Court Cases
| Most Popular Cases |  |
Cases with Faces | |
Cases by Type |  |
Cases by Reporter |  |
Cases by Year |  |
All Reporters → us-dist-lexis → Volume 1992
Opinions in us-dist-lexis Volume 1992
In this nineteen defendant racketeering conspiracy case against a religious organization known as The Nation of Yahweh and its leader, Yahweh Ben Yahweh (translated as Jehovah, the son of Jehovah), plus eighteen of its members for sixteen alleged homicides, arson by firebombing of a neighborhood in Delray Beach, extortion, etc., the court has concern about the possible intimidating effect upon th...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM
This lawsuit, brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., seeks review and reversal of a 1987 decision by the Wage Appeals Board (WAB) of the United States Department of Labor. The WAB’s decision reversed an earlier decision by a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) not to debar the plaintiffs from future government contracts. The WAB ins...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves for an order declaring the distinction in sentencing between cocaine and cocaine base in 21 U.S.C. § 841 and in the United States Sentencing Guidelines unconstitutional in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
On March 9, 1990, Defendant Marc ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff submitted a notice of settlement and a proposed judgment, to which defendant objected with respect to the interest and attorneys’ fees calculation. After due consideration of the issues, it is ordered that plaintiff have judgment against defendant Stephen C. Hartel in the amount of $59,212.27 which ...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO DEPOSE ARBITRATOR This is an action to confirm an arbitration award and is before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Order Permitting Discovery of Arbitrator Clair V. Duff (Doc. #~20), the sole arbitrator making the award. Plaintiff opposes the requested discovery (Doc. # 23). Since Arbitrator Duff is not a party, the Court invited the American Arbitration Association to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This case arises out of the administrative classification procedures applied to petitioner Mark R. Cugini at the Adult Correctional Institutions (“ACI”) in Cranston, Rhode Island. Cugini has been incarcerated at the ACI since February 15, 1985, serving concurrent sentences of three and twelve years. On several occasions, Cugini has appeared before the clas...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants City of New York (the “City”), Police Department of the City of New York (“Police Department”), Property Clerk’s Office of the Police Department of the City of New York (“Property Clerk”), Carl W. Wendt (“Wendt”), and Sandra Vazquez (“Office Vazquez”, collectively the “Defendants”) have moved to dismiss the complaint plaintiff East Coast Novelty Company, Inc. (“East Coa...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss Counts II and III of plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion will be granted in part and denied in part as to Count III, and will be denied as to Count II.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Augustus Condus, Christopher D. Harding, John D. Conner, Abra...
Views: 2
782 F.Supp. 1518 (1992)
In re GRAND JURY SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (Richard Arrington Jr., Mayor).
No. CV-91-Y-2922-S.
United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, S.D.
January 2, 1992.
*1519 *1520 Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Samuel H. Heldman, Cooper Mitch Crawford Kuykendall & Whatley, Donald V. Watkins, David C. Johnson, Johnson & Cory, P.C., Birmingham, Ala., for Grand Jury Subpoena.
Frank W. Dona...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Coleen Mast (“Mast”) and Respect Incorporated (together referred to as “Respect,”
1
treated after this sentence as though it were a singular collective noun) have filed an eight-count Complaint against Committee on the Status of Women (“Committee”). Respect claims a host of violations of its rights: copyright infringement (Count I), service mark/tra...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER This motion for reconsideration asks the court to once again examine the propriety of a proposed consent decree between plaintiffs and the only remaining defendant, Archer Daniels Midland Company (“ADM”). 1 The proposed consent decree, 2 if approved by the court, would finally settle this action brought pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
In their amended complaint plaintiffs assert four causes of action. Their first and second causes of action seek a declaratory judgment that federal housing and community development laws governing the construction of low income housing, 42 U.S.C. § 1437
et seq.,
federal prevailing wage rate legislation, 40 U.S.C. § 276a
et ...
Views: 1
OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendant Connecticut General Life Insurance Company’s (CGL’s) motion to dismiss the action and on its motion to strike plaintiff’s pleading captioned “Reply.” CGL bases its motion to dismiss on the assertion that plaintiff’s four state law claims are preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001,
et se...
Views: 0
*204
OPINION AND ORDER
A jury awarded plaintiff, Karen Sorluc-co, $264,242 in compensatory damages based on its determination that she was suspended and then fired from her job as a probationary New York City police officer as a result of sex discrimination, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1
Defendant, the New York City Police Department (the “Department”), has moved...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before us on the City of Naperville’s motion for reconsideration of our September 26, 1991 Order, which granted the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denied the Defendant’s cross-motion. We entertain the motion at this time in large part because of the appearance on September 6, 1991, of "an interim final rule, “Exemptions from Minimum Wage ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Agents of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized the Defendant Twenty-Six Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty-Four dollars ($26,-284.00) following a contact initiated by the Agents with Claimant Thelbert Crossland at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport (Detroit Metro). The Plaintiff United States of America has filed this in rem forfeiture proceeding p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The defendants’ claim for attorneys fees and costs based upon 17 U.S.C. § 505 is denied. The defendants base their motion on the pro se plaintiffs’ claim based upon the submission and contents of what has been termed in the patois of this litigation the Michaels/Minot tapes. This turns upon the circumstances under which the tapes turned up, and the plaintiffs’ actual know...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Electronic Signal Products, Inc. (“ESP”) brings this two-count complaint against Eastern Electronic Co., Ltd. (“EEC”) and Eastern International, Inc. (“EH”), seeking an accounting and damages for breach of contract. Presently before this court are (1) EEC’s motion to *1137dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and insufficient service of process, and (2) ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action brought under Sections 502 and 515 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132 and 1145, and under Sections 301 and 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947 (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 185 and 186. The plaintiffs — John Scarfi, Richard Hubert, I. Michael Braceo, Victor Bobes, William Henry, Alan I. Stem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER On December 9, 1991, the court accepted defendant’s guilty plea for conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine, a Schedule II narcotic controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a), and unauthorized use of food coupons, in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b). These offenses carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, and defendant is scheduled to be sentenced on M...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM In this action, plaintiff, a former non-commissioned officer (NCO) in the United States Air Force, seeks reinstatement into active service at his former rank, as well as back pay. Defendant moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On August 30, 1991, I denied that motion, concluding that plaintiff had properly stated a cl...
Views: 0
OPINION
On January 1, 1990, John and Judith Gallagher, husband and wife, were traveling with their four children, Gabriella, Yolanda, Laura and Dewi, in their 1989 Mazda MPV motor vehicle when they were involved in an accident.
1
As a result of the accident, Judith, Gabriella and Yolanda were killed, and John, Laura and Dewi were injured. This suit has been brought by John, in ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This patent infringement action comes to us on remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Plaintiffs (Stol-lers) had filed suit in 1987 against Ford Motor Company (Ford), Chrysler Corporation (Chrysler) and Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc. (MBNA), individually, alleging infringement of claims 5 and 6
1
of
*509
U.S. Patent No....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Donald Turnpaugh’s petition for Writ of Habe-as Corpus. For the reasons hereafter stated, the petition is denied and dismissed. I. BACKGROUND Petitioner Donald Turnpaugh was convicted of two counts of first degree murder contrary to MCLA § 750.316. On July 1, 1977, he was sentenced to two concurrent mandatory life sentences. Th...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter, which raises questions about the power of arbitrators in the labor grievance process, is before the Court on motions for summary judgment by the plaintiff-counterdefendant Irving Materials, Inc. (“Irving” or “the company”), and the defendants-counterclaimants, Coal, Ice, Building Material and Supply Drivers, Heavy Haulers, Warehousemen an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Plaintiff, Boston Housing Authority (“BHA”), brought this action against the Defendants, Atlanta International Insurance Company (“Atlanta”), National Casualty Company (“National”) and Covenant Mutual Insurance Company (“Covenant”), alleging breach of contract (Count I) and violations of Mass.Gen.L. ch. 176D, Unfair Methods of Competition and Unfair and Deceptive Acts...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is an appeal by the United States Trustee (“Trustee”) from a Bankruptcy Court Order entered February 12, 1991 which denied the Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158, the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois has jurisdiction to hear this appeal. For the reasons set forth below, this court vacates and remands the decisio...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Waterman Steamship Corporation and Amsouth Bank filed this limitation of liability proceeding after a fire erupted in the engine room of the S/S Stonewall Jackson. The fire resulted in the deaths of six persons, the estates of whom have filed claims under the Jones Act and DOHSA. These claims include loss of consortium and society claims, as well as punitive damages c...
Views: 2
ORDER
On November 18, 1991, a trial was held in this matter. After hearing the evidence and carefully reading the parties’ briefs, the Court finds that the plaintiffs are entitled to the requested relief. Therefore, the Court finds in favor of the plaintiffs, pursuant to the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
This case involves an employee welfar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on the plaintiff’s and defendants’ cross motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on the count of the amended complaint alleging breach of contract. Defendants move for summary
*41
judgment on that count as well as other counts alleging breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference wi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative, for Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is granted. Background On October 13, 1987, Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Department of Labor (“DOL”) alleging a violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by his employer, Vinnell Corporation (“Vinnell...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil case for injunctive relief in which plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction preventing the named defendants from interfering intentionally with the exercise of treaty-recognized hunting, fishing and gathering rights by any member of the plaintiff band. A preliminary injunction to this effect has been in place since March 15,1991.
Lac du Flambeau Band...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiffs, two animal welfare groups and two individuals, allege that the defendants, the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”), the Secretary of USDA (“Secretary”), and the Administrator of the Animal Plant Health Inspection Service, have violated the mandate of the Federal Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (“FLAWA” or “Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131
et seq,
by pr...
Views: 0
This matter is before the Court on motions for summary judgment filed by defendants, J.K. Byrne & Co. (“JKB”), William Finegan (“Finegan”), and The North River Insurance Company (“North River”).
1
Oral argument was heard on the motions and after considering the arguments presented, the memoranda of counsel, the record, and the applicable law, IT IS ORDERED that the motions for summar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Rollen F. Stewart, Steven D. Francis, and Edwin Thate, Jr. initiated this action this date against the District of Columbia Armory Board, Sharon Pratt Kelly,
1
Major General Calvin G. Franklin, Stuart J. Long, and James A. Dalrymple, seeking to enjoin defendants from preventing plaintiffs from displaying religious signs at RFK Stadium. Presently pe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Background On March 30, 1990, a jury returned guilty verdicts against a number of defendants in the above-captioned action. In addition, the jury returned special verdicts on Counts Six and Seven finding that the defendants’ interest in each of the pieces of real property identified in Counts Six and Seven is subject to forfeiture to the United States, pursuant to 21 U.S.C....
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER In this age discrimination action, Defendant American Management Association (“AMA”) 1 moves for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Plaintiffs oppose the motion. For the reasons stated at oral argument and below, AMA’s motion is denied. Plaintiffs allege in their complaint that AMA violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) and other New York ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Phillip Fung, a mail carrier for the United States Postal Service, and his wife, Li Jin Chen, have been indicted for theft of United States mail and conspiracy to use unauthorized credit cards. Each moves to suppress statements made to postal inspectors. There is no merit to Mr. Fung’s contention that he was under arrest when postal inspectors who had him under ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages alleging violations of the federal securities laws. Four of the defendant banks move individually to dismiss the Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R-Civ.P. 12(b)(2), and all of the defendant banks move jointly to dismiss the Complaint on grounds of
forum non conveniens
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). For...
Views: 3
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Now before this Court is the motion of the defendants Mary F. Grover (“Grover”)
*992
and Dr. Shepard Goldberg (“Goldberg”) (collectively “the defendants”) to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). This Court also addresses the renewed motion of plaintiff Galyn A. Vesey (“plaintiff”) for appointment of counsel.
On Jul...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a pro se prisoner, filed a § 1983 complaint against defendants alleging numerous constitutional violations. He alleges violations of his right to due process, his Eighth Amendment rights, and his Fourteenth Amendment rights in connection with a disciplinary hearing and sanctions imposed against him. Defendants have filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss aver-ing t...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Revised Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy Boudewyns on November 26, 1991 in the above-captioned matter is accepted pursuant to Title 28 United States Code § 636(b)(1).
REVISED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TIMOTHY M. BOUDEWYNS, United States Magistrate Judge.
This matter has been referred to me for consideration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) or (B).
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff seeks attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party following settlement, by reinstatement, of his discriminatory discharge claim. Defendant does not seriously contest that plaintiff is the prevailing party for the fee-shifting purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1988. It claims, however, that the release language is sufficiently broad to encompass a waiver of fees or at leas...
Views: 0
*1489
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART UNITED’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On January 6, 1991, this court heard defendant United Airlines, Inc.’s (“United”) motion to dismiss or for partial summary judgment. James H. Hershey, Esq. appeared on behalf of United; Robert M. Longstreth, Esq. appeared on behalf of plaintiffs. After reviewing the motion ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the basis of three Motions: 1) the Joint Motion, brought by all Defendants save Crowley Maritime Corporation, to Dismiss for Want of Personal Jurisdiction; 2) the Motion of Crowley Maritime Corporation to Dismiss for
Res Judicata
and Forum Non Conve-niens; and 3) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand.
PARTIES
This action arises out of t...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Jose Manuel Cabassa was arrested on June 19, 1991 and subsequently charged in a two-count indictment with: (1) possession with intent to distribute over 500 grams of a mixture containing a detectable amount of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school; and (2) unlawful use and carrying of firearms during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime. Cabassa moves for an or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above-referenced action, Harry Dickenson (“petitioner”), as owner of a 31 foot, sea-going vessel, the KAISO, seeks exoneration from or limitation of liability under the Limitation of Liability Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 183 for alleged tortious acts relating to a fire that completely destroyed the vessel and allegedly caused physical injury to plaintiffs Patrick E. Dicks...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Melun Industries, Inc. (“Melun”), applies to confirm an arbitration award of $185,142 in its favor dated July 3, 1991 (the “Third Award”), to vacate an arbitration award of $28,564 in its favor dated March 27, 1991 (the “Second Award”), and moves to dismiss defendant Michael A. Strange’s counterclaims against Melun. Strange applies to confirm the Second Award,...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Manuel De La Nueces brought this action pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2023(a) for judicial review of the final determination of the Food and Nutrition Service (“FNS”) disqualifying plaintiff’s retail food store, Superior Grocery, from participation in the Food Stamp Program of the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). In an Opinion and Order dated November 19, 199...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Court has before it two motions by plaintiff to enforce a consent decree that established deadlines for the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to promulgate water pollution regulations for the offshore oil and gas extraction industry. On April 5, 1990, this Court entered a Final Order and Decree that incorporated a Settlement Agreement signed by the parties. O...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION & ORDER
Creditor Beneficial Homeowner Service Corp. (“Beneficial”) appeals from two separate but related orders of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York (Mahoney, ...
Views: 0
ORDER This is an action in rem for the civil forfeiture of a parcel of real estate located in Moultonboro, New Hampshire. The government contends that this property is forfeitable civilly under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A) because a portion of the funds used to purchase the land was in *832 volved in a transaction or transactions in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5313(a) and 5324. Factual Backgroun...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A class of private plaintiffs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought two civil rights actions in 1973 against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (“NMDU” or “Union”) and more than fifty news publishers and distributors within the Union’s jurisdiction. Both suits charged that the Union, with the acquiescence of the p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is an admiralty action in which plaintiff J.E. Brenneman Company (“Brenneman”) seeks exoneration from or limitation of liability under 46 U.S.C.A.App. § 183 for damages sustained by the Tacony-Palmyra Bridge when it was struck on December 15, 1988, by the crane barge VULCAN/51 as the crane barge was being pushed up the Delaware River by the tug BEVERLY.
The Burlington County Bridg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action was initially brought by qad. inc., Karl Lopker and Pam Lopker (collectively for convenience “qad”
1
) against ALN Associates, Inc., Sally Allen, Mike Allen and Ronald Whiteford (collectively for convenience “ALN”), claiming various breaches of contract, copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition (under...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Stuart Becker & Co., P.C. (“Stuart Becker”), has moved pursuant to Rules 12(b) and 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for dismissal of the claims against it, and defendant Eisenberg Honig & Fogler (“Eisenberg Honig”) seeks similar relief pursuant to Rules' 12(b)(1), 12(b)(6), 9(b), and 56. For the reasons set forth below, their motions are granted, and the clai...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is based on an exclusive distributorship contract involving the manufacture, distribution and sale of ophthalmic diagnostic instruments. During the term of the agreement the distributor claimed a breach of the contract by the manufacturer and then attempted to waive that claim. Among the issues in this interesting contract case is whether the original claim of ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case grows out of Rhode Island’s current banking crisis. Plaintiffs allegedly hold an unsecured claim of $1.3 million against the receivership estate of Marquette Credit Union (“Marquette”), based on certain standby letters of credit issued in 1990. The Governor of Rhode Island closed Marquette on January 1, 1991, because Marquette’s deposit ...
Views: 3
OPINION
Defendant Ernst & Young (“E & Y”) has moved to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to plead fraud with particularity and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1 For the following reasons, the motion is granted.2 The Parties
The plaintiffs (the “Investors”) purchased interests between 1980 and May 1986 in various limited partnerships which were involved in the business of buying, b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Calumet National Bank (Calumet), a third party defendant in this action, moves to dismiss Paul Gussin’s (Gussin) third party complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Alternatively, Calumet requests that we exercise our discretion and decline jurisdiction. For the following reasons, Gussin’s t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Francis Golbeck, a Chicago police captain, challenges the constitutionality
*383
of his three-day suspension under the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article 1, Section 2 of the Illinois constitution. Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
United States Court of International Trade, sitting as a United States District Court Judge by Designation:
INTRODUCTION
The parties, asserting various errors in the court’s Opinion, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law dated November 25, 1991, 778 F.Supp. 781 (1991), and the judgment entered thereon dated November 29, 1991, have cross-moved for relief under Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the debtor’s voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy case.
In re Scheinberg,
132 B.R. 443 (Bankr.D.Kan.1991). The issue on appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in finding that to grant the debtors their requested relief would be a substantial abuse of the provisions of Chapter 7. The parties submitte...
