district court below granted summary judgment on all counts i...
Views: 4
Sun Cha Allen failed to make timely rental payments on property leased from Eduard Falk. Falk brought an unlawful detainer action in the Superior Court of Guam for back rent and treble damages. When Allen did not appear at the hearing, the. court entered a default judgment against her. Five months later, Allen moved under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to set aside the judgment. The trial court denied her ...
Views: 6
The district court dismissed this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW These consolidated cases arose out of a complex business arrangement, the nature of which is in dispute but is not the subject of this appeal. In 1978 Hiram and Joseph Ash (hereinafter collectively “Ash”) turned over to Eugene Cvetkov $30,000 worth of gold, to be...
Views: 2
This appeal is from the grant of a dismissal of a personal injury case as a sanction under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b) for a supposed failure to comply with an order requiring the plaintiff to submit to a physical examination under Fed.R.Civ.P. 35. While the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Robert L. Carter, Judge, is clearly authorized by law to dismiss a case for fai...
Views: 0
We grant the petition for rehearing, withdraw our prior order, and affirm the district court’s order granting an extension of time in which to file an appeal. Rule 4(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure permits the district court to extend the time for filing an appeal on a showing by the moving party that the failure to file a timely appeal was the result of “excusable neglect.” Sinc...
Views: 2
739 F.2d 464 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 912 ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, Air Force of the Islamic Republicof Iran, Plaintiffs-Appellants Cross-Appellees,v.The BOEING COMPANY and Logistics Support Corporation,Defendants-Appellees Cross-Appellants. Nos. 84-3542, 84-3558. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 1, 1984.Decided Aug. 2, 1984. John Dillow, Seattle, ...
Views: 0
Plaintiff sued defendants for breach of contract. The defendants did not file any responsive pleading, but their attorney entered into settlement negotiations. The negotiations failed. Subsequently, plaintiff’s attorney tried to notify defendants’ attorney that he would seek entry of defendants’ default; but defendants’ attorney did not get the notice. (He had moved his offices.) Plaintiff obta...
Views: 3
Robert A. Buss ended nearly 35 years of employment with Western Airlines on October 17, 1975 under circumstances which led him, in January, 1977, to file an action for damages for violating 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (The Age Discrimination in Employment Act). In September, 1980, the district court dismissed the complaint because of plaintiff’s failure to comply with court orders and failure to co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT The record in this case reflects that the Defendant filed on January 9, 1984, its Motion for More Definite Statement. No timely or otherwise sufficient objection to the allowance of this motion has been filed by Plaintiff.* Accordingly, pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule 19(b), the Motion for More Definite Statement is he...
Views: 0
Eastway Women’s Clinic, Inc., appeals the district court’s imposition of sanctions under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37, including the striking of its defenses, entry of adverse judgment on the merits, and the assessment of $1,000 in attorney’s fees. Upon review of the record, we find the sanctions imposed, albeit severe, are justified by the conduct of defendant’s representative, Tommy E. Swate, who is both a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants move pursuant to Rule 37, Fed.R.Civ.P., for discovery sanctions and costs, including attorney’s fees. This is a Title VII action in which plaintiff, an attorney, alleges that defendants unlawfully discriminated against him in making certain post-employment references to prospective employers, including agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) who were i...
Views: 0
Cooper appeals from the dismissal with prejudice of her Title VII complaint. The district court also denied Cooper’s motion to amend her complaint and name the proper defendant. The dismissal was based upon a lack of jurisdiction because Cooper failed to file an action naming the proper defendant within the period provided by 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, a...
Views: 4
delivered the opinion of the Court. Title 40 U. S. C. § 257, in conjunction with Rule 71A of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, prescribes a procedure pursuant to which the United States may appropriate privately owned land by eminent domain. The central issue in this case is whether the manner in which the value of the land is determined and paid to its owner under that procedure comports w...
Views: 11
The claimants’ motions for rehearing in these three cases are granted. The memorandum disposition filed on December 23, 1983 is vacated. Pursuant to that disposition this panel sua sponte determined that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal. The panel was in error. We now determine that this court does have jurisdiction and that the district court committed reversible error in dismissing the cla...
Views: 2
This is a suit to recover unpaid contributions to an employee benefit plan. The plaintiff-appellant, as administrator of the plan,* brought an action under section 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132, against an employer, D & L Camp Construction Company. In addition, the plaintiff sued the surety on Camp’s state contractor license bond, required und...
Views: 2
738 F.2d 999 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 944, 5 Employee Benefits Ca 2222 CARPENTERS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CORPORATION,Plaintiff-Appellant,v.D & L CAMP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., a corporation;Surety Company of the Pacific, a corporation,Defendants-Appellees. No. 82-6050. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 6, 1983.Decided July 23, 198...
Views: 1
In this antitrust suit, five states allege that major oil companies have conspired to fix the prices of refined petroleum products. The issue to be resolved on this interlocutory appeal is whether the states are entitled to a jury trial of legal claims. 1 The district court held that the states are entitled to a jury. We affirm. I. FACTS Arizona, California, Florida, Oregon...