Views: 1
OPINION This is a civil rights action for injunctive relief and damages brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by the plaintiff, Fred Meyer, Inc. (Fred Meyer), against the defendants, William Casey, Herb L. Gray, Ken Benjamin, Mike Wiley, Lon Mabon, Phillip Z. Ramsdell, the No Special Rights Committee, and the Oregon Citizens Alliance. The matters before the court are (1) the motion of Fred Meyer fo...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT AND GRANTING, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL ON DEFENDANT’S COUNTERCLAIM FOR FRAUD AND NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. MOTION FOR DIRECTED VERDICT AND JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT.
Standard of Review t>
Fraudulent Misrepresentation Claim w
...
Views: 2
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs have brought this class action against Lucky Stores, Inc. on behalf of Black and female employees working in retail stores within Lucky’s Northern California Food Division. Plaintiffs allege discrimination on the basis of race and sex in initial job placement, allocation of work hours, reclassification of part-time employees to full-time positions, ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs Dewayne Clifton and David C. Finley, prisoners proceeding pro se, assert that completion of the Missouri Sexual Offender Program as a prerequisite to parole violates the ex post facto clause of the constitution.1 Plaintiffs are sexual offenders, one convicted in 1983 and the other in 1989. From 1980 to 1990, th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION INTRODUCTION On March 29, 1987, Plaintiff Rochelle Hall filed a charge of discrimination against the Delaware Council on Crime and Justice (DCCJ) with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC dismissed Plaintiff’s claim on June 30, 1989 because it lacked jurisdiction over DCCJ because DCCJ did not fit within the definition of “employer” under 42 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, acting pro se,1 has filed a complaint in this case seeking five million dol*644lars in compensatory damages for injury he claims to have suffered as a result of a “longstanding conspiracy to abuse, discredit and vilify plaintiff.” Complaint at 4. Plaintiff is a doctor of naturopathy, and he complains of a “shameful defamation” that was published in the Towns...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment. Because there is no genuine issue of material fact and some of the moving parties are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, summary judgment is appropriate. For the reasons that follow, plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part and denied in part, defendant Kite Coal Sales, Inc.’s motion is denied, and defendant Double A F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
The Secretary of the United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) commenced this action in March, 1990 under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201
et seq.
(1988) (“FLSA”).
1
The DOL alleges that certain reporters at the defendant publisher, the Albany Business Journal (“ABJ”), are entitled to back-pay as compensation for overtime w...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff Joint Venture Asset Acquisition Group (“JVAA”) has moved pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment against each of the defendants and for an award of all amounts of unpaid principal, accrued interest, collection costs, attorneys’ fees, and punitive damages. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
The Parties
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Introduction
This action was brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., as amended by the Multiemployer *1088Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (“MPPAA,” “the Act” or “the statute”). Both parties have moved to vacate in part and to enforce in part the arbitration award.
In its complaint, filed July 28, 1986, the Grea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION Plaintiffs, AMR Corporation and American Airlines, Inc. (hereinafter collectively referred to .as “American”), bring this action to enjoin the acquisition of Air Wis Services, Inc. (“Air Wis”) by UAL Corporation pursuant to a proposed merger of Air Wis with a subsidiary of UAL. Plaintiffs’ motive in bringing this action is clearly set forth in paragraph 2 of the ame...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF FACTS Plaintiff Yin Yee Li alleges that on or about March 8,1991, she and her daughter, Jennifer Li, a two-year old infant, boarded a plane for a trip from Tokyo, Japan to New York. She states that during the United Air Lines flight defendant Abdul Quayyum Quraishi (“Quraishi”) exposed himself and urinated into the mouth and eyes and over the body ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages alleging violations of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 688, the general maritime law of the United States, and 46 U.S.C. § 10313
et seq.
Defendants move jointly for an order: pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) dismissing the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5) and 12(b)(2) quashing se...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of defendant Helene Curtis, Inc. (“HCI”) for summary judgment. For reasons that follow, the motion is granted.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Mattie Bracey (“Bracey”), is a black woman who began working for HCI in 1970.
1
By February 1987, she had
*569
worked her way up to the position of secretary, grade 10 in HCI’s personnel c...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On January 9,1992, this Court denied the motion by defendant Huang for an order excluding evidence pertaining to the identification of defendant Huang, basing its opinion on the affidavits of that defendant and of Special Agent Leonard W. Hatton, each of which were submitted by defendant Huang in his motion papers. On Friday, January 10, 1992, and continued on January 13 and 14, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Background On March 19, 1991, Defendant Kevin Gentry and four codefendants, were indicted in a nine-count indictment which charged Gentry, among other things, with possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 1 Gentry pled guilty on June 10, 1991 to violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The maximum sentence for violation...
Views: 0
*1340
ORDER
Plaintiff brought a four-count complaint against multiple defendants, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985(1), and state commonlaw claims of defamation and conspiracy to commit defamation. The case is now before the court on motion of defendants News-Press & Gazette Co. (“News-Press”), David R. Bradley, Jr. (“Bradley”), and Michael McCann (“McCann”) to di...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves for summary judgment dismissing this age discrimination action brought under the Age Discrimination Act of 1987, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621
et seq.
(“ADEA”) and the New York Human Rights Law, N.Y.Exec.Law § 296
et seq.
Defendant also seeks summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s contract claim for severance pay and his c...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for actual and punitive damages and equitable relief arising out of plaintiffs’ investments in securities of Polo Club Apartments Associates Limited Partnership (“Polo Club”) and other securities
*883
issued, underwritten or promoted by defendants.
The following motions are currently before the Court: Motions by Kenneth Leventhal & Co....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This diversity case arises out of an accident that occurred at 6:00 p.m. on November 1, 1988, on Old Bethlehem Pike in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. In the accident, a car driven by Marian J. Stewart collided with a tractor-trailer that, in the process of turning, had extended fully across the northbound lane of traffic. As a result of the collision, Marian Stewart was killed and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Jurisdiction is based on diversity. For the following reasons, the motion is denied in part and granted in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Marie Bageanis, filed a five count complaint against defendant, American Bankers Life Assurance Company (“American Bankers”). The basis for her acti...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The motion before the Court requires the Court to define the employment relationship between the plaintiff, David Savant, and James River Paper Company, Inc. (“James River”) for purposes of the Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Act. Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that James River is a statutory employer of Davi...
Views: 1
OPINION
The plaintiff, the Estate of Jimmy Lee Bruce, originally commenced this action against defendants The City of Middle-town, the Middletown Police Department, and two of their police officers, Harold Simpson and Gregory Warycka, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state tort claims for wrongful death and negligence for injuries that occurred during an incident at a local movie theatre....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Court has conducted a bench trial in the above-referenced case. Pursuant to agreement between the parties, trial by jury has been waived as to those counts permitting trial by jury. Plaintiffs, American Metal Forming Corporation (“American”), and Roger Schlossberg, Trustee of
*784
the assets of the estate of Pittcon Industries, Inc., have brought this a...
Views: 1
OPINION
This action involved allegations that plaintiff, a black male, while a customer in defendant’s store, suffered a back injury when a display chair in which he was sitting collapsed. At the close of all the evidence, plaintiff moved for a directed verdict on the theory of strict liability, and this court sustained plaintiff’s request for a peremptory instruction on defendant’s liabi...
Views: 1
Page 390
ORDER
These actions come before the court under unusual circumstances. The underlying action, United States of America v. Among Others, an Article of Drug for Veterinary Use, et al., has had a colorful history which, for the most part, this court has watched from the sidelines. On September 17,1991, the court issued a Consent Order (“the September 17 order”), originally agreed to and submitted by...
Views: 0
OPINION AND VERDICT
This case arises out of defendant Benjamin G. Sprecher’s relationship to certain corporate shells and his control of a tax-exempt religious corporation. Sprecher, an attorney with a securities law practice in New York City, is charged with conspiring to defraud the United States and making false statements to a government agency in connection with two separate securiti...
Views: 0
*1375OPINION
Diversity.
Can a defendant in a diversity case add additional non-diverse parties to a pending federal case by virtue of a third-party complaint for contribution and indemnity?
Simply put: no.
I. Facts
Gilbert Beck — the Plaintiff and a resident of Missouri — was employed by Technical as an insulator and was working on the construction of a power plant for Commonwealth Edison, an Ill...
Views: 0
CERTIFICATION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Third party defendant Robert Trent Jones (“Jones”) has moved to dismiss the Third Party Complaint that was filed against him by the First Eastern Bank (“the Bank”). Having considered materials beyond the Complaint, this motion is, after notice to the parties, treated as one for summary judgment.
Jones argues that he cannot be held personally liable...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff has filed a hybrid § 301 wrongful discharge/breach of duty of fair representation claim against his present employer, McDonnell Douglas and his union, Local Union No. 367. Both defendants have filed motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) claiming that the plaintiff’s lawsuit is barred by the applicable statute of limitations (defendant McDonnell Douglas’ motion to dismi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided f...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs continue efforts to set aside a final regulation of the Legal Services Corporation (“LSC”) prohibiting a legal aid organization receiving its funds from participating in a redistricting case, even when the organization has determined under procedures set out in the enabling statute that the litigation is necessary to benefit the poor. The LSC Act, as amended, is found at 4...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff filed this civil rights action seeking damages and declaratory relief under
*595
42 U.S.C. § 1981 and § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and § 2202 and Article I, § 12 of the Constitution of the State of Florida for the unconstitutional actions of Defendant Carrasquillo, a Clearwater police officer, and for the unconstitutional policy or custom of t...
Views: 4
*188
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Monica Santiago
1
brought this action against several defendants
2
that manufactured lead pigment contained in lead-based paint, charging that their negligence caused her to become lead poisoned. Although the defendants used pigment themselves in their own paint, the gravamen of Santiago’s complaint against them relates to their rol...
Views: 3
*648FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS RE: DENIAL OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiffs move for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendant union from using union dues or special assessments of union members to finance litigation that plaintiffs find ideologically offensive. Plaintiffs are the Oakland Black Firefighters’ Association and two individual members of that association. Defendants are...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT V OF PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendants The One Bancorp (hereinafter “Bancorp”), and Bancorp officers, Vincent E. Furey, Jr., Richard Roe and John Doe, 1 have moved to dismiss Count V of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (hereinafter “Complaint”), which alleges violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations A...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE THE APPEARANCE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE LAW FIRM VERRILL & DANA ON BEHALF OF EACH DEFENDANT
Plaintiff Arthur E. Cutler filed, on October 1, 1991, this Motion to Strike the Appearance of the Members of the Law Firm Verrill & Dana On Behalf of Each Defendant (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s Motion”) in response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count V of Second Amen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ November 27, 1991 motion to compel Plaintiff to produce a document dated September 27, 1990. Plaintiff claims that the document is protected by attorney-client privilege and work product immunity. Defendants contend that: (1) the privilege was waived; (2) the doc...
Views: 1
This action arises out of an alleged incident of physical sexual harassment. According to plaintiff, on April 18, 1990, she was violently assaulted at her place of employment by a fellow-worker, Stephen Rosenberg. She sues (1) Rosenberg, (2) Dinesh Ahluwalia, her direct employer, (3) New York Life Insurance Company (“NYL-IC”), the company for whom Ahluwalia and Rosenberg both work as insurance ...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
This matter is before the Court on defendant, Pelican Homestead and Savings Association’s (“Pelican”) Motion for Summary Judgment. On November 27,1991, the motion was heard and, following the submission of proposed findings by the parties on December 9, 1991, was taken under submission by the Court.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On August 9, 1990, this Court dismissed the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Edward and Jacquelyn Ermler, husband and wife (“Ermlers” or “plaintiffs”) bring this action against the Town of Brookhaven (“the Town” or “defendant”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 for the award of attorney’s fees as a result of their successful efforts to convince the Town to allow them to maintain a satellite dish antenna in their backyard. Presently before the Court is pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
With this action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1), Plaintiff seeks overtime pay for hours worked for Defendant as an emergency medical technician. Defendant has moved for summary judgment on the grounds that it has complied with the section 7(k) exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the defendants Joyce and William T. Riddell’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For the reasons discussed below, this motion is denied. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff People Helpers Foundation, Inc. is a nonprofit Virginia corporation whose mission includes fi...
Views: 2
OPINION
First, can only the public body on which a public mechanic’s lien has been served complain about the sufficiency of the lien?
No.
Second, does a lien for “materials and labor furnished” comply with a requirement that liens state with particularity the items and amounts that are due?
Yes.
This cause is before the Court on Defendant-contractor’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff-subcontractor’s c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced action, Patricia Ferraro (“plaintiff”) seeks review of a final determination by the Appeals Council of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“defendant” or “Secretary”) which denied her application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). In an Order dated August 14,1991, this Court, pursu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). Every federal court in the United States is now faced with the problem this motion presents. For the reasons outlined below, this motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Jagdish R. Khandelwal worked for Compuadd between November 14,1989, and January 5, 1...
Views: 2
RULING RE MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER FILED JANUARY 2, 1992 On January 2, 1992, the plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order and for Expedited Hearing. The defendants filed a Memorandum in Opposition on January 3, 1992 and a conference was conducted in chambers on January 10, 1992 commencing at 1:45 p.m. to address the motion. Participating counsel included: Donna Brown, representing the pla...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (1) Diane Morgan Chambón filed a diversity action for money damages on her behalf and two minor children, against Gan-nett Publishing Corp., Valley News Dispatch, a subsidiary of that corporation, and two employees of the newspaper. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1332. All parties agree that Pennsylvania law is controlling, except to the extent that...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this civil action brought under 35 U.S.C. § 146, senior party Andrew seeks to overturn the decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) awarding priority of invention in Interference No. 101659 to the junior party, Defendant Gabriel. A trial was held before the Court on June 17 and 18, 1991. As explained by the Board, the interference relates to a horn ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The above-captioned matter was tried to the court on September 11-13, 1991. Phillip A. Harding, of Ogden, Utah, represented the plaintiffs. Jean Robert Babilis, of Ogden, Utah, represented the defendants. At the conclusion of the three-day trial, the court took the issues presented under advisement. Having fully and carefully considered those issues, the court hereby re...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff James Lipton is an etymologist and author of the copyrighted book,
An Exaltation of Larks,
published originally in 1968, with a second edition in 1977 and an expanded edition in 1991. The section of the book at issue here involves seventy-six “terms of venery” — collective terms relating to nature and hunting. Defendant The Nature Company, under a li...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This action for recovery of employee severance benefits raises a question of growing importance in the federal courts concerning the limits of federal preemption of such actions under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 (1988). ERISA cases generally, and the removal of associated state law causes of ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree pr...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Before us are cross motions by plaintiff for partial summary judgment, and by defendants Transport Workers Union of America (“TWU”) and George Leitz individually and as the TWU’s International president and defendants Local 101 of the Transport Workers Union of America (“Local 101”) and Marsha Spinowitz individually and as Local 101’s president for summary judgment dismi...
Views: 0
ORDER On December 11, 1991, this Court heard petitioner Deepak Kumar’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 1 Jonathan M. Kaufman appeared for petitioner. Assistant United States Attorney Alberto E. Gonzalez appeared for respondent. Having considered the papers submitted, the arguments of counsel, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, the Court DENIES the petition. I. BACKGROUN...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Came on for consideration the motions of plaintiff, Donald R. Samuel, M.D. (“Sam
*426
uel”), to remand and for sanctions. The court, having considered the motions, the responses filed by defendants, Charles G. Langham, III., M.D. (“Langham”), and All Saints Episcopal Hospitals of Fort Worth, Inc., (“All Saints”), the record and the applicable auth...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is the summary judgment motion of APCOM, Inc. (“APCOM”) and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. (“Liberty Mutual” or collectively “defendants”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). The court denies summary judgment for defendants and grants summary judgment,
sua sponte,
for plaintiff.
*390
FACTS
APCOM manufactures water heater el...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT's General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided for ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On December 11, 1991, this Court heard defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss. Jonathan M. Kaufman appeared for plaintiffs. Alberto E. Gonzalez appeared for defendants. Having considered the papers submitted, the arguments of counsel, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion.
I. BACKGROUND
This is an action seeking declaratory an...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the defendant’s Motion To Vacate. *778The government has filed a Response. The defendant then countered with his Reply and Supplemental Authority. The motion is now ripe for disposition. On March 28, 1990, the defendant pleaded guilty to making a false statement in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. On July 27, 1990, the Court sentenced the defendant to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The government has moved this court for an order disqualifying George Santangelo from representing any of the defendants in this case at trial. This motion, like the motion previously made to disqualify Gerald Shargel, Bruce Cutler and John Pollok, is based upon the assertion that counsel’s continued participation would give rise to conflicts of interest which cannot ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This is an appeal from an interlocutory order of the Bankruptcy Court dated August 21, 1991, which denied Townsend’s (“appellant”) motion to reargue the National Bank of Stamford’s (“Bank”) motion to vacate an automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. section 362. On appeal, appellant contends that it was improper for the Bankruptcy Court to grant the Bank’s m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case presents a novel question of federal tax law involving the effective date of a congressional amendment to a statute that penalizes the setting up of a fraudulent tax shelter. On August 31, 1987, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS” or “Commissioner”) assessed a $391,500 penalty against plaintiff Gabrielle Gang (“Gang”) pursuant to...
Views: 0
*71
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This lawsuit is a contest between two financial heavyweights to secure title to further wealth. The three corporate defendants
1
and William D. Cayton, Mike Tyson’s manager, have moved for summary judgment on counts II through VII of Tyson’s Third Amended Complaint.
2
Those counts seek rescission of all contracts betwe...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
On January 16, 1992, attorneys for Nicholas Collwyn Sturge, an underwriter for Lloyds of London and a putative creditor of Bank of Credit and Commerce International (“BCCI”), hand-delivered to this Court’s chambers an appellate brief in support of Sturge’s appeal from a bankruptcy court order of January 8, 1992. With Sturge’s appellate brief and the vol...
Views: 0
Francis Musselman, Chapter 11 Trustee of the debtor Finley, Rumble, Wagner, Heine, Underberg, Manley, Myerson & Casey, moves to dismiss appeals from an order by the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Abram, J.) confirming the Trustee’s Third Amended Chapter 11 Plan. It is claimed that appellants lack standing to appeal because they failed to file timely objections to the pl...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff brought this action against the manufacturer and the operator of a high performance power boat for injuries sustained by him while a passenger on the boat. The claim against the manufacturer was tried on a theory of products liability and against the operator on a theory of negligence. The jury found that there was no defect in the boat, thus exonerating the manufacturer, but ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Various plaintiffs and intervenors in this consolidated action regarding the remapping of Illinois congressional districts following the 1990 census now move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) to modify judgment to permit the awarding of attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973i(e) and 1988.
BACKGROUND
On November 7, 1991, final judgment was ent...
Views: 0
OPINION AND JUDGMENT
Defendant Forward Marine, Inc. (“Forward”) moves pursuant to Rules 37 and 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for judgment against Thalassa Shipping, Ltd. (“Thalassa”). For the reasons set forth below, Forward’s motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
In 1987, Plaintiff Jordan International Company of Delaware (“Jordan”) shipped 366 coils of cold-rolled sheet steel aboard the ve...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant moves to dismiss pro se plaintiff’s Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., action against it on the grounds that she filed her complaint after the 90-day filing period had passed. Before us also is plaintiff’s application for appointment of counsel. Plaintiff acknowledged in her complaint that she received on June 21, 1991 the EEOC’s “Determination” letter informi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 28, 1991, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Susan Sonderby, found the United States (the “government”) in civil contempt for wilfully violating a discharge order. The bankruptcy court found that Section 106(c) of the Bankruptcy Code (“Section 106(c)”) waives the government’s sovereign immunity, making it subject to a suit for contempt and damages. The bankrupt...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment and the parties’ oppositions to those motions. This case arose out of the tragic events of August 26, 1987. The undisputed facts show that at approximately 4:45 p.m. on that date, plaintiff, a Criminal Investigator (Special Agent) with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (the “ATF”), left work and drove to a b...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the court is a motion to dismiss filed by defendants Senkbeil, James, Poole, Hartley, Bullard, Anderson, and King. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order.
FACTS
Plaintiff’s deceased was killed in a car accident that occurred on State Route 94. Plaintiff alleges that the accident w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On October 31, 1991, defendant Trevor Dunstand Williams was found guilty of distribution of cocaine base on or about April 24, 1991 and distribution of the same cocaine base near a school; distribution of cocaine base on or about April 26, 1991 and distribution of that cocaine base near a school; and distribution of cocaine base on or about June 19, 1991 and distrib...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the court is plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court makes the following conclusions of law. FACTS Plaintiff filed this declaratory judgment action in order to determine its potential liability on three insurance policies issued to defendant Tift County. Tift Cou...
Views: 0
OPINION
The instant action alleges a multi-party scheme to defraud in violation of several provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq.,
Delaware’s Fraudulent Conveyances Act, 6 Del.C. § 1301
et seq.,
and common law fraud. Defendants Gary Goldstein, John Nucci and Sally Nucci have each brought a motion to dismi...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the court is the “Motion to Vacate Void Judgment, Or In The Alternative To Dismiss The Case Due To Lack Of InPersonam Jurisdiction, Or In The Alternative, For Certain Other Relief” of the defendant R.J. O’Brien & Associates, Inc. (“R.J.O.”). For the reasons that follow, the court grants the motion in part and denies it in part.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Mark O’Brien, gave $40,000 to The S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are Motions for Summary Judgment filed by both the defendants and the plaintiff in the above-captioned action, which is on remand from the Court of Appeals.
See Doughty v. U.S. Board of Parole,
App. No. 90-5276 (D.C.Cir. May 31, 1991) (per curiam) [946 F.2d 1564 (table)]. The plaintiff is a D.C.Code offender presently serving a term of 10-30 ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. §§ 301-394, provides that generic drugs may be approved pursuant to an abbreviated application procedure. 21 U.S.C. § 355®. To receive such approval an applicant must show, among other things, that the generic drug is “bioequivalent” to a previously approved drug.
1
21 U.S.C. §§ 355®(2)(A)(iv), ®(3)...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Ernest Childress (“Childress”) claims that Areata Graphics Company (“Areata”) fired him because of his age (47 at the time of his dismissal), in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment ' Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634. Areata now moves for a summary judgment in its favor under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion an...
Views: 0
ORDER
William M. Bassett (“plaintiff”) filed the present action on September 18, 1991, to quiet title under 28 U.S.C. § 2410(a). He alleges that the federal tax liens on his property are invalid because the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) failed to send him a Notice and Demand letter as required by 26 U.S.C. § 6303(a).
1
Before the court is the United States of America’s (“def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Judge Edward Becker has noted that “[t]he business of judging is line drawing, and in this context it is not clear just where the line should be drawn.” Matter of Special Federal Grand Jury, 809 F.2d 1023, 1030 (3d Cir.1987). In this case, we are called upon to draw the line between where the curtilage ends and the open fields be *36 gin. If we were writing on a clean sla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this diversity action, plaintiff Sequa Corporation moves for summary judgment on defendants’ counterclaim for breach of contract. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid in their resolution. Because plain *1351 tiff is not entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law and because there are genuine disputes of material fact,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move to (1) dismiss plaintiffs’ claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Felix Burrows’ individual claim under § 1981, and (2) consolidate this action with 91-B-1222. Plaintiffs move for leave to file an amended complaint. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially assist their resolution. Because this case was filed after the ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, who is an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted by a jury of aggravated burglary and felony murder in September, 1978. In this action, petitioner challenges his conviction and claims the presumption of intent instructi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
In this case plaintiff Vincent Giolito claimed damages against Dow Corning Corp. (and others) for injuries received in a 1983 fire, while he was employed by Gillette Company at Gillette’s Andover plant. Plaintiff now petitions this court pursuant to M.G.L. c. 152 § 15 for approval of a post-trial settlement reached with Dow.
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) moves to: (1) disqualify counsel for Robert W. and Eleanor J. Is-
*527
ham (the Ishams); (2) strike defendants’ designation of non-parties; (3) strike certain affirmative defenses; and, (4) reconsider George Engel’s motion to compel. The motion to disqualify was heard on January 3, 1992. The r...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) or in the alternative to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
FACTS
The complaint alleges that Banque de la Mediterranee-France, S.A. (“Banque”) is incorpor...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, invoking the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction under the admiralty law of the United States, is hereby seeking to foreclose the mortgage on a vessel under the Ship Mortgage Act, 46 U.S.C. §§ 911— 984. For the reasons that follow, the Court holds that plaintiff is entitled to such remedy.
I. Statement of Facts
On December 22, 1988, codefendants ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending before the Court in the above-captioned ease is defendants’ motion for referral to the Bankruptcy Court. The issues have been fully briefed by both parties, and the motion will be decided without a hearing pursuant to Local Rule 105.6 (D.Md.1989). For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied. FACTS This diversity action arises out of the nonpayment...
Views: 1
ORDER # 2
BACKGROUND
This is an action for injunctive relief and recovery of response costs pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9606(a) and 9607(a), in connection with the Taylor Borough hazardous waste site located south of Scranton, Pennsylvania. The remedial action at the Taylor Borou...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case concerns a series of conveyances of interests in a tract of land in Wilkinson County, Georgia, from the heirs of Edward D. Smith (most of whom are represented by plaintiffs in this action) to defendant, Georgia Kaolin Company, Inc. These conveyances took place in 1969 and 1971.
Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in the Superi- or Court of Bibb County in 1985 shortly after ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is the motion of Harvest Foods, Inc., (Harvest) asking the Court to reconsider its order of April 29, 1991, denying Harvest’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to invoke administrative proceeding with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) before instituting the instant action alleging racial discriminatio...
Views: 0
In these appeals, The Resolution Trust Corporation, as conservator of Trustbank Federal Savings Bank (“Trustbank”), and United Postal Savings Association (“United Postal”) (collectively, “the Secured Creditors” or “the Banks”) appeal from two separate orders of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Blackshear, B.J.). The first order, entered November 6, 1990, denied the Se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) seeks reconsideration or, in the alternative, certification pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1292(b) of this court’s March 19, 1991, order denying DEC’s motion to dismiss claims and counter-claims against DEC for its hazardous waste clean-up activity.
This court’s March 19...
Views: 2
OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
Plaintiff seeks the return of his car, or the alternate value of $5,000, from defendants City of Virginia Beach and Detective Thompson. At the request of plaintiff’s counsel, the General District Court for the City of Virginia Beach issued a warrant in detinue on August 20, 1990, seeking recovery of a 1985 AMC Station Wagon. Pursuant to motion by defendants, the Ge...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, in which all the Defendants have joined. In addition, the Commonwealth Defendants (Virginia Retirement System and System Holdings, Inc.) have filed a Motion to Dismiss based on the sovereign immunity granted by the Eleve...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The Complaint in this action charges that the trustees of a carpenter apprenticeship trust fund violated the provisions of that trust fund. The parties agree that this...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant United States’ motion for summary judgment. Defendant’s motion was formerly a motion to dismiss which the court converted to a motion for summary judgment by order dated May 1, 1991. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order.
FACTS
Plaintiff conveyed fifteen (1...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendants Philip E. Jakeway, Jr. and -Wilfred American Educational Corporation (hereinafter “Wilfred”) move for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Rule 29 and for a new trial pursuant to Rule 33. The defendants were charged in a sixty-five count indictment. Count one of the indictment charges Jakeway with conspiracy to defraud the Department of Education in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371....
Views: 1
ORDER AND DECISION
Petitioner National Development Company (“NDC”) moves for summary judgment confirming an award issued by a tribunal of the Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, rendered on April 12, 1989, against respondent Adnan M. Khashoggi (“Khashoggi”) in the amount of $4,441,180.47. The motion also requests that the Court grant NDC post-award, prejudgment ...
Views: 0
ORDER By the narrow margin of 21,915 to 21,-287, the voters 1 of Bibb County, in the general election of November 8, 1988, approved the issuance of twenty-nine million dollars ($29,000,000) of school bonds to pay for (1) air conditioning the remainder of Bibb County schools; (2) building a fifth high school to serve a projected 53% black-47% white student body and a new middle school; and (3)...
Views: 0
782 F.Supp. 4 (1992)
3307 M STREET PARTNERS, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-2994(JHG).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
January 21, 1992.
*5 Richard M. Preston, Joseph J. Dyer, Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Kevin P. Kennedy, R. Bradley Runyon, Conroy, Ballman & Dameron, Bethesda, Md....
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant’s Objection to the Presentence Investigation Report with Respect to Enhanced “Cocaine Base” Penalties. At issue here is whether the term “cocaine base,” as used in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(l)(A)(iii) and Section 2Dl.l(c)(2) of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, is synonymous with only “crack,” or whether the term “cocaine base” encompasses a g...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action commenced on September 9, 1988 by Plaintiff pro se, seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Plaintiff cross-moves for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion is granted as to Defendants City of New York and Human...
Views: 0
782 F.Supp. 1285 (1992)
Glendine BURR, Plaintiff,
v.
Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant.
No. 87 C 10636.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
January 16, 1992.
*1286 JoAnn Villasenor, Sherry L. Estes, Steven F. Fabry, Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Margaret C. Gordon, Eileen M. Marutzky, Asst. U.S. Attys., for...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The defendant in this case, Inland Steel Company (“Inland”) has filed a series of separate motions in limine, seeking to bar certain objected to evidence or witnesses. We herewith combine the rulings for each of the motions into this single order.
I. MOTION IN LIMINE TO BAR EVIDENCE OF LOSS OF CONSORTIUM DAMAGES
The plaintiff in this case, Rosetta Johnson, brings this action unde...
Views: 0
*900
OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
United States Court of International Trade, sitting as a District Court Judge by Designation:
INTRODUCTION
This is a bitterly contested diversity suit by plaintiff Mar Oil, S.A., a Spanish business corporation, against Francis X. Morrissey, Jr., a New York attorney, who rendered professional services for the plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Medicaid case involves the complex question of how the statutory provision known as the “Pickle Amendment” is to be construed in states that are governed by § 209(b) of the Medicaid Act. Plaintiffs challenge a regulation promulgated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) as contrary to the statutory authority set out in the Pickle Amendment...
Views: 0
OPINION
By order of this court filed September 24, 1990, the two above-captioned cases were consolidated under Civil Action No. 89-614. Presently before this court is the motion of defendants Township of Eves-ham, Township of Evesham Police Department, Patrolman William Behnke and Patrolman James T. Brown for summary judgment against plaintiffs Giovanna Lodato (“Lodato”) and Mark Jacobs (“Jacobs”...
Views: 0
Before the court is an appeal by the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, from an order of the bankruptcy court dated September 19, 1991, which permitted the Trustee in Bankruptcy to abandon a parcel of environmentally hazardous real property formerly owned by debtor, North American Products Acquisition Corp. (“NAPA”). There are two issues presented on appeal....
Views: 0
*75 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Joseph Graham (“Graham”), filed a two-count complaint in August 1990 alleging racial discrimination in defendant’s, Bodine Electric Company, failure to promote him. Count I is brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (“Title VII”). Count II asserts the same allegations but is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“S...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate, has submitted a pro se complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to redress alleged violations of his constitutional rights. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that defendants violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment by serving contaminated food to plaintiff and other inmates and by serving food under unsanita...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff in this action filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on January 2, 1991 seeking all FBI records that refer to him. Plaintiff was notified that the backlog of FOIA requests would cause a delay in providing him with the records he sought. After receiving that information, he filed an appeal in February of 1991. In a letter to the FBI giving notic...
Views: 0
OPINION OF THE COURT
I. Nature of the Case
In this case, the Court considers an issue of considerable import to civil rights, namely, whether 42 U.S.C. § 1981 prohibits the exclusion, on the basis of race, ancestry, or ethnic background of non-registered guests to a privately owned hotel with a facially neutral “no visitors policy,”
see
Defendant’s Motion For Partial Recon...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT VERNON RAYMOND VELLALOS’ MOTION TO DISMISS CLAIM BASED ON HAWAII UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFER ACT INTRODUCTION On Monday, December 2, 1991, the court held a hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by defendant Vernon Raymond Vellalos (“Vernon”) on October 17,1991. Third party defendant Akamai Electrical Services, Inc. filed a joinder in this motion on November 6, 1991. On...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is the motion of claimants Frederick L. Szoyka, Thomas Lynch, Donald Kevin Castilow, Steven Mashburn, and Joey Boudreaux to lift the stay currently in effect in this matter in connection with Zapata’s action for limitation of liability. For the reasons set out below, theCourt finds that this motion is not well taken, and should be denied. I. Stays in limita...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Houston Jones alleges that, on November 6, 1990, he was arrested by defendants John Heidelmeier, Tyson Johnson, G. Esposito, Robert Deevey, John Payne, and Stuart Lucado. These defendants are alleged to be members of the police department of defendant Village of Villa Park. It is alleged that plaintiff, a diabetic, was suffering an insulin attack at ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, the Cavalier Group, (“Cavalier”) owner of the Cavalier Country Club Apartments in Newark, Delaware, filed this diversity action on November 3, 1988 seeking to recover the cost of repairing and replacing concrete balconies at the apartment complex. The balconies were designed, fabricated and installed by the defendant Strescon Industries, Inc. (“Strescon”). (Compl., 1Í 3...
Views: 0
Page 742
OPINION & ORDER
BACKGROUND
Petitioner Chas. Kurz & Co., Inc. (“Kurz”) owns the United States flag tanker Valley Forge (the “vessel”), which it operates through an affiliated company, petitioner Keystone Shipping Corporation (“Keystone”). In April 1991, respondent Texport Oil Company (“Texport”) chartered the vessel to carry gasoline blending stocks from a United States Gulf port to a...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The defendant is charged in a one count indictment filed on October 5, 1989, with unlawful possession with intent to distribute heroin, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). He filed a motion to suppress evidence which the court orally denied. He moved for reconsideration and after a further argument, the Court granted his motion for reconsideration and granted his motion to *19suppr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Pursuant to Rules 50(b) and 59(a), Fed. R.Civ.P., the Court has before it the motion of defendant Pelikan, Inc., for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial (filed April 8, 1991; Docket Entry No. 246), and an accompanying memorandum in support thereof (filed April 8, 1991; Docket Entry No. 247). On May 1, 1991, Smith Corona Corporation filed a m...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Alexander Binzel Corp. (“Bin-zel”) brought this action against defendants Nu-Tecsys Corp. (“Nu-Tecsys”) and Karl Heinz Binzel alleging trademark and trade dress infringement. The magistrate judge recommended that Binzel’s motion for preliminary injunction be granted in part. After a careful review of the facts and for the reasons set forth herein, Bi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Before the Court is plaintiff’s application for the award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (1985)
1
*224
The defendant, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) contends that the application is untimely.
This case was originally brought by plaintiff under ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON AMENDED MOTION TO WITHDRAW GUILTY PLEAS AND TO PROCEED TO JURY TRIAL PREDICATED UPON NEW FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES This cause is before the Court on report and recommendation issued by Magis*602trate/Judge Thomas G. Wilson, on November 13, 1991. The report recommends that the motion to withdraw pleas be denied. Pursuant to Rule 6.02, Rules of the United States District Court for the Middle ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Ivan Mullenix (Mullenix) to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended petition and defendant’s response thereto. In this action plaintiffs Dennis and Katherine Gosnell seek recovery for personal injuries and loss of consortium sustained as a result of Dennis Gosnell’s fall from an elevated walkway during the construction of the Bogey ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motions for summary judgment. The motion of the Hennepin County defendants will be granted. The motion of the remaining defendants will be granted in part and denied in part.
FACTS
Plaintiff is a physician specializing in ne-phrology, a field of medicine involving the treatment of diseases and conditions of the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1883(c)(3) to review a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) who reduced plaintiff’s supplemental security income (“SSI”) payments. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. On December 10, 1991, Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Tullio Gene Leomporra filed his Report and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Eduardo Palayo Sanchez is charged in a single count indictment with bank robbery and use of a dangerous weapon and kidnapping in committing the robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d) and (e). He pleaded guilty to the (a) and (d) charges, but pleaded not guilty to the subsection (e) charge of kidnapping. Trial by jury has been waived and the matter has bee...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity action arises out of a dispute between the Borough of Schuylkill Haven (“Schuylkill Haven Borough”) and Warner Cable Communications Inc. (“Warner Cable”) over who will supply cable television services to the residents of Schuylkill Haven Borough.