Views: 3
Plaintiff Stephen Borzeka appeals the district court’s order granting the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ motion to set aside a default judgment against her and to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to coniply with the technical requirements of service under Rules 4(d)(4) and (5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We affirm the district court’s order insofar as it sets asid...
Views: 3
This case began as a seaman’s claim for damages arising from a back injury suffered as the result of the shipowner’s alleged negligence under the Jones Act and alleged maintenance of an unseaworthy vessel. What takes it out of the ordinary is that the jury rendered arguably inconsistent verdicts on negligence and seaworthiness. It answered “yes” to the question: “Did the plaintiffs injuries res...
Views: 3
The issue presented on this appeal is whether the district court was required to provide explicit notice to Garaux, a pro se plaintiff, of its intent to transform defendants’ motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) into a motion for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. We hold that it was. Garaux was' originally an inmate of the California Men’s Colony (CMC) in San Luis Obispo, California...
Views: 0
739 F.2d 437 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 976 Randolph GARAUX, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Reginald L. PULLEY, individually and in his officialcapacity as warden of the San Quentin State Prison; andJ.W.L. Park, individually and in his official capacity asappeals investigator for the Department of Corrections,Defendants-Appellees.Randolph GARAUX, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Reginald PULLEY, et al., Defendants-App...
Views: 2
ORDER In Pepperling v. Crist, 678 F.2d 787 (9th Cir.1982), we held that the warden’s blanket prohibition against prisoners’ receipt of nude photographs of their wives and girlfriends was invalid as overbroad and ordered that a less restrictive alternative be adopted. The warden neither sought review of our decision by this court on a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc nor review by t...
Views: 2
This appeal arises from an order of dismissal entered by the district court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(d).1 In its order, the district court cited repeated failures of the appellant to appear and give deposition testimony. In doing so, appellant defied proper notices, confirmed agreements and court orders. While we agree that the sanction of dismissal is a most extreme remedy and *1539one not to ...
Views: 2
737 F.2d 1538 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 983, 10 Media L. Rep. 2256 Cyrus HASHEMI, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.CAMPAIGNER PUBLICATIONS, INC., d/b/a The ExecutiveIntelligence Review, New Solidarity and NewSolidarity International Press Service,Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 83-8584Non-Argument Calendar. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Aug. 1, 1984. O. Jackso...
Views: 0
Appellants class members and proposed intervenor, the State of New York, appeal from an order entered September 12, 1983 in the Southern District of New York, Irving Ben Cooper, District Judge, distributing to defendant, The Boeing Company, the unclaimed portion of a class action judgment fund, subject to the conditions that Boeing publish notice of the availability of the fund in it...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendants Nickel Odeon, S.A., Jose Esteban Alenda, Jose Luis Garci, Simon/Reeves/Landsburg Productions, Inc. and Twentieth Century-Fox Entertainment, Inc. move for an order pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Civil Rules of this court requiring plaintiff’s payment of said defendants’ counsel’s fees, travel and accommodation expenses for the depositions noticed by plaintiff of Shapira...
Views: 0
We review in this appeal an order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida approving an antitrust class action settlement between plaintiff-class representatives and thirty-one of thirty-five defendants. The appellants in this appeal include several groups . of dissident plaintiffs who argue that the settlement agreement is invalid in that it perpetuates a violati...
Views: 4
Appellants Linda and Roger Hebert appeal from an award of summary judgment and attorney’s fees to defendant Cordelia Wicklund in a copyright infringement action arising out of Wicklund’s alleged copying of the Heberts’ basketweaving kit. 1 In granting Wicklund’s motion for summary judgment, the district court noted that the Heberts had produced no evidence to counter Wicklund’s evide...
Views: 2
Plaintiffs-Appellants, Cameo Convalescent Center, Inc. (Cameo), and three of its officers and directors brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants, officers and employees of the Wisconsin Department of Health and Human Services (WDHHS), acted individually and in concert to deprive the plaintiffs of constitutionally protected rights. For the reasons explained below, we ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pursuant to designation from Judge Northrop to, inter alia, hear and determine non-dispositive pretrial matters (see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A)), this case came on for hearing before me on the plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants Teitelbaum and Hamburger to answer deposition questions. The issue for decision, as framed in the plaintiff’s response to the opposition of defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Richard Kaufman brings this derivative action on behalf of Morían International, Inc. (“Morían”) against Safeguard Scientifics, Inc. (“Safeguard”) and six current or former directors of Morían. Morían is a Delaware corporation. The parties have engaged in a flurry of motion prac *488 tice. Defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint and, on different g...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for a jury trial (doc. 9) and a memorandum by defendant, James H. Kilburn (doc. 10) in which he states that he does not oppose the jury demand. Plaintiffs demanded a jury in their complaint in this action for a declaration as to the proper recipient of proceeds of a Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI) policy on Paul Kilburn, the dece...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM and ORDER Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b) and 78t(a) (the “Act”), and Pennsylvania common law, to recover damages for alleged misrepresentations and omissions made by defendants with respect to the financial condition of C.I. Realty Investors, a real estate investment trust (the “Trust”). Pla...
Views: 1
740 F.2d 974 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1027 Gordonv.U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development 83-6022 United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. 7/5/84 1 C.D.Cal. AFFIRMED ...