1
Warner Cable contends that Schuylkill Haven Borough is preparing to build and operate its own cabl...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Peter Vigliotti moves (1) for an order dismissing the indictment on the ground that the grand jury was misled and misinformed by the Government’s presentation of evidence before that body and (2) for an order compelling the Government to disclose information about the confidential informant in this case including but not limited to his name, date of birth, and nature o...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity case is before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue under N.Y.C.P.L.R. § 301 and 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Alternatively, the defendant moves to transfer the action to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 § U.S.C. 1404.
Plaintiff cross-moves to vacate the Court’s prior vacatu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff was hired as Director of Marketing for defendant effective July 28,1989 and terminated on October 31, 1989. He files this action against defendant, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), alleging that he was discriminated against on the basis of his sex. Plaintiff also sues defendant for breach of contract alleging that he detrimentally r...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on a motion of defendant Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) in its capacity as receiver for Bell Savings Bank, PaSA (“Bell Savings”), to dismiss or, in the alternative, to stay proceedings in a judicial action brought by plaintiffs Sanford and Faye Cohen until the exhaustion by plaintiffs of the administrative procedures mandated by the Financi...
Views: 0
Presently pending before the Court are defendant's Motions for Rule 12(d) Preliminary Hearing on its Defense of Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. Beginning in 1983, more than one hundred female plaintiffs began to file products liability claims in Maryland against G.D. Searle & Company and Searle Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively referred to as “Searle”). Each plaintiff alleges that she was inju...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). Plaintiff instituted this civil rights action on October 5, 1989.
I. Facts
The circumstances giving rise to this action occurred on October 6,1987. The original complaint named as defendants the City of Grand Rapids, Officer Dennis Johnson, Of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a diversity case, governed by Pennsylvania law and asserting wrongful discharge from employment. Defendant moves for summary judgment, essentially averring that the discharged plaintiff, a paralegal employed by the defendant, a lawyer, has no cause of action because of the virtually impervious employment-at-will doctrine in Pennsylvania, see
Hall v. Lank...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the motion of the counter-plaintiffs to dismiss, or alternatively for summary judgment on, the counterclaims. For reasons that follow, the motion is granted in part, denied in part, and reserved in part. FACTS This action arises from efforts to redistrict the Illinois General Assembly following the 1990 federal census. The initial complaint was filed by the Illinois Legis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The basic facts of this case appear in this court’s Memorandum and Order dated January 11, 1991, familiarity with which is assumed. Plaintiff Elias filed suit against the Town of Brookhaven and its Planning Board and Town Board, seeking to restrain enforcement of a zoning ordinance passed by the town. Before adoption of the ordinance, Elias’s property was zoned for commerci...
Views: 1
Page 826
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move for an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) withdrawing the reference to the district court. Plaintiffs have moved for partial summary judgment on their first claim. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to withdraw the reference is denied, and the motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ first claim is granted in part.
Background
To...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
This matter is before the Court on defendant Cho-me Towing Company’s (“ChoMe’s”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment seeking dismissal of all claims for economic loss asserted herein against it by plaintiffs, L & L Fleeting, Inc. (“L & L”), Cooper/T. Smith Stevedoring Co., Inc. (“Cooper/T. Smith”), Plimsoll Marine, Inc. (“Plimsoll”), and Elmar Marine Corporation d/b/a Da...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff has brought this declaratory judgment action against the insured-defendants seeking to declare the rights of the parties under a certain fire policy with respect to a loss claim made by the insured-defendants. Plaintiff refuses to honor the loss claim because it believes that the fire (which destroyed defendants’ home) was intentionally set or intentionally caused t...
Views: 0
782 F.Supp. 88 (1992)
Ann C. SCHWEISS, Plaintiff,
v.
CHRYSLER MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 89-0943C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
January 22, 1992.
*89 Thomas Casey, Casey & Meyerkord, St. Louis, Mo., for Schweiss.
Charles Newman, Thompson & Mitchell, St. Louis, Mo., for Chrysler.
John Moellering, Lewis & Rice, St. Louis, Mo., for Sigwerth.
MEMORANDUM
GU...
Views: 2
*92MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court for a decision on the merits after a one-day trial before the Court sitting without a jury. This Court having considered the pleadings, the testimony and exhibits introduced at trial and the applicable law, hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required by Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed.R.C...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF DECISION This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and the mirror image, Defendants’ Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The issue before the Court is the Plaintiff’s claim, as secured lender and assignee of a construction contract, for liquidated damages and Defendant’s counterclaim challenging the enforceability of the co...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case arises out of an internal revenue dispute between
pro se
Plaintiff Gilbert T. Gonsalves and Defendant Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter “IRS”). Plaintiff has initiated suit against the IRS.
1
On March 28, 1991, Plaintiff filed this action for monetary damages under sectio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff has sued the Dierks School Board under two legal theories. First, plaintiff complains, citing 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that his vote in at-large school board elections has been diluted in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Second, he asserts that the school board has violated Arkansas law in failing to institute zone districts to replace the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs filed these consolidated voting rights cases in September 1991, challenging the House Apportionment Plan (referred to as “the official Plan”) adopted the same month by the Missouri House of Represent*402atives Reapportionment Commission. Unlawful dilution of voting rights of African Americans is alleged, as the Plan applies to Jackson County (Kansas City), St. Louis...
Views: 0
OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
sitting as a United States District Court Judge by designation.
INTRODUCTION
William J. Condren (“Condren”), residing in New York, brings this diversity action against Michael P. Grace (“Grace”), residing in California, seeking damages in the total amount of $68,060 coupled with recompense for his attorney fees and costs, in conne...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a motion for summary judgment by plaintiff Hedda Schoonderbeek von Kaulbach, who seeks a declaration that the agreement she signed to establish a trust is unenforceable. Her summary judgment motion in a companion case,
Keoseian v. Schoonderbeek, et al.,
88 Civ. 1544 (MBM), was granted in an opinion reported as
Keoseian v. Von Kaulbach,
763 F...
Views: 0
*1207 MEMORANDUM The United States has filed this action against Ralph H. Deckelbaum and Vera M. Deckelbaum, seeking to recover a tax refund paid by the Internal Revenue to the Deckelbaums in connection with their 1985 federal individual income tax return. The case presents the question of whether the Deckelbaums can adjust certain tax preference items downward for the purpose of determining ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Appellant Irma Baez (“Baez”) appeals from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Blackshear, B.J., denying her motion for post-petition interest on her pre-petition claim. Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company (“MLMIC”) cross-appeals from an order of the bankruptcy court which approved a Stipulation of Damages between MLMIC and Baez or, alternatively, seeks affir...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Mary A. DeSantis (“DeSantis”) brings this action for recovery of federal income tax and interest assessed and collected from her by defendant United States of America (“the Government”). Plaintiff moves the Court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 56 for summary judgment on the ground that the assessment of taxes against her was untimely pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6501...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Maurice Hunley (“Hunley”) brings this habeas corpus petition against respondents Salvadore Godinez and Roland W. Burris (“respondents”) pursuant to 28
*523
U.S.C. § 2254 (“§ 2254”). Respondents are currently imprisoning Hunley as a result of his convictions for residential burglary and murder by the Circuit Court of Cook County. Hunley c...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this matter Chicago police officers (“Officers”) seek overtime pay for their meal breaks pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201— 219.
1
The City of Chicago (“City”) has moved pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings contending that as a matter of law the Officers are not entitled to overtim...
Views: 0
OPINION
These consolidated actions arise out of the May 22, 1989 closing of the Atlantis Casino Hotel in Atlantic City. Plaintiffs are former employees of Atlantis and their representative union. Defendants are Elsinore Shore Associates (“ESA”), a New Jersey partnership that owned and operated the Atlantis; various corporations which make up the partnership; the parent corporation that co...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL '
This is an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s July 9, 1991 order denying the motions of defendants Meyer Blinder and Intercontinental Enterprises, Inc. to dismiss Adversary Proceeding No. 91-1283 RJB (the Adversary Proceeding). Glen E. Keller, Jr., trustee for the liquidation of Blinder, Robinson & Co., Inc. (Trustee), moves to dismiss the appeal,...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The defendant, Christine Merritt (“Merritt”), has filed a motion requesting credit towards her federal sentence for time served in the prisons of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The motion is properly before this Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3585 (1985).1 This Court has the authority to entertain such a motion and to grant it in appropriate circumstances. United States v. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION
This court held hearings on October 28, November 25, and December 9, 1991 to discuss several matters pertaining to the
*827
Paul A. Dever State School (“Dever”).
1
The October 28 hearing was scheduled because of reports from the Office of Quality Assurance (“OQA”) and the Department'of Public Health (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate serving a life sentence, is incarcerated at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas. Petitioner’s action was filed on December 30, 1985. This court denied all relief and dismissed the petition on March 31, 1986. Petitioner filed a noti...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Vernon Isaac, filed this action seeking a review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) denying his application for social security disability and supplemental security income benefits. That application, which was filed on May 25, 1989, alleged that plaintiff became disabled on January 26, 1987 as a result of a back injury. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. This matter is before the Court on defendant Marcus Lacey’s motion to dismiss the charges against him on double jeopardy grounds. On December 10,1991, this Court held an evidentiary hearing to resolve the issues raised in defendant’s motion. Therein, two witnesses testified: DEA Agent Brian Hal-tom and FBI Agent Robert Carter. Having presided over the hearing and af...
Views: 0
*64MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
Prior to filing the instant litigation, plaintiff Norman Mahdesian sued defendant Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc., in an attempt to obtain no-fault benefits pursuant to the Michigan Motor Vehicle Per...
Views: 0
OPINION AND DECISION
Plaintiff Vivian Hutchinson brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a declaration that Ohio’s post-judgment statutory procedure for execution on personal property is unconstitutional and for a permanent injunction against enforcement of those statutes. Because the challenged Ohio statutes deprive Plaintiff and those similarly situated of property without ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case presents the novel questions whether it is a due process violation to transfer a defendant’s case from state to federal prosecution solely to obtain an increased federal sentence, and whether the court may depart from federal sentencing guidelines because the state sentence would have been substantially less severe than the federal sentence. Both questions are answe...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court is plaintiff Burke, Inc.’s motion to reconsider the directed verdict granted in favor of defendants Everest & Jennings, Inc. and Invacare Corp. Defendants moved for the directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. In its case-in-chief, Burke introduced U.S. Patent No. 4,570,739 (the “patent”) into evidence. Plaintiff also presented evidence intended to s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. Background
This dispute involves a 54-mile segment of rail track connecting Davenport and Iowa City, Iowa (“Iowa City line”). On October 10, 1984, Heartland Rail Corporation (“Heartland”) acquired the 54-mile Iowa City line. With the purchase of the Iowa City line, Heartland also acquired 500 additional miles of rail line to the east and west of the Iowa City line. Heartla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The above referenced action arises from the efforts of Southold Development Corp. (“SDC”), a corporation in bankruptcy, to sell Robins Island, one of the last parcels of undeveloped, pristine property in Suffolk County. Now before the Court is SDC’s motion to dismiss the appeal of Robins Island Preservation Fund (“RIPF”) from the May 28, 1991 Order of the Bankruptcy Court c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Larry J. Rial (“Rial”) has tendered a self-prepared Complaint in which he invokes 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) to seek declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief against prosecuting officials of Will County, Illinois (“County”) — its State’s Attorney Edward Burmila and one of his assistants, plus the “State’s Attorney’s Office” (although the latter is of course n...
Views: 0
*39MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before this Court on defendants, Goodyear Aerospace Corporation, Loral Corporation, Loral Corporation Engineered Fabric Division, and Divested Aerospace Corporation’s (“Loral Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss and plaintiff counsel, Herman L. Stephens’, Motion to Withdraw as counsel to bankrupt plaintiff’s assignee, Herbert H. Bauer.
I. FACTS
This cas...
Views: 0
Page 915
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s objections to certain discovery rulings made by Magistrate Judge Guzman. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s objections are denied in part and granted in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Patricia Bobkoski, filed suit on October 1, 1990 against the Board of Education of Cary Consolidated School District 26 and two supervisors, (...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF REMAND
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Facts.....................................................................937
A. Supply of Herbicides to the United States .............................•. 937
B. Defendants’ Removal Notice............................................939
II. Law of Removal ..........................................................939
...
Views: 1
*1361
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is now on appeal from a jury verdict in which nominal damages of $1 were awarded to plaintiff Maceo Willis (“Willis”) for a violation of his constitutional rights — a matter on which this Court had earlier ruled in Willis’ favor on a motion for summary judgment as to liability (726 F.Supp. 1118 (N.D.Ill.1989)). As in every civil rights...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
ArtCarved (Bridal) was a jewelry business headquartered in New York City, and was formerly a division of defendant Lenox, Inc. In April, 1988, Lenox sold Art-Carved to CJC Holdings, Inc.; in August, 1988, CJC announced that part of the Art-Carved operations would be relocating to Austin, Texas over the ensuing 6-9 months. CJC offered to relocate all employees who wished ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
On February 22, 1990, the United States of America (hereinafter “the government”) filed a forty-six count Indictment against the defendants Ted W. Gleave (“Gleave”) and David R. Knoll (“Knoll”) (collectively referred to as “the defendants”). The indictment charges the defendants with conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 371); concealment of assets in bankruptcy (18 U.S.C. § 152...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANTS CITY OF ROYAL OAK, KEMP AND DOYLE AND DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT SWIFT All four defendants filed one motion for summary judgment September 6, 1991, and *1252 a supplemental brief in support September 20, 1991. Plaintiff filed her response October 4, 1991. No reply was filed. Oral argume...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This is a class action1 challenging the constitutionality of Section 8001 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, 38 U.S.C. § 3205,2 in which plaintiffs seek in-junctive relief as well as a declatory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Plaintiffs now move, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order preliminarily e...
Views: 1
JUDGMENT FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES, PENALTIES, AND COSTS
This is an ERISA action in which plaintiff has prevailed, in part, and now has moved for an allowance of attorney’s fees and costs. Plaintiff seeks an allowance of attorney’s fees in the amount of $14,145.00 plus a multiplier and reimbursement for costs advanced in the amount of $2,823.75.
Plaintiff Steven King’s employment with defendant Caesar’...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on Debtors’ Motion: (i) For Approval of Employee Benefits; (ii) to Limit Notice; (iii) to Limit Time (the “Motion”) which was filed and served by the Debtors on December 19, 1991. Responses to the Motion were filed by the Official Landmark Unsecured Creditor’s Committee and the Resolution Trust Corporation. Pursuant to notice the matter was called for heari...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
This case arises from a collision which occurred on March 5, 1989, involving an automobile driven by an uninsured motorist, Deanna Jo Stetter, and two young children, Peter Tokley Jr. and Richard Perry, who were playing on their sleds when they were struck by Deanna Stetter’s car. At the time o...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
1
Plaintiff Bosede Adedeji alleges that, upon returning to Logan Airport from a trip to Nigeria in May, 1986, United States customs inspectors subjected her to a strip search, X ray examination and body cavity searches without having reasonable suspicion that she was carrying contraband. Plaintiff also makes common law allegations of false imprisonment and a...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, & ORDER FOR JUDGMENT
The above entitled actions came on for trial before the court on October 7-9, 1991. Based upon the evidence adduced at trial and upon all the files, records and proceedings herein, the court makes these findings of fact and conclusions of law.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
A.
The Bank and Its Directors and Officers
1....
Views: 2
ENTRY DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE
Defendant Robert D. Steele (Steele) moved to suppress evidence of a handgun seized from him on the evening of May 26, 1991 by Officer Roger Phillips (Phillips) of the Kokomo Police Department. Steele contends that he was seized and searched without a warrant or probable cause, and that the circumstances of the seizure did not fall with...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is granted. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Joseph Abadi claimed a business loss deduction of $200,460.00 on his 1978 individual federal income tax return. The deduction arose from his investment of $52,000.00 in November of 197...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) on appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order of February 20, 1991. In its order of February 20, 1991, the bankruptcy court enjoined the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) from proceeding against debtor Toni Lee Davis (“debtor”) and ordered the IRS to pay debtor $475.00 in compensatory damages, $700.00 in attorn...
Views: 2
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW INTRODUCTION This matter came on for trial May 1, 1990, upon the complaint of Michael Schunk, a Vietnam veteran. Plaintiff claims that, between 1979 and 1985, doctors at the Veterans Administration Medical Centers in Long Beach, California (“Long Beach VA”) and in Northport, New York (“Northport VA”) committed medical malpractice by failing to diagnose ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Storck USA, L.P. and August Storck K.G. (“Storck”) have moved the
*732
court for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendant Farley Candy Co. (“Farley”) from using any trade dress or trademark which is confusingly similar to the package used by Storck for its Werther’s Original candy.
FACTS
Since 1980, Storck has continuously...
Views: 2
Page 973
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Inland Waters Pollution Control, Inc. [“Inland Waters”] filed the instant lawsuit against defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. [“National Union”] in Wayne County Circuit Court. Defendant removed the case to federal court under diversity jurisdiction. After discovery, the part...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On April 5, 1991, plaintiffs filed a complaint with this court seeking damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671 et seq., for injuries allegedly resulting from negligent medical care provided by employees of the United States Army. The case comes before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss. Upon consideration of defendant’s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant, Omar Watson, was indicted in September of 1991 in the Eastern District of Virginia on one count of possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and one count of interstate travel in aid of racketeering, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1952(a). This matter is before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress the fruits ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. For the following reasons, plaintiff’s motion will be denied and defendant’s cross-motion will be granted.
I.
Plaintiff Clinton Memorial Hospital (“Clinton”) challenges certain Medicare reimbursement regulations promulgated by the Secretar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Donald F. Fix filed his complaint April 1, 1991, under diversity jurisdiction alleging state law age discrimination in his termination by defendant Unisys Corporation. Defendant filed the instant motion for summary judgment December 6,1991. Plaintiff filed his response December 26, 1991; and defendant ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Plaintiffs Blagoja and Olga Stojanovski filed their complaint October 9, 1991. Plaintiffs amended their complaint October 11, 1991. Defendant Strobl and Manoogi-
*321
an, P.C. filed a motion for summary judgment Dece...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Nari Lakhaney brings this diversity action to enforce two guarantees of payment (“the guarantees”) allegedly executed by defendants James Anzelone and Bart Tarulli. The guarantees were for payment of a promissory note (“the note”) executed in favor of plaintiff by 5550 Corp. Plaintiff has moved for summary judgment under Rule 56, F.R.Civ.P. Defendants have not opposed th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment in Civil Action Nos. 88-969 (Pittston), 88-3716 (Pittsburg & Midway (P & M)), 89-2833 (Pierce), and Civil Action No. 91-3241 (Rawl).1 The three *660cases brought by the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) Pension and Benefit Trusts (the Pittston, P & M, and Rawl cases) are actions to collect delinquent contributions and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On December 20 of 1990, plaintiff filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the defendant, seeking a variety of documents relating to the Department’s activities in connection with the Paris Air
*676
Show. The dispute with respect to all but one set of documents has been resolved. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This appeal concerns whether a tax fraud penalty assessed by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) against the debtors Alton Vaughn Byrum and Juanita Doris Byrum (“the Byrums”) is dischargeable under Chapter 7 pursuant to section 523(a)(7)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7)(B). Bankruptcy Court Judge John E. Ryan held that the debt was dis-chargeable....
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff, Makolle Williams, brings this race discrimination suit against the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (“MWCC”) and certain MWCC employees and supervisors, in their individual capacities. Plaintiff’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Minnesota Human Rights Act (the Act), Minnesota Statutes, § 363.01
et seq.,
and Minnesota common law, were tried to a jury or ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This case is before the Court on defendant, the New York Times Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment. On February 19, 1991, the Court heard oral arguments. After careful consideration of the motion, the opposition thereto, and the entire record in this case, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of the defendant.
I.
The facts may be briefly stated. Plaintiff ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1. Introduction
This action involves the enforcement of the so-called “layering rule,” 10 C.F.R. § 212.186,
1
governing the resale of crude oil. MAPCO is a reseller of crude oil. In April of 1986, the Department of Energy issued a remedial order charging MAPCO with violations of the layering rule and ordering it to repay $1,765,320.59 in overcharges. MAP...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants in the above-captioned case have petitioned this Court for summary judgment. Defendants advance two arguments in support of their motion. First, they argue that party affiliation is an appropriate requirement for the position in which plaintiff was formerly employed; thus, defendants were legally entitled to fire plaintiff because of her party affiliation. Second...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants in the above-captioned case have petitioned this Court for dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendants’ motion is predicated on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), which provides for dismissal of an action if the court lacks personal (“in personam”) jurisdiction over the defendants). I find that in personam jurisdiction is lacking, and I order imme...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the Motion to Withdraw the Reference Under 11 U.S.C.
*205
§ 157(d)
1
and Rule 5011 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, filed by defendants Pla-Do Corporation (“Pla-Do”) and Robert Saddler. The defendants ask the court to withdraw the reference of Adversary Proceeding No. 90-1053 from the United States Bankruptcy Court...
Views: 0
Before the court in the above-captioned matter is a Motion to Intervene Pursuant to FRCP Rule 24(a)(2), filed on behalf of the former crewmembers of the M/T STOLT LUISA PANDO and the M/T STOLT MARIA PANDO. The. Motion is opposed by Banco Exterior de España, S.A., the successor banking corporation of Banco de Crédito Industrial, S.A., formerly Banco de Crédito a la Construcción, S.A. (“BCI”). Th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, the United States of America, objects to and appeals from the Magistrate’s November 18, 1991 Order requiring the United States to provide the Court and the defendants with a log of documents in the possession of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce, United States House of Representatives. This Court agrees with plaintif...
Views: 0
*566
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The primary issue before the court is whether or not the courtroom should be closed to the public and the press during the testimony of eleven witnesses in a criminal proceeding. The Government’s Motion for Protective Order seeks,
inter alia,
to close the courtroom during the testimony of eleven witnesses who are the parents of children allegedl...
Views: 1
Pending before the court are a series of motions in this complex case. In a consent order issued on March 20, 1991, defendant/third-party plaintiff William A. Fick-ling, Jr., (“Fickling”) dismissed with prejudice his claims against third-party defendants Steven S. Friedman and Steven R. Gretenstein, removing them from this case and mooting their motion for summary judgment. Presently pending ar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Lucy Pokuaa pled guilty to importing heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952(a). She had been arrested when she disembarked at John F. Kennedy Airport. There it was discovered that she had swallowed balloons containing about 92 grams of heroin prior to boarding the plane in Nigeria. She was in custody for six weeks before the court authorized her release pending se...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case is a testament to the principle “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.” We must ask ourselves why the current clamor and rush to carry out death sentences, but no similar urgency in freeing one who might be wrongly convicted and confined.
Vincent James Landano has been up and down the judicial ladder enough times to exhaust anyone and destroy their spirit. Nonetheless,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before this court is a motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants on October 30, 1991. A response was filed by the plaintiff on November 4, 1991. The defendants filed a reply brief on December 2, 1991. This matter is ripe for determination. The defendants seek summary judgment as to the corporation and as to Paul Watkins, Employee Relations Manager for Riverwood Interna...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 19, 1991, a trial to the court was held on this action. At the close of the trial the case was taken under advisement and the parties were directed to submit briefs to the court. The court has received the briefs from the parties. This matter is ripe for determination.
At the trial of this case the only parties to participate were the plaintiffs and co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(2), of an administrative due process hearing wherein the hearing officer determined that the plaintiffs were not entitled to reimbursement for tuition and related expenses associated with their handicapped child’s placement in a private facility. The principal issues in this case are: (1) whether the DeSoto County School Distr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs United Services Automobile Association (“USAA”); USAA Casualty Insurance Company (“USAA Casualty”); USAA Life Insurance Company (“USAA Life”); and USAA Annuity and Life Insurance Company (“USAA Annuity”) filed this declaratory judgment action in 1984 challenging the constitutionality of section 641 of the Pennsylvania Insurance Code. Section 641 is an...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are the plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim and to Strike Affirmative Defenses. The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, and concludes that the Motion for Class Certification shall be granted, and the Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim and to Strike Affirmativ...
Views: 0
Page 1122
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This action involves the initiation, by the New York State Department of Social Services (“DSS”), of a “lag” in the reimbursement of Medicaid funds to certain health care providers. Under this “lag,” each payment by the State to the providers will be delayed by one day until the payments are ultimately received by the provider two weeks later than had been the practi...
Views: 0
OPINION The issues in this case relate to the amount-in-controversy requirement for a *45 hearing before an administrative law judge in connection with a certain type of Medicare claim. More particularly, the question is whether plaintiffs are able, under the relevant statute, to “aggregate” their claims and obtain a hearing based upon the aggregated amount. It appears that Medicare claims ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Joseph John Chilli, Jr., Joseph Macaluso, and Alan Taglianetti each move pursuant to Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (“Rule 35”) for a reduction in their respective sentences imposed by this Court on July 2, 1990. For the reasons set forth below, the motion of defendant Chilli is denied, the motion of defendant Macaluso is granted in part, and the...
Views: 0
ORDER
On August 13, 1990, this court ruled that the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.App. §§ 761 et seq. (“DOHSA”), was a necessary cause of action for the plaintiffs asserting wrongful death claims in this case, which arose in connection with the mid-air accident involving United Airlines Flight 811 on February 24, 1989. The court further held that DOHSA provides only pecuniary damag...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Appellants Karl and Wilma Goos (“the Gooses”) seek to collect post-petition rent payments from F.A. Potts & Co., Inc., and GNP Land Company (“Debtors”) for the period May 1984 through April 1990. The Gooses filed a motion in bankruptcy court, arguing that these payments should be allowed as an administrative expense pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(A). The bankruptcy court den...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. FACTS
The plaintiff, Horace Mann Insurance Company, has moved this court for a declaratory judgment as to the scope of its duty to indemnify or defend its insured, Cecil Fore, and for summary judgment. The motion for summary judgment was filed November 6, 1991. On November 15, 1991, Judge Hobbs ordered that a response be made on or before December 4, 1991, and i...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 1212 (1992)
Julia DORSETT
v.
AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS, INC. and Isuzu Motors, Ltd.
Civ. A. No. 89-9111.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
February 3, 1992.
*1213 *1214 John J. Mahoney, Thomas R. Wilson, [COR LD NTC], Crawford, Wilson, Ryan & Agulnick, P.C., West Chester, Pa., for plaintiff.
Raymond T. Le Bon, Joseph V. Pinto, William J. Conroy, Jeanne M. Proko, White ...
Views: 2
*476
ORDER
The Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), authorizes an award of attorney fees to a prevailing party in certain civil litigation against the United States. This case requires the court to consider when an applicant for supplemental social security income benefits becomes a “prevailing party” in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs David Arazie, Gary Hurlick, Paul Karinsky, William and Ann Klein, Aldo Mirizzi, Lawrence and Florence Moss, Kevin O’Sullivan, Jeffrey Starr, and Arthur Yorkes bring this action against defendants Robert E. Mullane, Roger Keesee, Paul J. Johnson, Patrick L. O’Malley, William E. Chandler, and Bally Manufacturing Co. (collectively, “Bally” or “company”).1 They...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Lynn L. Chapman and the United States of America have moved to dismiss (or, alternatively, for summary judgment on) plaintiff William Finch’s second amended complaint. Finch alleges constitutional and common law wrongdoing stemming from his second mistaken arrest as a supposed Naval deserter. Although we sympathize with Finch and find his treatment ...
Views: 1
Again, as the Third Circuit stated in its 1990 decision, “we revisit the seemingly endless litigation over the closing of Penn-
*216
hurst State School and Hospital (“Pennhurst”).”
Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hosp.,
901 F.2d 311, 314 (3d Cir.),
cert. denied,
— U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 140, 112 L.Ed.2d 107 (1990). Now before this Court is defendant Commonw...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Joseph Ruby Carl,.brought this action against defendants Richard J. Galus-ka, Charles Davis, George Calvert, National Gas and Electric Corporation of America, National Gas Associates, Ltd. and Geo-quest, Inc. Plaintiff asserts claims under the federal securities statutes, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) statute, and pende...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
These cases come before the court on several motions and cross motions for summary judgment and the oppositions and replies thereto concerning the proper interpretation of Section 506 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as amended, 46 U.S.C. § 1156 (1975 and Supp.1991) (“Section 506”). On January 31,1990, and as amended on February 28, 1990, the United States Maritime Administr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Charles Brown, an inmate in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections (“IDOC”), brings this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Cook County State’s Attorney, police officers Peggy O’Connor and Dale Altman, United States Probation Officer *1151 Ronald Krumke, and alleged police informants Clifford Perkins and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Robert Haynes brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several employees of the Illinois Department of Corrections. Haynes claims that defendants deprived him of liberty without due process of law by subjecting him to excessive discipline and causing him to remain in punitive segregation for nineteen days longer than provided for in the prison regulatio...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Republic of the Philippines (the “Republic”) and the National Power Corporation (“NPC”) instituted this action against Westinghouse Electric Corporation and Westinghouse International Projects Com
*974
pany (collectively, “Westinghouse”) and Burns & Roe Enterprises, Inc. (“Burns & Roe”), asserting multiple tort and contract claims. The case arises out of the const...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
January 13, 1992
BACKGROUND
On April 27, 1990, plaintiff Barbara Futch filed this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, alleging sex discrimination in her failure to be selected as Deputy Director of the Supply Directorate at the Tobyhanna Army Depot. Subsequent to a final pretrial conference, plaintiff filed a motion to amend her com...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The Court is troubled by the lack of civility among attorneys which has become all too common. The erosion of cooperation and courtesy within the legal community accounts, in large part, for the negative image attorneys suffer in the community at large. Moreover, constant squabbling increases the cost of litigation for all parties and causes unnecessary delay in the re...
Views: 1
ORDER
This jurisdictional issue is before the Court on its own motion. The Court concludes that it does not have jurisdiction over this case.
Plaintiffs, owners of housing developments, initially filed this action in the Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis against the Housing Authority of St. Louis County (HASLC) and its commissioners. Plaintiffs’ complaint in its current posture seeks to re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, filed pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Since this action is time-barred and precluded by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel, the Court GRANTS the Defendants’ motion and ORDERS this action dismissed and stricken from the docket of the Court. The Plaintiff...
Views: 0
This is an action for declaratory judgment to determine rights to benefits under the New Orleans Electrical Pension Plan [“the Plan”] as between the Estate of the deceased participant, Frank Francis Newman, Sr., and the spouse, Barbara Roberts Newman. The matter was submitted to the Court on an earlier date.
After considering the stipulation of facts, the briefs of counsel and the applicab...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM These consolidated actions concern the questions raised by the presence of HIV *1096 positive inmates within prison populations. Plaintiffs, inmates of the Maryland prison system who have no reason to believe that they are HIV positive, originally filed the actions pro se, requesting various forms of relief, including the mandatory segregation of HIV positive inmates. I appointed...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Lowell and Rosa Arnold (the “Arnolds”), bring this claim against defendant, the United States of America (the “government”) seeking a refund of federal income tax for tax year 1983. The Arnolds submit, and the government concedes, that the government incorrectly determined the extent of the Arnolds’ tax liability for the tax year 1983 by disallowing a valid employee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff, KFC Corporation (“KFC”), a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters in Louisville, Kentucky, filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendants, Ole J. Lilleo-ren and Joanne E. Lilleoren, residents of Oregon, and their wholly owned Oregon corporations, Kentucky Fried Chicken of Port Angeles, Inc. (“KFC-Port Angeles”), and...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action is submitted to the Court on motion by the plaintiff, KFC Corporation (“KFC”), for a preliminary injunction. Fed.R.Civ.P. 65. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing as well as the memoranda submitted by the parties, KFC’s motion will be granted.
KFC, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Lou...
Views: 1
RULING RE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL
Now pending before the undersigned Magistrate Judge is the motion of the plaintiffs, Jason James Romero and Tammy Derouen Romero, for an order compelling responses to interrogatory nos. 4, 8, 20 and 21 and request for production of documents no. 21, and for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 37(a) in the sum of $1,150.00. Defense counsel has ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The United States brought this action to recover funds transferred from a federally-funded Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) housing project to a
*764
church school. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1345.
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it fails to state a claim and is time barred. In...
Views: 0
OPINION Evaristo Carbonell-Iznaga (“Carbonell-Iznaga”) was convicted of three counts of possessing narcotics with an intent to distribute and three counts of unlawfully using a firearm during the commission of a drug trafficking crime on August 7, 1987. He was sentenced to five years of imprisonment for each of the narcotics counts, to be served concurrently, and five years of imprisonment for eac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this criminal case, the government charges defendants Joseph and Leonard Wassner with conspiring to violate Internal Revenue Laws. Three of the Wassners’ alleged co-conspirators, Schnejer Zalman Gurary, Nochum Sternberg and Esther Sternberg, have already been convicted. No other alleged co-conspirators were charged in this indictment. The government now moves in limine for ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case presents a controversy over the power of a federal court to review a dispute arising under the Medicare Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1395
et seq.
(the “Act” or the “Medicare Act”). Plaintiffs are claimants for medical benefits under the Medicare Act. Defendants are the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”); the administrator for region II of the...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action by plaintiff, Trans-Orient Marine Corporation (“Trans-Orient”), to recover damages from defendant, Star Trading & Marine, Inc. (“Star”), for breach of an agreement entered into on January 10, 1985. A two-day non-jury trial was held before this Court beginning on January 8,1990. At the conclusion of plaintiff’s case, this Court dismissed the action pursuant to. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Marcia Saxton (Saxton) brought this Title YII action against defendant American Telephone & Telegraph Company (AT & T), alleging sexual harassment in the workplace. Before us now is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, we grant defendant’s motion.
I. FACTS
Saxton began her employment with AT & T (Naperville, Illinois)...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This petition to compel arbitration (the “Petition”) is brought pursuant to Sections 4 and 201 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 4, 201, pursuant to an arbitration provision in the Purchase Agreement between petitioner Gestetner Holdings PLC
*79
(“Gestetner”) and respondent Nashua Corporation (“Nashua”).
1
BACKGROUND
Gestetner is ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
FACTS
On January 4, 1989,
1
Raymond Dyes, as pastor of the First Baptist Missionary Church (“Dyes”), entered into a contract with Arnold Weiner, an individual doing business as Alway Financial (“Alway Financial” or “Weiner”), to obtain a loan in the amount of $210,000.00. The loan was to be secured by certain real property owned by Dyes. Dyes signed ...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING WILLIAMS’ MOTION TO SUPPRESS BACKGROUND On October 23, 1991, a car driven by Defendant HERMAN T. LAWSON (“LAWSON”), in which Defendant REGINALD DEAN WILLIAMS (“WILLIAMS”) rode as a passenger, was stopped by a Florida Highway Patrol trooper on the Florida Turnpike. Ultimately, cocaine was seized from the car and both Defendants made incriminating statements. Defendants charac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action comes before the court as an appeal from an order entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, the Honorable Massie Tillman presiding. The court, having reviewed the briefs of appellant, Russell Doucette (“Doucette”), and appellee, Ming Yu Pannell (“debtor”), the record on appeal and applicable aut...
Views: 0
*1380
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Com: plaint, pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P.
15(a). In her motion, Plaintiff seeks to add a claim under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1981, and to amend her claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, both in light of the Civil ...
Views: 1
*271 OPINION The is an action of foreclosure brought by Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) against 12A Associates (“12A”) for 12A’s default on a mortgage Consolidation and Extension Agreement executed on July 21, 1987 (the “Agreement”). 1 On papers filed September 25, 1991, RTC moved for summary judgment. On November 7, 1991, this Court granted RTC’s motion for summary judgment and ordere...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs commenced this action by filing a complaint on May 7, 1991, alleging civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, municipal liability, and claims under the Court’s supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1367. The case is in the discovery stage ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
This matter comes before the court on the Motion for Leave to Amend and Demand for Jury Trial (“Motion to Amend”) (DE 8) filed by the Plaintiff, KIMBERLY JOYNER (“JOYNER”). Having reviewed the record, the memoranda of counsel, and relevant authorities, the court enters the following order.