Views: 0
This case is a further illustration, if one were needed, of the unwisdom of continuing diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, and particularly that portion of the diversity statute permitting such jurisdiction to be invoked by an in-state plaintiff. 1 There is no federal interest in this lawsuit except for that engendered by the disregard by trial counsel of a federal procedural r...
Views: 3
*45OPINION Presently pending before the Court are a motion by plaintiff to compel discovery against defendant Lufthansa1 and a motion by Lufthansa for a protective order concerning the depositions of its vice chairman and its former chairman. The issues with respect to both motions revolve principally around four arguments made by Lufthansa: (1) that it should not be required to produce any docum...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a legal malpractice action based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. Plaintiff, a Kansas resident, contends that defendant, a Colorado resident, negligently failed to institute a lawsuit on his behalf. Plaintiff served the defendant by first class mail as provided by Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(e)(2)(C)(ii). This matter is presently before the court upon defendant’s motion t...
Views: 1
Joseph and Sylvia Barrows appeal from the dismissal of their complaint alleging violations of federal securities laws and New York statutory and common law by Forest Laboratories, Inc. (“Forest”), Forest-Barrows, Inc., M.D. Oppenheim & Co., and various Forest officers, directors, and employees, in connection with Forest’s purchase of the Barrows’ pharmaceutical business in 1969. Following the deni...
Views: 1
742 F.2d 54 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1055, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 91,614 Joseph BARROWS and Sylvia Barrows, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.FOREST LABORATORIES, INC., Forest-Barrows Inc., Hans Lowey,Ian Stewart, Roberto Sein, Milton Dorison, WilliamJ. Candee, III, Howard Solomon, M.D.Oppenheim & Co., Defendants-Appellees. No. 1194, Docket 84-7094. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM On October 28, 1983, NL Industries, Inc. (NL Industries), a New Jersey corporation with its principal place of business in New York, filed a praecipe for the entry of a default judgment against Blue Streak Industries, Inc. (Blue Streak), a Louisiana corporation with its principal place of business in Louisiana. The praecipe stated that Blue Streak had failed to file an answer to NL Indu...
Views: 1
This appeal arises out of a dispute over the right to use the term “Hi-Res Adventure” to identify home computer strategy games with high-resolution (hi-res) graphic displays. 1 The defendant, Phoenix Software, Inc. (Phoenix), appeals from an order denying reconsideration of a preliminary injunction, and also denying its motion for summary judgment. We affirm the preliminary injunctio...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Pennex Products Company, Inc. (“Pennex”) has moved this court pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for reconsideration of this Court’s Order entered June 4, 1984, denying Pennex’s motion for leave as a third-party plaintiff to cause a summons and third-party complaint to be served1 23pursu-ant to Rule 14 of the Federal Rules of Civil Proced...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER Third party plaintiff, Friedman/Meyer Productions, Ltd., and additional counterclaim defendants, Stephen R. Friedman and Irwin Meyer (collectively referred to as “Friedman/Meyer”), move this Court pursuant to Rule 4(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure for an order extending their time to appeal. They seek to appeal from a final judgment entered in their third party...
Views: 0
Before the Court are defendant’s motion for relief from default judgment, memoranda in support thereof and opposition thereto, and the entire record herein. On January 30, 1984, this Court entered a default judgment against defendant on plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, pursuant to Rule 37(b) and (d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff’s motion was based on defendant’s repeated fail...
Views: 0
Memorandum The cause is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the court’s order of March 20, 1984, granting leave to intervene to Betty Johnson and other of plaintiff’s employees similarly situated. For the following reasons, after reconsideration, the court adheres to its earlier order. I In this suit, plaintiff challenges an order which defendant McNeil issued in state a...
Views: 0
OPINION The first of two issues presented in the controversy at hand is whether we should grant a defendant’s motion to dismiss an interpleader action commenced under Fed. R.Civ.P. 22. Only if we deny that motion must we reach the second issue which is whether we should issue an injunction barring the defendants from continuing or commencing suits against the plaintiffs surety for payment under a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a derivative suit on behalf of Geothermal Resources International, Inc. (“GRI”). Upon remand by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals the court has reexamined whether plaintiffs Oliver DeGray Vanderbilt, Vanderbilt & Company, and C. Clay Noah are fair and adequate representatives of the shareholder class. The court has also considered defendants’ contention that ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. NATURE OF THE ACTION and JURISDICTION This is an action for damages and for the imposition of a constructive trust by Plaintiff, JOHN ALDEN LIFE INSURANCE *364 COMPANY (“JALIC”), against Defendant, C.A. CAVENDES, SOCIEDAD FINANCIERA (“CAVENDES”) under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, R...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On May 7, 1984, defendant presented before this Court a “Verified Bill of Costs (FRAP 39(e))” submitting the expenses incurred upon appeal. Said expenses are for the translation of several opinions and legislative history and for the court reporter’s transcript of a hearing held on January 26, 1983, necessary for the determination of the appeal. The courts have established that ...
Views: 0
OPINION Defendants move to dismiss this action as a class action upon the ground that the named plaintiffs failed to move for class certification within sixty days after the filing of a pleading asserting a claim for a class, as is required by Local Civil Rule 4(c). The motion is denied. Plaintiffs are three partnerships, and the ten individuals who comprise the partnerships, who invested in the ...
Views: 1
ORDER Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, brought this action to enjoin defendants from violating the record keeping, minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. The Secretary also seeks an award of liquidated damages under 29 U.S.C. § 216(c). The action is before the court on the Secretary's motion to strike defendant...
Views: 0
*687 Memorandum Defendants K & S Commodities, Inc. (K & S), and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) have filed counterclaims against plaintiffs Elizabeth Vaccariello, Richard Winer, and certain unnamed class members. The cause is before the court on plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss those counterclaims. For the following reasons, the motion is denied. The gravamen of the count...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The plaintiff, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (hereinafter “State Farm”) has brought a suit for money had and *236received against the defendants for the recovery of fire losses paid under Homeowners’ Policy No. 46-027-9670-6. After the commencement of this case the defendants filed their petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM The complaint alleges that on the evening of August 3, 1979, four Secret Service agents arrived at plaintiff’s residence to serve him with a subpoena ordering him to provide handwriting exemplars to a grand *804jury. The agents allegedly did not possess a warrant to enter the premises, but instead they contacted plaintiff’s step-father, a co-owner but nonresident of that residence, who ...
Views: 1
ORDER Plaintiff Kenneth J. Lundy is appealing the judgment entered in favor of defendants, as well as the court’s denial of his motion for retrial, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Defendants seek an order requiring Lundy to file a bond or provide other security as an undertaking for costs on appeal in the amount of $2500 pursuant to Fed.R. App.P. 7. Defendants mai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Magistrate is plaintiffs’ motion for clarification of the Magistrate’s May 7-, 1984 Order with respect to whether Syntex Laboratories, Inc. should be required to produce to counsel for the plaintiffs in this case documents concerning Syntex’s follow-up of other infants in connection with their use of the Neo-Mull-Soy formula. Specifically, plaintiffs contend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This civil rights defamation action came to trial before a jury on December 9, 1983. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff awarding her $20,000.00 in compensatory damages and $125,000.00 in punitive damages. On January 11, 1984, the Court denied defendant’s motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, for a new trial, or for a remittitur and awarded plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Defendant Camar Corporation, having obtained a dismissal of plaintiff’s action and a judgment on its counterclaim in an amount of $125,560, plus interest, costs and disbursements, see Findings and Opinion (May 25, 1984), now applies to the Court for imposition of monetary discovery sanctions upon plaintiff pursuant to Rule 37(b)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P. Camar asserts that plaintiff flouted def...
Views: 0
Appellant Frank Gibbs, the plaintiff below, was employed as a “green coffee dumper” by the Maxwell House Division of the General Foods Corporation in Jacksonville, Florida. There were some labor difficulties at the Maxwell House plant and in the aftermath Gibbs was fired. 'Gibbs, who is black, alleged that he was discharged because of his race; he brought suit against Maxwell House on March 11,...
Views: 2
In this admiralty action, the district court denied Steve Fredieu’s request for a jury trial as untimely and contingent. Fredieu’s effort to excuse the lack of timeliness with a plea of inadvertence is insufficient. The district court’s decision was not an abuse of discretion. On the merits, the district court concluded that Fredieu was not a seaman under the Jones Act because the rig on which ...
Views: 3
ORDER On June 27 and 28, 1979, a group of officers from the Shawnee County Sheriffs Department and the City of Topeka Police Department as well as officers from other law enforcement agencies executed a search warrant on the Jordan Patterson American Legion Post No. 319. This raid has spawned a number of lawsuits, both in state court and in this court. The above-mentioned cases, which have been c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER By an order to show cause issued February 28, 1984, heard and fully submitted on March 5, 1984, defendants, on the even of trial, moved to strike the jury demand set forth in the complaint herein. By this action filed July 14, 1983, plaintiff, Angelo Paladino, seeks a declaratory judgment with respect to his rights to receive pension benefits from the Taxicab Industry Pensi...
Views: 1
OPINION Defendants move for an order granting an unsecured stay of execution of the judgment entered against them on May 10, 1984, pending resolution of their post-trial motions. Fed.R.Civ.P. 62(b). Plaintiff does not oppose a stay but cross-moves for an order requiring certain defendants to post bonds in the amount of the judgment plus interest, and requiring certain other defendants to provide ...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff Group Health Inc. (“GHI”) has moved to remand this action to state court. The United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) has moved for an order permitting it to intervene in the action as a defendant under Rule 24(a) or 24(b), Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons given below, GHI’s motion is denied, and HHS’s is granted. *889 Defendant Blue Cross...