I. BACKGROUND
The Unforgettable Firing
On Octo...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before me on Lloyd Louis Valdez’s pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) (1966) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1980). This petition, alleging numerous due process violations, was referred to the magistrate judge, and on September 9, 1991 he recommended granting the petition in part and denying it in part. Becaus...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this bankruptcy appeal, Andrew L. Quiat and the Law Offices of Andrew L. Quiat (collectively, Quiat) contest the bankruptcy court’s June 4, 1991 order requiring Quiat to disgorge approximately $125,000 of attorney fees paid by the debtor, John Allen Vann. Quiat argues that the bankruptcy court erred in ruling: (1) under § 329 of the Bankruptcy Code Quiat mu...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1282: United States v. Local 295 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Page 1282
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The amended complaint of United States names as defendants two Locals, Local 295 and Local 851, of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL-CIO (the Teamsters International) and related officers and alleged co-conspirators, and alleges violations of the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO),
18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, including ninet...
Views: 3
OPINION
Defendants Thomas A. Coughlin, III (“Coughlin”), Robert Greifinger (“Greifinger”), Marion Borum (“Borum”), Elaine A. Lord (“Lord”), and Raul Russi (“Russi”) (collectively the “Defendants”) have moved to dismiss Plaintiff Doris Clarkson’s (“Clarkson”) complaint against them on the ground that the action is moot. Defendant Lord also has moved separately for summary judgment pursuant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Olayinka Sadiq was found guilty by a jury on count one of a superseding indictment charging her with conspiring in April and May of 1991 to import heroin into the United States, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 963. She has moved under Rule 29(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for a judg *99 ment of acquittal on the ground that there was insuffic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendants’ motions for orders pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 72 setting aside Magistrate Judge Katz’s Order and Opinion dated November 8, 1991.
For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motions are denied.
BACKGROUND
The allegations of the Supplemental Complaint are discussed in the Court’s decision denying defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The court has before it the December 17, 1991 motion to amend filed by plaintiff Antoniette Maddox in the above case. In her original complaint, filed on June 26, 1991, plaintiff invokes Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, charging her employer with
failure to promote
her because of her race. At the time this...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Felicia Watkins, plaintiff in the above-entitled cause, together with plaintiffs in
*582
numerous other pending cases of alleged employment discrimination in this and other courts, have filed motions for leave to amend their complaints to request trial by jury and to claim the kinds of damages provided in the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which was signed into ...
Views: 2
Page 1299
OPINION
Plaintiff Stanley C. Kopczynski brought the instant suit alleging that Defendant, Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund (“Pension Fund”), wrongfully denied him pension benefits in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”), and in violation of state law. Plaintiff maintains that he should be awarded ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT PRUDENTIAL SECURITIES’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On January 23, 1991, plaintiff Michael F. Schmidt filed his complaint in Wayne County Circuit Court. Defendants removed the lawsuit to federal court February 5, 1991. Defendant Prudential Securities, Inc. [“Prudential”], filed the instant motion for summary judgment March 4, 1991. Plaintiff filed his r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Armando Londono pled guilty to importing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 960(a)(1). He had been arrested when he disembarked at John F. Kennedy Airport. There it was discovered that he had swallowed balloons containing cocaine prior to boarding the plane in Colombia. The number of balloons and the weight of the cocaine is controverted. „
Customs off...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Plaintiff Insurance Company of North America [“INA”] filed.its complaint June 21, 1991, seeking indemnification from defendants on certain bonds executed by defendants J.S. Vig Construction Company [“J.S. Vig”], Joseph S. Vig and Madeline Vig. Defendants filed their answer to the complaint July 29, 1991, admitting, inter alia, that these ...
Views: 0
OPINION This matter is before the Court upon a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner argues, inter alia, that the trial court erred in permitting the unredacted confession of his codefendant to be admitted as substantive evidence against him. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives, who submitted a report and recommendation that the petition for habeas corpus be d...
Views: 0
*910
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Susanne Littlefield (“Littlefield”), who is white, sued Malcolm McGuffey (“McGuffey”), also known as Wally Mack among other persona, claiming he denied her rental housing and harassed and intimidated her because her boyfriend, the father of her daughter, is black. She sued McGuffey for violation of the civil rights laws and the Fair Housing Act u...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Miles V. Williams (“Williams”) has alleged discrimination by defendant Lieutenant General Charles McCausland (“McCausland”) in violation of Title YII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16, arising out of the promotion of another employee to a position sought by Williams. Upon the trial to the Court and all prior proceedings, the facts are fo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This suit involves a royalty interest in tracts of land in the Columbus III oil. field in St. Clair County, Michigan. The field is leased to and operated by defendants Sun Exploration Company and Sun Operating Limited Partnership. Plaintiffs Edgar J. and Theresita Dietrich filed their five-co...
Views: 0
I
Defendant National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (“National Union”) on January 22, 1992 filed objections to plaintiff Bobbie Baranowski’s January 10, 1992 notices of written depositions and questions directed to two physicians. Included in the objections is this *56prayer for relief, which is common in form to both motions:
Defendant prays that upon hearing, its Objections...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs move, pursuant to Rule 23, Fed.R.Civ.P. for an order certifying this case as a class action on behalf of all claimants whose claims have been or will be assigned to Administrative Law Judge Helen Anyel (“AU Anyel”) for decision, and all claimants who have received an adverse decision from AU Anyel, not reversed on any subsequent appeal. Defendant Louis W. Sullivan, Secr...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
On December 13,1990, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) filed its complaint in this action alleging that defendants, ten registered representatives, engaged in unlawful high pressure sales of small highly speculative stocks, sometimes referred to in Wall Street parlance as “dogs,” to unwary customers and caused trades to be entered in customer accounts wi...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner commenced this action while an inmate housed at the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas, challenging the action taken on his case by the United States Parole Commission. Having examined the record, the court makes the following findings and or...
Views: 0
ORDER Petitioner is currently incarcerated at United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He proceeds on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner seeks to set aside his military conviction, and alleges numerous constitutional errors occurred during his court-martial. Respondent filed an answer and return to the petition, and petitio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and the defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff, a former employee with the K-Mart Corporation in Lawrence, Kansas, brings this action to recover disability retirement benefits from the defendant pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case was removed from the District Court of Saline County, Kansas. The matter is presently before the court upon plaintiff’s motion to remand. Having carefully reviewed the arguments of the parties, the court is now prepared to rule.
Plaintiff contends that remand to state court is necessary because (1) this court lacks jurisdiction, and (2) the defendant co...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER I last wrote about the federal sentencing guidelines in a decision issued on February 22, 1991. United States v. Scott, 757 F.Supp. 972 (EJD.Wis.1991). In Scott I expressed my view that the guidelines were not working and that Congress should revisit them and conclude that they are an experiment that has failed. While I could have written about the guidelines and the problems I ...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF 1991 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Complaint and Try This Matter by Jury, filed December 18, 1991. Plaintiff seeks to apply the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (the “Act”) to a case that was pending prior to the date of enactment. This matter has been fully briefed by the litigants. Jurisdictio...
Views: 1
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1342: RXDC, Inc. v. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Union-Industry Pension Fund
Page 1342
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was filed August 31, 1990. The Defendant filed its response in opposition to Plaintiff’s motion and brief in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment on October 23, 1990. Reply briefs and supplemental documents were also submitted. Also pen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for decision following a bench trial held on October 15 and 16, 1991.
The plaintiffs in this case are present and former detectives in the investigations section of the City of Emporia Police Department. The plaintiffs contend the defendant, the City of Emporia (City), violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a civil rights action. Plaintiff Dixie Adair is a female commercial spare parts analyst in defendant Beech Aircraft Corporation’s (Beech) inventory control department 152, a division of the company’s product marketing section. Pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., plaintiff seeks statutory relief for alleged discrimina...
Views: 0
782 F. Supp. 546 (1992)
Norman E. DeVOE, Plaintiff,
v.
MEDI-DYN, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-1483-B.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
January 15, 1992.
*547 *548 Daniel T. Brooks, Wichita, Kan., for plaintiff.
Susan P. Selvidge, Fleeson, Gooing, Coulson & Kitch, Wichita, Kan., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BELOT, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Joint Motion of plaintiff Pacific Employers Insurance Company (“Pacific”) and defendant P.B. Hoidale Company, Inc. (“Hoidale”) to limit the number of expert witnesses called by defendant Employers Mutual Casualty Company (“Employers”); and the Joint Motion in Limine of Pacific and Hoidale to exclude at trial the testimony of an expert wit...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION. Ricky Ray Rector (“Rector”) has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and an application to stay his execution. For the reasons that follow, both submissions are denied. FACTS. The facts of this case have been well documented. On March 22, 1981, Rector shot and killed Arthur Criswell and wounded two others at a Conwa...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for a preliminary injunction ordering defendant to preserve and set aside $42,843,614.13, together with income earned thereon since November 25, 1991, in an escrow account pending final resolution of this action. The motion was heard on January 21 and 22, 1992. I granted a preliminary injunction on the record at the conclusion of the hearing. I...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER As full and adequate briefs have been filed by the litigants, I have determined that oral argument would not provide material assistance in determining this appeal. Michael Van Tassel is 32 years of age and is suffering from the progressive wasting disease muscular dystrophy. He was professionally trained as a jeweller but had to quit his job as his illness hamper...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs, J.L. McGraw and LaNelie McGraw, were farmers until they liquidated their farm assets in 1979. After the liquidation, plaintiffs were assessed income taxes by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Due to their insolvency, plaintiffs were unable to pay. They filed this action, pro se, on February 6, 1990, alleging that the IRS violated their constitutional rights by “illegally ...
Views: 0
784 F.Supp. 648 (1992)
CONOPCO, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
MAY DEPARTMENT STORES COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
No. 90-1475C(3).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
January 2, 1992.
*649 *650 *651 *652 *653 *654 Harry O. Moline, Moline Ottsen Mauze Leggat & Shostak, St. Louis, Mo., Berj A. Terzian, Joseph Diamante, Peter D. Vogl, Darren Saunders, Pennie & Edmonds, New York City, for ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC”) motion for a preliminary injunction freezing the assets of all of the named defendants and for appointment of a trustee to manage the assets.
This case has its origin in the failure of Peoples Heritage Savings, a Federal Savings and Loan Association, Salina, Kansas, and, before that, Pe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the court are the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Doc. # 53) and the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. #48). A hearing was held on December 23, 1991. Because the arguments for and against the respective motions are interrelated, they will be considered concurrently. For the reasons more fully set forth below, the court will deny the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on two motions filed by defendant. These motions are: (1) Defendant Roadway Express, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, dated August 28, 1991 (Doc. 21); (2) Defendant Roadway Express, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Action With Prejudice, dated December 4, 1991 (Doc. 39). Additionally, defendant has filed De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On January 21, 1992, the motion by the plaintiffs for summary judgment (doc. #43) came on for hearing. For the reasons set forth in the record, the plaintiffs’ motion is denied. Some clarification of the ruling is required in order for the parties to properly prepare for trial.
The court has determined that there is no issue of material fact concerning whether or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on two motions. Defendants, Pauline E. Rains, Michael J. Friesen and Lydia K. Friesen, ask the court to alter, vacate and set aside its order of July 25, 1991, (Dk. 72) in which the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against defendant Rains was granted as uncontested. Now that defendants Michael J. Friesen and Lydia K. Friesen have *1293fi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On November 14, 1989, Edward S. Money and Reginald Smith filed this action for
*566
wrongful termination from their employment at the Great Bend Packing Company, Inc. (GBC). In December 1987, both Money and Smith’s employment with GBC was terminated following an investigation of allegations by another GBC employee, Eddie Givens, that Money and Smith were ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs’ complaint seeks recovery from the Defendants of the withdrawal liability of Lidelco, Inc. (“Lidelco”) pursuant to the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendment Act (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1381
et seq.
(1985). The case is currently before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment or, In the Alternative, for an Order Comp...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Joseph Copeland (“Copeland” or “plaintiff”) brings the above-referenced action against Cesar A. Perales as Commis*13sioner of the New York State Department of Social Services and Ruth Brandwein as Commissioner of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services (collectively “defendants”). Copeland challenges defendants’ alleged policy and practice of reducing the a...
Views: 0
ORDER This is a proceeding under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. Section 405(g) provides for judicial review of a “final decision” of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Before this Court is Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment. Essentially, Plaintiff sets forth three arguments as to why the Appeals Council’s determination that Plaintiff co...
Views: 0
OPINION This Title VII action brought by plaintiff Kathryn D. Babcock (“Babcock”) against defendant Postmaster General Anthony Frank (the “USPS” or the “Service”) was tried before the Court from October 23 to 29, 1991. Post-trial submissions were completed on December 23, 1991. Upon all the proceedings, the following findings and conclusions were reached upon which judgment will be entered dism...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Background
This dispute arises out of a February 27, 1989 agreement between the parties under *32which Sotheby’s contracted to sell by auction plaintiff’s painting, entitled “Christus,” which was allegedly painted by Rembrandt Harmensz Van Rijn. The contract permits Sotheby’s to withdraw the painting from auction for various reasons, including breach of plaintiff’s assurance tha...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Statement of the Case
Lomas Mortgage USA (“Lomas”) and Union Planters National Bank (“Union”) appeal an order confirming Joseph P. Fischer’s (“Fischer”) Chapter 13 Plan for the repayment of his indebtedness to Lo-mas and Union. In each case, the debt is secured by Fischer’s real estate. Each security interest is evidenced by a deed of trust. The order was iss...
Views: 1
ORDER The debtor appellant, Columbus J. South-erland (Southerland) filed a Chapter 13 action pro se in the Bankruptcy Court of the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division. In the related adversary proceeding, South-erland named several defendants, including Ann Southerland Laird (Laird) his ex-wife, all of whom are Georgia citizens. Souther-land’s complaint alleged that the defendants cons...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause is before the Court on the following motions and responses:
1. Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment as to liability, filed on August 26, 1991.
2. Plaintiffs’ memorandum of law in support of motion for partial summary judgment as to liability, filed on August 26, 1991.
3. Defendants’ joint motion for summary judgment...
Views: 0
OPINION Before the court is an appeal of two orders issued by the bankruptcy court. The first order, dated March 8, 1991, scheduled a hearing in which debtor was to show cause as to why the settlement agreement at issue in this case should not be enforced. An appeal of this order has been rendered moot because the bankruptcy court ruled that the settlement agreement should be enforced by order ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The plaintiff Alex Bradley, Jr. brings this diversity action for damage for personal injuries alleged to have occurred while using a Bobcat Skid Steer Loader (Bobcat) manufactured by the defendant Melroe Company. During the course of discovery, the plaintiff learned of seven other accidents resulting in personal injuries, all of which involved the use of the Bobcat seat bar int...
Views: 11
OPINION
What do a martini olive transmitter and a modified satellite television descrambler have in common?
Fortunately, for the Defendants: nothing.
The issue in this case is whether modified satellite television descramblers are primarily useful for the surreptitious interception of electronic communications.
This Court concludes that they are not.
Defendants move to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
The undersigned Judge, sitting by designation, presided over the trial of this case on December 2 to 9, 1991, in Chicago, Illinois. The jury returned a verdict of $50,-000.00 in favor of the defendant, Financial Management Consultants, Inc. (FMC), and against Geldermann, Inc. Judgment was entered thereon and costs were assessed against Geldermann, Inc. On Dece...
Views: 0
CORRECTED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The matter is currently before the Court on a motion for a preliminary injunction in a case involving alleged infringement of copyrights, trademarks, and trade dress. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is denied without an evidentiary hearing. Defendants’ request to consolidate this case with one now pending before Judge Dearie is denied. Plaintiffs...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
On January 23, 1991, this court issued a Remand Order in which we found that the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ (“Secretary”) decision denying plaintiff Migdalia Heredia’s application for disability benefits was not based on substantial evidence. We remanded the action to the Secretary for additional proceedings. Specifically, we ordered that a residual function...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants Michael Bloome, Salvatore Fusco, and Vincent Zappola were convicted at trial on the first thirteen counts of a fourteen-count superseding indictment. After the jury verdict, each of these three defendants waived his right to trial by jury on the fourteenth count (for forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a)(3) of the proceeds of the racketeering activity of whi...
Views: 0
ORDER
On January 15, 1992, this Court heard plaintiff E. & J. Gallo’s motion for attorneys’ fees and defendant Consorzio del Gallo Nero’s motions for discovery and a hearing in the event fees are awarded, and to amend the judgment. G. Kip Edwards of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe appeared for plaintiff E.
&
J. Gallo Winery. Griffith B. Price, Jr., of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the «IBT”) ancj the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In July of 1981 the petitioner, Raymond Johnson, was convicted by a jury in Delaware Superior Court of sexual assault, unlawful imprisonment, first degree sodomy, and first degree rape. Docket Item (“D.I.”) 9 at 1. Counsel for the petitioners, two public defenders, then filed motions for a new trial. Memorandum (“Memo.”), D...
Views: 6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Vera Fields, the mother of Taalib Fields, brought this action on her own behalf after her son was struck and injured by defendant’s motor vehicle on November 29, 1989. Her son’s bodily injury claims have been settled, but plaintiff asserts her own right to recover, under several different theories. Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss Counts Two, Three, Four, ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This action arises out of an administrative proceeding under the Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act, 77 P.S. §§ 1,
et seq.
Plaintiff, a former employee of defendant, alleges that, in the course of the workers’ compensation proceeding, defendant knowingly introduced false evidence, causing the referee to deny plaintiff benefits to which he was entitled. Defendant...
Views: 0
OPINION
Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701,
et seq.,
and the Competition in Contracting Act, 10 U.S.C. § 2304,
et seq.,
Plaintiff Technology for Communications International, Inc. (“TCI”) protests the Defendant Navy’s award of a contract for 15 dual mode high frequency antennae, with options for 80 or more, to Defendant-Intervenor Andrew-Ca...