Views: 1
741 F.2d 1406 239 U.S.App.D.C. 247, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1165 Michael McCARTHY, et al. Arthur Waskow, et al., Appellants,v.Richard G. KLEINDIENST, et al. No. 83-1789. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 13, 1984.Decided Aug. 17, 1984. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Civil Action No. 00844-72...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM Two motions are currently pending in this asbestos action. Both were filed by defendant Keene Corporation (“Keene”) and only affect the interests of third-party defendant EGNEP (Pty.), Ltd. (“EGNEP”). One is a motion to vacate the Order entered by this court on March 7, 1984, pursuant to Eastern District of Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b), which dismissed this action due to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER This action concerns the attempts of plaintiff to have published a treatise on Spanish literature. At the time she instituted this action, plaintiff alleged in her Complaint that defendant, which had contracted to publish her book, had reneged on its contract, and that she had been unsuccessful in her attempts to find another publisher. At some later time another publisher was ...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff initiated this action to obtain an Order declaring a covenant not to compete unenforceable on the grounds that it is an unreasonable restraint of trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 (1890), it is vague and over-broad, and it is against public policy. Plaintiff also seeks an injunction prohibiting defendant from enforcing the covenant. Defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Arthur Andersen & Co. (“Andersen”) moved before Magistrate Buchwald to compel discovery of matters to which plaintiff Chase Manhattan Bank, *58 N.A. (“Chase”) has interposed the objection of attorney-client privilege. The case is before me now on an appeal from the March 14, 1984 order of the Magistrate granting the discovery. For the reasons se...
Views: 0
Dennis Gorby was severely injured when defendant-appellant’s semi-tanker truck collided with his vehicle at an Indiana highway intersection in the late evening of October 5, 1977. Gorby’s wife, acting individually and in her capacity as guardian of her husband’s person and estate, brought this diversity action seeking compensation for her loss of consortium and for her husband’s personal injuri...
Views: 3
This appeal presents questions of subject matter jurisdiction and the propriety of summary judgment. Both questions are affected by the nature of existing litigation with'which this case was consolidated by the district court. I. A. In 1977 the United States, at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency, initiated a compliance action in the district court against the Cit...
Views: 3
This is an appeal from the trial court’s order approving the terms of a settlement agreement in a shareholder’s derivative suit. We are asked to review whether the trial court violated the constitutional process due an objecting shareholder by failing to hear live testimony at the settlement hearing. This case was fraught with the kinds of acrimonious assaults, vitriolic comments and contu...
Views: 6
This three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of these appeals. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Tenth Circuit R. 10(e). The causes are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. In No. 81-1778 plaintiffs Betty Bledsoe and Gail Wesson appeal from an adverse judgment in their civil rights action brough...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending before this Court is defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Third Party Complaint, naming Bic Corporation of Milford, Connecticut (“BIC”) as a defendant, in this personal injury action. Upon consideration, the Motion is denied. I. The plaintiffs, Nichole Diar and her parents, residents of Ohio, brought this diversity action against the defendants, Genes-co, Inc. (“Gen...
Views: 0
OPINION OF THE COURT This appeal arises from a dismissal with prejudice of a civil complaint charging violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 (1982), along with pendent state claims for fraud, breach of contract, and conversion. These claims arose from a series of transactions spanning a twenty-one month period and involving th...
Views: 2
741 F.2d 312 35 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1232,34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,578, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1253 UNITED TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Petitioners,v.Dale E. SAFFELS, United States District Judge for theDistrict of Kansas, Respondent,Phyllis Wilson Hoffman and Equal Employment OpportunityCommission, Respondent and Real-Parties-in-Interest. No. 84-1811. United States Court of Appeals...
Views: 0
Appellant Burnam appeals the dismissal of her action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 621 et seq. 1 The district court held that the case was time-barred because Burnam did not file her charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the alleged unlawful practice as required by 29 U.S.C.A. § 626(d)(1)....
Views: 3
Appellant, Mabel Y. Burnam (Burnam), appeals from the district court’s dismissal of her complaint in an age discrimination action. The issue presently before this panel is the threshold question of whether this court has jurisdiction over Burnam’s appeal. Background On January 26, 1984, appellant filed a complaint against appellee, Amoco Container Company (Amoco), alleging that she was a vi...
Views: 1
*56MEMORANDUM OPINION The parties are before the Court to resolve certain discovery disputes; specifically, defendants’ motion to compel production of documents and answers to interrogatories, and plaintiff’s response and objections thereto. The production of documents issue involves a question of privilege. This Court will deal with that issue separately after an in camera inspection of the docu...
Views: 2
The Texas Association of Counties (the “Association”) seeks review of an order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas denying its motion to intervene as a matter of right or on a permissive basis, pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 24(a)(2) and (b)1 as defendant in this prisoner’s civil rights action. We hold that the Association was properly denied intervention. I. FACTUAL A...
Views: 2
740 F.2d 350 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1270 John BUSH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.Robert O. VITERNA, Individually and in his official capacityas Executive Director, Texas Commission on JailStandards, et al., Defendants,Texas Association of Counties, Intervenor-Appellant. No. 83-1613. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. Aug. 20, 1984. Bickerstaff, Heath & Smi...
Views: 0
OPINION Zsa Zsa Gabor (“Gabor”), the only remaining defendant in this action, moves pursuant to Rule 55(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order setting aside an entry of default and setting aside the striking of her answer.1 Plain-tiff, Jacob Oliner (“Oliner”), opposes the motion, or, in the alternative, argues that the motion should be granted on certain conditions which he has s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending before this Court is defendant’s Motion to Strike and Dismiss Portions of Plaintiff’s Complaint and for Sanctions. Plaintiff’s claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of her Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights are without merit, and are dismissed. The Motion for Sanctions is granted. I. In this sex discrimination case, plaintiff Marilyn Kuzmins alleges tha...
Views: 4
We have consolidated these two appeals (and one mandamus petition) to consider what is likely to be a recurrent question under the recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (effective August 1, 1983) strengthening the powers and responsibilities of federal district judges to mete out sanctions for procedural abuse: the immediate appealability of orders imposing such sanctions. The ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Broan Mfg. Co., Inc. (“Broan”), a manufacturer of attic ventilating fans, filed this *774action against Westinghouse Electric Corp. (“Westinghouse”), alleging that Broan purchased about 16,000 electric fan motors from Westinghouse, that those motors were improperly wired, and that Westinghouse is liable for breaching express and implied warranties. Westinghouse has denied Broan...
Views: 1
DECISION and ORDER The plaintiffs, a married couple, brought this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs suffered extreme emotional distress as a result of the sexual harassment suffered by one of the plaintiffs at her place of employment. The defendants now move pursuant to Rule 37, Federal Rules of Civil Proc...
Views: 0
Appellant Reverend Scott seeks review of the district court’s denial of his motions to vacate judgment and for reconsideration. The district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Scott’s motions, and accordingly, properly denied them. We find that Scott’s appeal is frivolous and we exercise our discretionary power to invoke sanctions. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW Scott is head of Faith Center,...
Views: 3
Plaintiff appeals from the district court’s refusal to vacate the award of an arbitration panel. We affirm. In 1977 Thompson developed a board game which she began marketing under the name “Marathon Game”. Two years later Tega-Rand International, as a licensee of Runner’s World Magazine, began marketing a game under the name “Runner’s World Marathon Game”. Shortly thereafter Thompson filed an a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER This matter is presently before the Court on defendant’s motion for a new trial and relief from judgment under Rules 59 and 60(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s 60(b)(3) motion is denied. Defendant’s motion for a new trial under Rule 59 will be denied if plaintiff accepts remittitur in the amount of $73,895. In the event plai...
Views: 2
ORDER The beleaguering saga of these and other Alan Taylor lawsuits provides distress *227 ing evidence of the nature and magnitude of the abuse to which our legal system is susceptible. Through the initiation and perpetuation of his six lawsuits, see Taylor v. Bache Group, et al., No. 81-CV-435 (N.D.N.Y.) (Miner, J.); Taylor v. Prudential-Bache Securities, I...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This action was filed by plaintiff Jerome H. Lemelson (hereinafter “Lemelson”) against defendants The Bendix Corporation (hereinafter “Bendix”) and Brown & Sharpe Manufacturing Company (hereinafter “Brown & Sharpe”) on June 1, 1982. The complaint essentially alleges that Bendix and Brown & Sharpe unlawfully “combined and conspired with one another to boycott Lemelson” and refus...
Views: 0
*20MEMORANDUM OPINION This action is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff’s subsequent Motion for Enlargement of Time and Motion for Substitution. For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ motion is denied and Plaintiff’s motions are granted. On July 25, 1983, B.F. Tatterson, a former employee of Koppers Company, Inc., filed a Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Al...
Views: 6
In 1974 plaintiff entered into negotiations for the purchase of a tooling machine from defendants. During 1975 plaintiff purchased or leased three such machines. From the moment of delivery until the filing of this suit the machines failed to meet plaintiff’s expectations. In fact, because the machines needed almost constant repairs, defendants voluntarily extended the warranty period on the ma...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Thomson (“Thomson”) originally filed a March 1981 pro se Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two correctional officers at the Stateville Correctional Facility (“Stateville”), Earl Jones (“Jones”) and Marvin Baskin (“Baskin”), charging them with physical violence against Thomson. This Court appointed lawyers from the Schiff, Hardin & Waite firm to represent T...
Views: 3
Opinion PER CURIAM. This appeal arises out of consolidated diversity actions involving a dispute over contractual rights and obligations under a title insurance policy issued in February, 1979 by Chicago Title Insurance Company (“CTI”), a Missouri Corporation, to Eureka Investment Corporation, N.V. (“Eureka”), a Netherlands Antilles Corporation, to insure certain real property in the District of ...
Views: 2
*610MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER After a successful jury trial defense by American Airlines, Inc., (“defendant”) of assault and defamation charges brought against it by the plaintiffs, the defendant filed a bill of costs pursuant to Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Fed.R.Civ.P.”). A taxation conference was held on March 15, 1984, at which time the bill of costs was reviewed by...
Views: 1
The Federal Trade Commission appeals from the district court order denying the Commission’s application for a preliminary injunction to block a proposed joint venture involving Warner Communications Inc. and Polygram Records, Inc. We reverse. FACTS Warner Communications Inc. is a diversified communications company that operates three record labels (Warner, Atlantic and Elektra/Asylum)...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, a black employee of United States Steel Corporation, seeks certification of a class under Federal Rule 23(b)(2). Plaintiff alleges that he and approximately 80 other black persons have been denied employment opportunities as a result of the company’s practice of requiring apprentice candidates to take a discriminatory, non-job-related test. Because we find that plaintiff has...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The plaintiffs allege that they have suffered injury as a result of the installation of urea formaldehyde foam insulation (UFFI) in their residence. Their second amended complaint seeks recovery under the theories of strict liability, negligence, express warranty and implied warranty. It also includes class action allegations which support our maintaining this action as such. ...