Views: 1
*90
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant, Rainbow Shops, Inc., moves for an order referring certain issues to the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”) and to stay this case pending the ICC’s resolution of those issues. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I
Plaintiff, Lifschultz Fast Freight, Inc., is a motor common carrier operating in interstate commerce pu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This products liability case arises out of a 1987 car crash. The dispute turns on an interpretation of Tennessee’s Mandatory Safety Belt Act, Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 55-9-601 to 610. The matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses of.the Defendant General Motors Corporation. . For the following reasons, the Plaintiffs’ Motion hereby is GRANTED ...
Views: 1
Page 1504
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner Kerwin Farkas seeks an order expunging all records of a prior arrest. For the reasons set forth below, his application is denied. The arrest in question, which took place nearly two decades ago, arose out of an investigation conducted by the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), the predecessor of the present-day Drug Enforcement Administration. Accor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The defendants have moved this court for an order disclosing the names of the persons who served as jurors in two previous trials in this district, anonymously in the case of United States v. John Gotti, et al., CR-85-178 (EHN) and not anonymously in the case of United States v. Edward Leno, CR-83-483 (JMM). 1 The reasons advanced to support the relief they seek are: ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants Thomas A. Coughlin, III (“Commissioner Coughlin”), J. O’Gorman (“Officer O’Gorman”), Bobbie Jo LaBoy (“Sergeant LaBoy”) and Lt. McMahon (“Lieutenant McMahon”) (collectively, the “Defendants”) have moved to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff
pro se
Ramón Cepeda (“Cepeda”) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and for failure...
Views: 3
Page 1509
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This proposed drug-related forfeiture of a mobile home poses, at least so far as reported cases are concerned, a question of first impression anywhere. Both the United States and claimant Mark Stover (“Sto-ver”) 1 have moved for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56,2 coupling their motions with the required statements under this District Court’s General Rul...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185, filed by plaintiff Frank Lee Hocker against Navistar International Transportation Corp. (“Navistar”), the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) and Local 658, United Automobile, Aerospace, Agriculture Implement Work...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendants’ Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) motion for summary judgment. For reasons hereafter stated, defendants’ motion is GRANTED. I. BACKGROUND Defendant United Autoworkers Local 600 (“Local”) is an amalgamated union, meaning that its membership works for several different employers. The Local is thus divided into bargaining units, with...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action for damages and injunctive relief, Quotron Systems, Inc. (“Quotron”) alleges copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets by Automatic Data Processing, Inc. (“ADP”) and Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co. (“Smith Barney”). Quotron now moves pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a) and 26(c) for entry of a protective order in a form proposed by Quotron, effectiv...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Chase Manhattan Bank, National Association (“Chase”) appeals from a November 25, 1991 final order of the Honorable Burton R. Lifland, Chief Judge of the Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York (the “Order”), enjoining Chase from taking any further action in its suit against Thomas LaSala (“Thomas”), Kenneth LaSala (“Kenneth”) and Jacob I. Sopher (“Sopher”) (colle...
Views: 13
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Nezameddin Rouhi (Rouhi), as liquidator of F. & H.R. Farman-Farmaian (Farman-Farmaian), brings this action against defendants for money allegedly due Farman-Farmaian as its share of an award issued to certain of the defendants by the Iran-United States Claim Tribunal.
*1292
Defendants now move this court to require plaintiff to post a security ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action alleging violations of the federal securities laws and various state law claims sounding in fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract. Two of the defendants move jointly to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Government of Chile seeks to extradite Feliciano Palma Matus (“Palma”), pursuant to the terms of an extradition treaty executed between Chile and the United States on April 17, 1900 (the “Treaty”), for crimes he allegedly committed against the *1054 Chilean Government. The defendant is presently in the custody of the United States, having been arrested on July 31, 199...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case is now before this court on a Verified Motion for Preliminary Injunction. This court has jurisdiction over this matter under 7 U.S.C. § 2023(a). An evidentiary hearing was held on January 8, 1992. I. A letter dated January 9, 1991 was sent by the Indiana State Board of Health to Russell’s Trading Post, Inc. (“Russell’s”) advising Russell’s that its “authorizat...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL ON THE ISSUE OF DAMAGES
CAME ON TO BE CONSIDERED the Plaintiff, Frank David Levesque’s, Motion For a New Trial in this cause. The court, after considering the motion, the defendant’s response, and the record, is of the opinion that the Motion For a New Trial on the Issue of Damages should be GRANTED.
FACTS
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM/ORDER Plaintiff has brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review the final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) denying her claim for supplemental security income (“SSI”) provided under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Plaintiff originally applied for SSI on October 8, 1987. The application was denied on December 10,1987 and upon reconsiderat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case arises under an 1837 treaty between the United States and the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (the Band). The Band seeks a declaration that their hunting, fishing, and gathering rights under the treaty on lands ceded within Minnesota remain in force; a declaration defining the nature and scope of those rights; and an injunction barring state interference ...
Views: 1
Page 1556
INTRODUCTION Before the Court is a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by defendant, counter-plaintiff Realty Photo Master Corporation (“RPM”). Invoking the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq. (1973 and Supp.1991), RPM seeks to enjoin plaintiff, counter-defendant Montgomery’ County Association of Realtors (“MCAR”) from adding photographs of properties to MCAR’s computerized multiple-list...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FINDINGS OF FACT: The following facts have been stipulated in this cause by the parties: 1. The plaintiff, Johnson City Medical Center Hospital (the “Hospital”), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Tennessee. 2. The Hospital operates a general acute care hospital located on State of Franklin Road in Johnson City, Tennessee. 3. The ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In the early 1980s, state and federal environmental authorities began investigating alleged discharges of hazardous wastes from a lumber treatment plant in Polk County, Arkansas. In March, 1988, the Environmental Protection Agency, a federal authority, sued Hines Lumber Company and Mid-South Wood Products, 1 seeking to enjoin further discharges and to require those companie...
Views: 0
OPINION Before the court is a complaint by the United States of America (“USA”) seeking injunctive relief and civil penalties against Ernest Barkman. The USA, acting on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), alleges that Barkman unreasonably failed to comply with Information Requests issued to him pursuant to Section 104(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental *1183 Response, Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. 90-21675-BKC-AJC
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Appellant’s Notice of Appeal of a final order in the bankruptcy court striking appellant’s proof of claim. Both parties appeared before this court to offer oral argument. This court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. 28 U.S.C. § 158. After reviewing the briefs of the parties and con...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the court on a Bill of Costs in the amount of $2,722.86 filed by the defendant, Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc. (hereinafter “Subaru”) on December 16, 1991. The plaintiff, Kenneth Voight, (hereinafter “the plaintiff”) objects to the Bill of Costs and requests a hearing at which the court may ascertain his indigency. In the alternative, the plaint...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiffs in this case, In-Sun Cho and Tae Hoon Kim, brought suit for temporary and permanent injunctive relief asserting that the defendants, Itco, Inc., Grover Lee, Dennis Lee, and Ronnie Lee, violated the plaintiffs’ civil rights by refusing to sell them certain commercial real estate because the plaintiffs are of Korean descent. The plaintiffs assert claims under 42 U....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The plaintiff brought this action alleging breach of a collective bargaining agreement in violation of § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185, and for wrongful denial of benefits and clarification of benefit rights under a qualified employee pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS FOR RULING Defendants’ motions for summary judgment to strike plaintiffs’ claims for: (1) pre-impact fear by Casey Miley, (2) attorney’s fees, (3) William Simmons’ personal damages, (4) Macey Simmons’ pre-death pain and suffering, and (5) Macey Simmons’ hedonic damages were heard this date on memoranda. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment on the issues of attorney’s fee...
Views: 0
*783FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This is an action for declaratory relief in which the plaintiff, United States Fire Insurance Company (U.S. Fire), seeks a judicial declaration that its insurance policy does not provide coverage for defendants Donald E. Mobley and Linda Mobley for damages arising out of an aircraft accident in which defendant Barbara Stone suffered injuries on June 9, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now pending before the Court are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. The issues raised in the motions have been fully briefed by both parties, and the Court heard extensive oral arguments on February 3, 1992. After carefully considering all pleadings submitted on the outstanding motions, the full administrative record in this case, and the arguments made by...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now before the Court are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. The issues raised in the motions have been fully briefed by both parties, and the Court heard extensive oral arguments on December 12, 1991.
1
After carefully considering all pleadings submitted on the outstanding motions as well as the arguments made by counsel at the December 12, 1991...
Views: 0
OPINION The matter before the court is defendant’s motion to suppress (#46) and request for a Franks hearing (# 84). BACKGROUND On November 25, 1991, a federal grand jury returned a thirteen count superseding indictment against the defendant, Edward Charles Sandoz. Sandoz is charged in count one of the superseding indictment with the crime of conspiring to possess with the intent to distr...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS FOR RULING
Before the Court is the Resolution Trust Corporation’s (RTC) motion for substitution of party, for substitution of counsel and for ninety (90) day stay of the proceedings pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(12).
RTC’s motions for substitution of party and substitution of counsel are GRANTED. For the reasons stated below, RTC’s motion for a ninety (90) day sta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is an action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq.
This Court, through Orders of Judge Herbert Hutton dated June 14, 1990 and January 10, 1991, has previously dismissed much of plaintiffs’ Amended RICO Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim...
Views: 0
ORDER OF TRANSFER Plaintiffs NGS American, Inc. (“NGS”) and Masco Industries Self-Funded Employee Benefit Plans (“Masco Plan”) filed their complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on December 4, 1991. Five days later plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment and for permanent or preliminary injunction. Defendant filed a response January 21, 1992, a...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This is a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a prison inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections (DOCS). The plaintiff, Joseph Allen Ross, claims that the numerous defendants — all present or former employees of the Department of Corrections — failed to attend to his medical needs. Specifically, plain...
Views: 1
*1000
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff sued defendant in early 1990, claiming a violation of COBRA and ERISA. The COBRA claim was settled for $11,-228.15, including attorneys’ fees attributable to that claim. The parties could not, however, resolve their differences respecting the ERISA claim, although they came close, and that claim proceeded to trial. This court found for the pla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
The Court has before it cross-motions for summary judgment. The motions are fully briefed and at issue. Counsel have informed the Court that they desire to waive oral argument, and request the Court to
*252
rule on the pleadings submitted. The Court will resolve the motions after reviewing the background of this litigation.
The plaintiffs, Richard an...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This Court has conducted a three day bench trial concerning Plaintiff’s allegation that his employer, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), discriminated against him in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). See 29 U.S.C. § 621, et seq. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that he did not receive a position as an attorney-adviser in Li...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This is a prisoner civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Samuel McCullough (“McCullough”). Defendants, various officials at the Greenhaven Correctional Facility in Stormville, New York (“Greenhaven”), now move for summary judgment. For the following reasons, de*116fendants’ summary judgment motion is granted and the action is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
This action aris...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Ronald W. Thibodeaux is a former employee of the City of Port Arthur. Thibo-deaux worked as a police dispatcher until his termination on October 24, 1990. Thi-bodeaux is confined to a wheelchair. Thi-bodeaux filed this lawsuit against Port Arthur and five individual defendants who were in various supervisory positions over Thibodeaux. The individual defendants and their position...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Clifford M. Curtis has filed this suit against Interstate Brands and several of its officers under the provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68. He also asserts various pendant claims under state law. This matter is now before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss and for...
Views: 0
*241
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an employment discrimination suit against an employer and a fellow employee. Plaintiff charged his employer with breach of express contract, breach of implied contract, negligent supervision, wrongful discharge, intentional interference with contractual relations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of Title VII, 42 U.S.C...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand and Motion for Sanctions and Defendants’ Motion to Transfer. For the
*372
reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand is GRANTED, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Sanctions is DENIED, and Defendants’ Motion to Transfer is not reached.
I.
Plaintiffs initiated this action on April 24, 1991 in the 212th District Cour...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL JUDGMENT THIS suit involved as plaintiffs a number of individuals seeking placement on the presidential preference primary ballot of the Democratic and Republican parties in the State of Florida. Another group of plaintiffs includes individuals who are political party member registered voters who would like to vote for one of the other candidate plaintiffs. I. BAC...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Motion of Defendants Poole, Crenshaw and Lombard for Entry of Sanctions against the Plaintiffs pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants Smith, Wetherell and Margolis joined in the motion. Plaintiffs filed suit on January 17, 1992 seeking injunctive and declaratory relief under 42...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER By decision and order of July 22, 1991, the court granted the petitioner, Ronald Keith, currently incarcerated at the Wau-pun Correctional Institution, leave to proceed with his in forma pauperis petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2242 and 2254. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, in its decision and order, the court noted that Mr. Keith had completed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion For New Trial Based on Newly Discovered Evidence. THE COURT has considered the Motion, responses and the pertinent portions of the *862record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ADJUDGED that Defendants’ Motion for a New Trial is DENIED without an evidentiary hearing. Defe...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
On January 3, 1990, a Grand Jury filed the seventh superseding indictment (the “indictment”) against the defendants in this case. The evidence presented to the Grand Jury was the result of a long-term investigation by the Government into various activities of an international organization known as “the Mafia” or “La Cosa Nostra.” According to the Government, this organiz...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendants’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. All parties agreed at oral argument that no trial was necessary and that the Court should dispose of all claims by a judgment as a matter of law.
THE COURT has considered the Motion, respon...
Views: 0
Page 1705
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Progressive Realty Advisors, Inc. (“Progressive”) brought this suit against defendant The Great-West Life Assurance Company (“Great-West”), seeking the recovery of real estate brokerage commissions and the value of services rendered with respect to certain properties owned by the defendant. Progressive claims that it possessed exclusive listing agreements an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER On October 26, 1990, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kenneth J. Benson for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), and Rules 3 and 4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, filed on January 14, 1992, recommended that defendant’s motion for sanctions pursuan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes on for consideration of the motion to intervene filed by Russell and Charles Lucero on October 25, 1991. The Court, having reviewed the memoranda of the parties, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds that the motion is not well-taken and will be denied.
On August 30, 1990, Officers Kenny Salazar and Richard Rohlfs of the Albuquerqu...
Views: 0
Page 1716
ORDER
This case is a harbinger of the plethora of cases that this jurisdiction has been inundated with because of the economic conditions in this state and resulting bank failures.
This court in a somewhat vitriolic opinion dated November 21,1991 unhappy with the actions or inactions of the FDIC gave precedent to this case on its court calendar. As a result the case was heard on its ...
Views: 3
OPINION OF THE COURT
I. Procedural Posture
This action arises out of a Joint Venture Agreement (“Joint Venture," “Venture," “Agreement”) which envisioned the creation of Spanish language television news programming for transmission via cable television for broadcast to audiences across the United States. As more fully set out below, the parties to the ill-fated Venture had, to put it...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This action concerns a dispute between plaintiff Hoppy’s Oil Service, Inc. (“Hop-py’s”) and its insurers, Insurance Company of North America (“INA”) (for policy periods from July 1, 1981 to July 1, 1983) and Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company (“GNY”) (for policy periods from July 1, 1983 to June 30, 1986), regarding the alleged duty of the insurers under certain insuranc...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This case is before the Court on Defendant Canadian Pacific’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, Dawn Priestman, the widow and personal representative of the Estate of Harden C. Priestman (“Priestman”), asserts negligence claims under the Federal Employer Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51
et seq.
(FELA), against Canadian Pacific Ltd. (“CP”), Priestman’s ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS FOR VIOLATION OF SPEEDY TRIAL ACT, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 et seq. The Court dismissed, by endorsement on December 26, 1991, the indictments in the above-entitled matter against Defendants Rivas and Ramirez on timely filed motions (see 18 U.S.C. § 3162(a)(2)) of Defendants (Docket Nos. 27 and 29) for failure to bring Defendants to trial within the period spec...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This products liability case arises out of a hip replacement operation performed on Gordon Porter, the plaintiff, on July 15, 1986. During the course of the operation, the surgeon drilled a hole in Porter’s hip so that he could implant a 64mm one-piece acetabular cup without using cement. As the surgeon hammered the acetabular cup into place, however, the cup’s poly...
Views: 0
Page 1723
MEMORANDUM Debtor filed bankruptcy under chapter 11 in February 1991. Later that year, the FDIC — a creditor of the debtor — moved the bankruptcy court to remove the automatic bankruptcy stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362 and convert plaintiff’s bankruptcy to a chapter 7 proceeding. On November 8, 1991, the bankruptcy court, after a hearing, allowed the FDIC’s motion for relief from stay and converted deb...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1415, for review of a February 4, 1991 decision of the Massachusetts Bureau of Special Education Appeals (“BSEA”) denying reconsideration of the BSEA’s November 2, 1990 decision holding the government not responsible for reimbursing the plaintiffs for the costs of Tara Gertel...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is a handicap discrimination action under Sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. On October 7, 1991, ten days before trial was scheduled to commence, defendant filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiff may not state a claim under either § 501 or § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. A bench trial was held on October 17, 1991. At the start of trial the court s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiffs in these related cases are three individuals, Matthew J. Berliner, Gordon S. Oppenheimer, and Donald B. Goodman, who purchased shares of the defendant Lotus Development Corporation (“Lotus”) at an allegedly artificially inflated price. They sue on behalf of themselves and an, as-yet, uncertified class of those who purchased Lotus shares between February 25, 1988 ...
Views: 4
DECISION AND ORDER This case, set for trial today, raises the troubling question of whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991 is to be applied retroactively. Strange as it may seem, the act which was signed into law by President Bush on November 21,1991, is silent on the important question of whether or not the law is to have retroactive effect. To my knowledge, no federal courts in Wisconsin have a...
Views: 1
OPINION
This matter involving disputed coverage of habitational properties was tried to this Court without a jury on January 6th, 1992.