Views: 1
George Raymond Daniels and other applicants for general relief assistance in Woodbury County, Iowa brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging, inter alia, that the administration of the general relief program violated the applicants’ procedural due process rights. The defendants are Woodbury County, the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors, and an individual caseworker and her supervisor. The di...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action for negligence and strict liability. Defendant has moved to dismiss. I. FACTS The summons and complaint name as the defendant in this action “ATF-DAVIDSON COMPANY, formerly known as AMERICAN TYPE FOUNDERS CO., INC.” The complaint was answered by WHITE CONSOLIDATED INDUSTRIES, which uses “ATF-Davidson” as a trade name and manufactures the product which is the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT This case comes before the Court on the motion of the Plaintiffs, filed on July 12, 1984, seeking reconsideration of the Court’s Orders, entered via the Clerk of Courts on June 27, 1984, pursuant to Local Rule 19(c). Those Orders granted Defendants’ two ...
Views: 0
concurring in part and dissenting in part. For the reasons discussed below, I concur in part and dissent in part. As a preliminary matter, I agree that we have jurisdiction of this appeal under the collateral order doctrine. Cf. United States v. Sacco, 430 F.2d 1304, 1305 (2d Cir.1970) (per cu-riam) (district court order authorizing expenditure of government funds for transcript of minutes of indi...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION This cause is before the court on a Motion for Summary Judgment and a Motion *1167 to strike Responses to Request for Admissions, both filed by Defendant. Gary Dukes and Thomas E. Barber, d/b/a D & B Dozer, filed a Complaint in the Circuit Court of Smith County, Mississippi, on October 19, 1982. This action sought to recover under an insurance pol...
Views: 0
741 F.2d 1053 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1366, 16 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 209 UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, Appellant,v.William A. MEANS, Mathew King, a/k/a Noble Redman, and allother persons occupying the location called"Yellow Thunder Camp at Victoria Lake inthe Black Hills NationalForest," Appellees. No. 82-2489. United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. Submitted March 30, 1984.De...
Views: 1
ORDER Plaintiff seeks to recover based upon strict liability and negligence in design for fire damage to an aircraft that plaintiff’s predecessor purchased from defendant, British Aerospace, Inc. Plaintiff sought the production of certain documents that defendant asserted were not in its possession. Plaintiff believes, and defendant has not denied, that the documents are in the possession of defe...
Views: 1
On March 2, 1977, the plaintiff, William E. Oyler, filed suit against the Insurance *547Company of North America in the Circuit Court of Peoria County, Illinois, alleging that certain disability insurance benefits had been wrongly withheld. On April 5, 1979, Oyler amended his complaint, adding defendants Cole, Hamilton and Sandell, along with the National Guard Association of the United States and...
Views: 0
The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint 1 for lack of jurisdiction on *1172 the ground that the eleventh amendment barred the relief requested. In ruling on a motion for reconsideration, the court alternatively held that principles of qualified immunity shielded the defendants. We affirm in part and reverse in part. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW Appell...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This water pollution suit involves an accumulation of polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”) in the Waukegan Harbor and other navigable waters adjacent to the Waukegan, Illinois facility of the Outboard Marine Corporation (“OMC”). The PCBs allegedly were discharged from OMC’s facility, and they allegedly came from PCB-bearing industrial fluids sold to OMC by Monsanto Comp...
Views: 2
The plaintiff Albert Carter, acting pro se, appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing with prejudice his diversity action against the defendants. On appeal, Carter essentially contends (1) that the district court erred in dismissing his substantive claims against the defendants with prejudice on the ground that those claims were frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), and (2...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The above-captioned action is before the Court upon plaintiffs motion, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(7), for an order directing that his deposition be taken telephonically. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied. BACKGROUND Clem is an American citizen stationed abroad in the course of his employment with Merrill Lynch International Incorporated. In August...
Views: 0
We are presented here with consolidated appeals from two related cases, which, although sharing the same set of facts, present quite different issues. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in part and vacate in part the judgment based on the jury verdicts in No. 83-3303, and vacate the judgment in No. 83-3455. I. BACKGROUND A. Facts The jury had before it evidence from which it could find the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION This action is before the Court on a Motion for Substitution of Plaintiff filed by Michael Blair. For the reasons stated below, the Motion for Substitution of Plaintiff is granted. The original Plaintiff in this action, Margaret M. Blair, Administratrix of the Estate of Steven Cort Blair, died on September 8, 1983. On October 27, 1983, Letters of Administration were issued to he...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM and ORDER Plaintiffs are approximately 100 migrant farm workers who have brought six actions against Orange County farm owners. The farm workers seek damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA” or “the Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. (1982), for allegedly excessive rent deductions made from their minimum wages. The actions have been consolidated for pretrial purposes. Se...
Views: 5
The plaintiffs, Bottero Enterprises, Inc., and its President and Treasurer, Gian D.R. Bottero (collectively referred to as “Botte-ro”), entered into four separate loan transactions with the defendant, Southern New England Production Credit Association (SNEPCA). These loans and the subsequent foreclosure of ship mortgages and real estate mortgages were the subject of prior actions in the federal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. FACTS Presently before the Court in this diversity case is the motion of defendants, Chester E. and Carl E. Drake, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b), to set aside a default judgment entered against them by the Clerk of this Court. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 11.) The chronology of events leading up to this motion may be summarized as follows: Plaintiff, Heleasco Seventeen, Inc. (“He...
Views: 0
OPINION The Court has before it plaintiff’s post-judgment motions which seek to obtain that which was denied in the judgment. Plaintiff’s argument in support of the post-judgment motion points out certain advantages which will accrue to plaintiff if the judgment be vacated. She also argues that the precedent upon which the Court depended has been criticized by Professor Moore. Without testing the ...
Views: 1
744 F.2d 963 21 ERC 1769, 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1432,14 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,736 NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION and New Jersey State Federationof Sportsmen's Clubs, Appellants,v.Anne M. GORSUCH, in her official capacity as Administratorof the United States Environmental Protection Agency andJacqueline Schaeffer, in her official capacity as RegionalAdministrator of Region II of the United StatesEnvir...
Views: 0
In this action plaintiff Ruth Zimmerman appeals the district court’s order granting defendant Joe Quinn’s motion pursuant to Rule 60(b) and modifying a prior consent judgment entered between plaintiff and defendant. The only issue presented is whether the district court erred in modifying the consent judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(5) and (6). This diversity action began when plaintiff s...
Views: 3
*791OPINION OF THE COURT I. Introduction and General Background - 791 II. The Facts - 793 A. Hospital Services in the York MSA - 793 B. Discrimination Against D.O.s at York - 794 C. Staff Privileges Application Precedure - 796 D. Doctor Weiss’ Application for Staff Privileges - 797 III. Procedural History and Problems - 799 A. Before the District Court - 799 B. Appellate Jurisdiction - 801 (1) Th...
Views: 10
745 F.2d 786 39 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1444, 1984-2 Trade Cases 66,211 Malcolm WEISS, Appellee in Nos. 82-3507 & 82-3580,Cross-Appellant in No. 82-3581v.YORK HOSPITAL and the Medical and Dental Staff of YorkHospital, S. Philip Laucks, M.D.; Harold H. MacDougall,M.D., Ian L. MacKenzie, M.D., John P. Whitely, M.D., S.W.Deisher, M.D., (Executive Committee--Jack A. Kline, M.D.,Lois M. Kushner, I...
Views: 3
ORDER This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s January 30, 1984, and February 8, 1984, “Motions to Compel Discovery.” More specifically, the matters addressed in this order are plaintiff’s request that several employees of defendant Parkview Memorial Hospital answer deposition questions, in writing, which were objected to by defendant and plaintiff’s request that defendant produce the min...
Views: 0
This memorandum addresses motions to intervene by Dominga Carrasquillo, Ophelia Casey, Ricardo Ramirez, Joanne Lockett, Helen Spires, the State of New York, and Cesar Perales, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services. The subject of this action, a challenge to the legality of the standards by which claims for disability benefits are evaluated, is described in a separa...
Views: 0
I. These cases present a question whose determination has twice been reserved by the Court of Appeals for this Circuit: 1 whether the denial of federal disability claims under the so-called “severity regulation” adopted by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) violates the Social Security Act (the “Act”) because the regulation conflicts with the definition...
Views: 1
In the present appeal this court reviews for a second time proceedings instituted by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) against Alcon Laboratories (Alcon) and its drug “WANS” (Webster’s Anti-Nausea Supprettes). See United States v. Alcon Laboratories, 636 F.2d 876 (1st Cir.), cert, denied, 451 U.S. 1017, 101 S.Ct. 3005, 69 L.Ed.2d 388 (1981). The issues arise u...
Views: 1
OPINION The defendants in this federal civil rights action appeal from a decision of Magistrate Harold J. Raby, dated July 6, 1984, ordering disclosure of so-called G.O.-15 statements provided by five members of the New York City Police Department in connection with an investigation by the Civilian Complaint Review Board into the beating of plaintiff Lester Brown on August 2, 1983. Because the und...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case presents the question of what constitutes waiver of a venue defense under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On October 11,1983, plaintiffs, seven firefighters employed by the federal government and working in Maryland, sued Donald J. Devine, Director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Raymond Donovan, Secretary of Labor, and the United States. Before d...
Views: 0
This multidistrict diversity litigation in the Eastern District of New York concerns claims by Vietnam War veterans and certain of their wives and children. Defendants are chemical manufacturers from which the United States (the “Government”) procured, directly or indirectly, various herbicides and defoliants (collectively for convenience “Agent Orange”). From use thereof in combat the veterans...
Views: 4
OPINION The plaintiff was notified on February 5, 1983 by the defendant union that his grievance against defendant Dean Foods would not proceed to arbitration. He filed the instant suit on August 2, 1983 alleging a hybrid § 301 claim against the union and Dean Foods. Plaintiff’s suit was filed within the six month limitations period in § 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 160(b...
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