1
Plaintiff in Civil Action No. 90-4293, Independent Fire Insurance Company (“Independent Fire”), brought this declaratory judgment action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-02 and 28 U.S.C. § 1332 seeking a declaration that it did not issue a polic...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DECLARE MARIHUANA PLANT GUIDELINES UNCONSTITUTIONAL The defendant, Scott Watson, was indicted in a two-count indictment by a grand jury on July 9, 1991. The first count alleges that Watson knowingly and intentionally conspired with his codefendant to manufacture marihuana in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 846. Count Two alleges that Watson,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court in the above styled action is defendant May Zima & Co.’s (May Zima) motion for summary judgment on the issues of plaintiffs’ fraud created the market theory, plaintiffs’ aiding and abetting and conspiracy theories as applied to May Zima, and the statute of limitations issue.
I. BACKGROUND
After substantial discovery, the facts pertinent to the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION, INCLUDING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
ConAgra, Inc. (ConAgra) sued Geo. A. Hormel & Company (Hormel), claiming that
*702
Hormel infringed ConAgra’s HEALTHY CHOICE trademark as applied to shelf-stable food products. ConAgra claimed Hormel infringed on ConAgra’s trademark by utilizing Hormel’s HEALTH SELECTIONS trademark as applied to shelf-stabl...
Views: 3
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
This is an employment discrimination action brought by pro se plaintiff George R. Tyree (“Tyree”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) against defendant John H. Riley (“Riley”), Administrator of Federal Railroad Administration (the “FRA”) of the United States Department of Transportation.
1
Jurisdiction is alleged pursuant to 28 U.S...
Views: 2
OPINION This matter is before the Court on the motion of the Plaintiff Steven Karakas seeking dismissal of counterclaims on the basis that such claims would either be properly or more efficiently adjudicated in a pending state action. In other words, the Plaintiff asks this Court to abstain from exercising jurisdiction over the counterclaims in favor of parallel claims made in a pending state a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT HOME RUN, INC. ON PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM
Paragraph eight of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint alleges that Defendant Home Run Inc. “was guilty of reprehensible conduct, oppressive and malicious action, gross negligence and intentional reckless, willful, and wanton misconduct in that it did violate and disregard the app...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Sammy Knox and Noah Robinson have joined in a motion “to investigate improper jury influence,” contending that a Deputy United States Marshal threatened jurors with tax prosecution unless the “right” verdicts were delivered. Knox and Robinson were both convicted of serious charges in connection with their involvement in and with the El Rukn street gang, and are current...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”, collectively “defendants”) move for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants the motion.
FACTS
Plaintiff, Andrew Gale, filed this suit pro se under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., to compel defendants to produce all documents in their possession...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
May a taxpayer be equitably estopped from prosecuting a tax claim because the taxpayer executed an informal settlement agreement form in which the taxpayer agreed not to dispute the assessment and the government agreed to abate penalties? Yes, in some situations, but not on the facts presented in this matter. The sole question...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff brings this action seeking to recover retirement benefits under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), and under state contract law. The case was tried to the Court sitting without a jury. Having considered the pleadings, the testimony of the witnesses, the exhibits before the Court and the stipulations of the parties, and being fully advised in the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon defendant W.M. Barr & Co.’s Motion for Summary Judgment in this matter involving claims of negligence, strict liability and breach of warranty against a manufacturer and retailer
1
of an alleged inherently dangerous product. Having reviewed the written pleadi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The defendants have presented to the court for signature two writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum. The first directed to Assistant United States Attorney John Gleeson, would command him to produce Donald Frankos (who is detained in the Witness Protection Program) no later than February 7, 1992 and thereafter to *1012 hold him in the Metropolitan Correction Center unt...
Views: 1
ORDER Suellen Morris (“plaintiff”) filed the present action on June 15, 1989, against her employer, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company (“Southern Bell”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”). A nonjury trial was held in this court on August 28, 1991. The court, having considered arguments of counsel and the record as a whole, hereby m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action is a constitutional challenge to the District of Columbia’s current cosmetology regulations. Plaintiffs own and operate Cornrows and Company (“Cornrows”), an African hair styling salon and school established in 1980 and located in the District of Columbia. Defendants are the District of Columbia and the six members of the D.C. Board of Cosmetology....
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are defendants’ motion to dismiss, plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, and the oppositions and replies thereto.1 Because the Court considers evidence besides the pleadings, the Court treats the defendants’ motion as a motion for summary judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and gra...
Views: 0
ENTRY
This matter comes before the Court on the motion of the defendant, Reliable Drug Stores, Inc., for partial dismissal and to strike the plaintiff’s jury demand. For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part the defendant’s motion.
Background
The plaintiff, Larry Poston, an African-American male and a Muslim, was an employee of the defendant, Rel...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on the “Motion to Dismiss” [Doc. #24] filed by the defendant Guy Hunt, Governor of the State of Alabama (the “Governor”). Because the Court finds that its assertion of jurisdiction over the Governor in this case would violate the Eleventh Amendment, the Governor’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF CASE This action began with the fil...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 3, 1992, the Court held a hearing to consider defendants’ motion to
*4
dismiss. Plaintiff failed to appear despite the fact that on January 9, 1992, the Court mailed him notice of the hearing. Since that time, plaintiff has informed the Court that he has a new address in Florida. Plaintiff has offered an explanation for his failure to appear, bu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ Domenic Franchi (“Franchi”) and Franchi Group Associates (“Associates”) motion to dismiss. The plaintiff, Nancy Bergeson (“Bergeson”), is a former employee of the defendant Associates, a real estate management enterprise, at which defendant Franchi was her direct supervisor. In her complaint, plaintiff asks for declaratory relief a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
In this action, the plaintiff, Charles Jac-quin et Cie, Inc., (“Jacquin”) alleges that defendants, Destilería Serralles, Inc., (“DSI”) and Crown Marketing International (“Crown”) infringed its trade dress in violation of section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and state common law. At trial, the jury found that Jacquin had established that its trade dress had seconda...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a consolidated action (the “Consolidated Action”) of four actions, the first, (the
“All American
Action”), brought by plaintiff All American Life Insurance Company (“All American”) against Beneficial Life Insurance Company (“Beneficial”), General American Life Insurance Company (“American Life”), Maine Fidelity Life Insurance Company (“Maine Fidelity”), Mutual B...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion to remand, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). For the reasons discussed below, the plaintiff’s motion to remand will be DENIED.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On May 1, 1988, the plaintiff, Great Coastal Express (“Great Coastal”), entered into a “Group Contract” with the defendant, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Virgini...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the court is defendant Nalco Chemical Company’s motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment dismissing any claim for market loss damages. After considering the submissions of the parties and the arguments of counsel, the court will grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
On December 18, 1989,...
Views: 0
OPINION
Introduction
In light of the current controversy surrounding breast implants, one wonders when all industries will recognize their obligation to voluntarily disclose risks from the use of their products. All too often in the choice between the physical health of consumers and the financial well-being of business, concealment is chosen over disclosure, sales over safety, and money over m...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Chester and Helen Jane Dempsey filed this diversity action after settling a state court action in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. In the state court litigation,1 the Dempseys sued various parties including Cessna Aircraft Company, which manufactured an airplane in which Chester Dempsey was severely injured. The Demp*249seys and Cessna ultimately agreed to a $300,000.00 sett...
Views: 0
MEMOKANDUM On September 9, 1991, I granted defendant’s motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Contending, for a variety of reasons, that the order vacating defendant’s sentence was erroneous, the government has moved for reconsideration. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied. Defendant Moskovits moved to vacate his sentence because, in formulating that se...
Views: 0
*68
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration, the defendants’ response and the plaintiffs’ reply. The relevant facts are discussed in this Court’s Memoranda dated July 3, 1990 and December 30, 1991. 782 F.Supp. 1016. The plaintiffs ask the Court to reconsider the Court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants on the ground...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), plaintiff seeks judicial review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ (Secretary) decision that she is not disabled and, therefore not entitled to supplemental security
*555
income benefits. Having reviewed the record and the briefs under the substantial evidence standard, I hold that the Secretary’s determ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Eric E. Ulmer brings this action against defendants City of Overland Park, Kansas, Detective Bill Falk, Major John Round, and Sergeant Charles Tippie, alleging that, by seizing his 1977 Porsche automobile, defendants deprived him of certain constitutional rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1982, and 1983. Defendants now move the court for summary judg...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Jay S. Shukman, M.D., has moved the court (Doc. 19) to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). However, the motion to dismiss is actually one for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), and the court will consider it as such. For the reasons stated below, the moti...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this lawsuit brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983, plaintiff Thomas G. Green, IY, charges that the defendants “redeemed” his property in violation of the fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. One of the defendants, Boyett Brothers, Inc., is represented in this lawsuit by the law firm of Beasley, Wilson, Allen, Mendelsohn & James and, more s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
By final order dated November 19, 1991, the court approved a settlement agreement in this consolidated securities fraud class action against numerous defendants, including Prudential Securities, Inc. Prudential Securities moves for enforcement of the November 19, 1991 final judgment (“final judgment”) against individual class members Elmer and Lois Hubbard (“the Hubba...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action, attacking § 104(2) of the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1461, on procedural due process grounds, comes before the court on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and defendant’s cross motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, to stay proceedings pending arbitration. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied ...
Views: 0
Page 1857
OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action, defendant, H.E. Yerkes and Associates, Inc. (“Yerkes”), now moves the Court, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56(c), for summary judgment. Plaintiff, Albert T. Chandler (“Chandler”), as executor of the estate of Frederick W.A. Knight (“Knight”), opposes the summary judgment motion, claiming that there exist disputed issues of material fact. For the fol...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Carlos Salazar (“Salazar”) has submitted a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (“Section 2255”) in which he seeks to have this Court correct a portion of the sentence that it imposed on him just over a year ago (on January 28, 1991) in Case No. 89 CR 998. But because this Court has determined that the Sentencing Guideline (“Guideline”) provision on which Salazar seeks to ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On January 10,1992 this Court issued its order regarding the secondary embargo provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. On January 27,1992, pursuant to Federal Defendants motion for Clarification, we issued an order amending our January 10, 1992 order. In light of a stipulation filed by the parties on January 30, 1992, we once again amend our original order as reflected herei...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Theodore Randall drowned while attempting a swing rope transfer from a fixed platform in the Gulf of Mexico to the M/V SEA SAVAGE. At the time of his death, he was employed by Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (“Chevron”). Chevron had time chartered the M/V SEA SAVAGE, from Sea Savage, Inc., owner of the vessel. Plaintiff, Barbara Randall, individually, on behalf of the estate of h...
Views: 1
OPINION The matter before the court is the appeal of the government from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon in which the bankruptcy judge concludes that the tax claims of the United States are not entitled to priority status within the Chapter 13 plan of the debtor. UNDISPUTED FACTS On June 13, 1988, the United States made tax assessments against Rober...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action for equitable relief is brought by a patient involuntarily committed to the Massachusetts Treatment Center for the Sexually Dangerous (“Center”). Plaintiff Robert Cameron (“Cameron”) alleges that defendants have violated his federal constitutional rights by failing to provide him with minimally adequate treatment. In particular, Cameron contends that defendants persist...
Views: 2
OPINION
The matter before the court is the motion of plaintiffs for a renewed preliminary injunction (#682).
BACKGROUND
On October 19, 1987, the plaintiffs, Portland Audubon Society, Headwaters, The Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, Inc., Siski-you Audubon Society, Central Oregon Audubon Society, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Salem Audubon Society, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society, an...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case involves an action brought against individual Defendant police officers (hereinafter “individual Defendants”) and their employer, the Town of Old Orchard Beach (hereinafter “the Municipality”), arising from several incidents involving Plaintiff John F. Maguire between October 23, 1988 and October ...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs suffer from Alzheimer’s Disease. They filed this action seeking injunctive an declaratory relief against the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Plaintiffs challenge the FDA’s failure to approve the drug tetrahydroaminoacrinine (THA) as a treatment for Alzheimer’s Disease. Plaintiffs have not exha...
Views: 0
PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 6
By order dated August 7, 1991, the Court certified these consolidated cases as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) and defined the class of plaintiffs as follows:
All persons in the United States, who, during the period January 1, 1988, to the present, purchased domestic airline passenger tickets from one or more of the defendant airlines for ai...
Views: 1
OPINION The matter before the court is the appeal of the government from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon in which the bankruptcy judge concludes that the tax claims of the United States are not entitled to priority status within the Chapter 13 plan of the debtor. UNDISPUTED FACTS On June 13, 1988, the United States made tax assessments against Rober...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
Defendant Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company has moved for summary judgment, or in the alternative, for partial summary judgment, and for an order compelling plaintiff to produce certain documentation. Plaintiff Fold-Pak Corporation has moved for partial summary judgment.
In support of its motion, defendant submits a memorandum of law with exhibits (“Defendant’s...
Views: 0
Page 1905
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Current Financial Services, Inc. (Current), for modification of the Court’s December 5, 1991, Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and on the motion of plaintiff, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), for the appointment of a receiver. On consideration of the entire record, the Court denies defendant’s motion...
Views: 0
*1192 MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs Stanley and Barbara Mitnik (“Trustees”) have brought this action in their capacity as Trustees on behalf of Bon-nell Dress Company Pension Fund and Bonnell Manufacturing Company Inc. Pension Fund (“Pension Funds”). The Trustees instituted this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq., and under the Rac...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action comes before the Court on the Defendants’ motion for Summary Judgment.
See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Plaintiff Frances Welsing was formerly a psychiatrist employed by the District of Columbia’s Commission on Mental Health Services (“CMHS”) at the Paul Robeson School. Defendants are the District of Columbia and seven officers of the CMHS. Plain...
Views: 0
ORDER (Motion to Dismiss) Defendant moves to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion is opposed. Oral argument has not been requested and is not deemed necessary. Plaintiff’s wife, Jennifer Letasky, was injured on September 19, 1988, when a bus owned and operated by the defendant collided with the vehicle in which plaintiff’s wife was ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Court of Appeals remanded this action, 946 F.2d 1567, for proceedings eonsist-ent with Florida v. Bostick, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) and U.S. v. Lewis, 921 F.2d 1294 (D.D.Cir.1990). This Court held a de novo hearing on the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence and statements on February 3, 1992. At the hearing, the Court heard testimony from Detectives K. Ox...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. On consideration of the entire record, including the parties’ arguments at the hearing held on January 7, 1992, the Court denies plaintiff’s motion.
The parties agree to the material facts as follows. On April 19, 1991, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs in this action are captains and lieutenants in the Metropolitan Police Department. They brought suit seeking a declaratory judgment stating that they are entitled to overtime calculated under the criteria of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. They claim that the District of Columbia has violated the law by classifying them as “exempt” empl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff George Cowsen-El, currently incarcerated in the Federal Penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, submitted a request under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts, 5 U.S.C. §§ 552, 552a (1988 & Supp. I 1990) (FOIA or Privacy Act, respectively), to the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Cow-sen-El requested copies of records pertaining to medical treatment he receiv...
Views: 0
Page 1948
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this case concerning foreign currency exchange transactions, plaintiff Compañía Sud-Americana de Vapores (“CSAV”) seeks to recover more than $1.5 million,
*415
claiming fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) against defendant IBJ ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Now before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or for Summary Judgment, filed November 15, 1991, and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment on the ■ Pleadings or for Summary Judgment, filed November 26, 1991. FACTS On May 28, 1987, Plaintiffs Michael B. Suffness and Dorit R. Suffness (“Plaintiffs”) filed their 1986 joint income tax- return with an el...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING ENSTROM’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause comes before the Court upon the motion for partial summary judgment of defendant Enstrom Helicopter Corporation (“Enstrom”), pursuant to Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff All Air, Inc. (“All Air”) filed a response, Enstrom a reply, and All Air a supplemental memorandum. Enstrom argues that s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Jenny Chun seeks a preliminary injunction to enjoin the State of New York from prosecuting her for violating New York’s anti-gambling laws. Defendants oppose the preliminary injunction and have filed a cross-motion for dismissal on the grounds of abstention and failure to state a claim under F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6). The court abstains from exercising jurisdiction fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is currently before the court on the motion of defendant Samuel Dunlap, d/b/a Sam Dunlap Insurance Agency (“Dunlap”), for summary judgment against plaintiff. In opposing the motion, plaintiff (American Management Corporation, d/b/a American Insurance Group and American Management Insurance Group (“AMIG”)), has cross moved for partial summary judgment on the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action on October 25, 1991, against numerous defendants alleging violations of both his federal and state civil rights. He asserts that this court has jurisdiction to hear his federal civil rights claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983 and his state civil rights
*307
claims pursuant to the doctrine of...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Joseph Pisciotti seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent Keith Cooper now moves to dismiss Pisciotti’s petition for failure to exhaust available state remedies prior to seeking federal relief as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). For the reasons as set *179forth below, Cooper’s motion to dismiss is granted without prejudice. I. The cri...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Third-party defendant New York Telephone Company (“NYTel”) has moved to amend the August 22, 1991 Opinion and Order herein, 772 F.Supp. 777 (S.D.N.Y. 1991) (the “Opinion”), which rejected its assertion
inter alia
that the third-party complaint herein is barred by the state action defense under the antitrust laws, so as to certify the issue pursuant to 28 U.S.C...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before WALD, Circuit Judge, and JOYCE HENS GREEN and SPORKIN, District Judges. On February 5, 1992, plaintiff filed its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (and for Oral Hearing and Expedited Consideration) with Supporting Legal Memorandum. On February 6, 1992, the court ordered defendant to submit a memorandum in response to plaintiffs motion. Defendant filed its Memorandum in Op...
Views: 0
*210
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF PLAINTIFF FLEET BANK OF MAINE
This case involves the claims of Plaintiff Fleet Bank of Maine (hereinafter “Fleet Bank” or “Plaintiff”) for foreclosure of two mortgages under Title 14 M.R.S.A. section 6321
et seq.
and for collection of amounts due under a promissory note (hereinafter “Note”) and an Equity Line of Credit agreement ...
Views: 1
Pretrial Order No. 7
Presently before the Court are several motions to compel filed by plaintiffs against each of the four airline defendants in this action. Several discovery requests are objected to by most or all defendants. Plaintiffs’ motions to compel against all defendants with regard to these requests, therefore, will be dealt with concurrently. Other miscellaneous objections by each def...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before, the Court is the motion for summary judgment of the plaintiff, the motion for summary judgment of the defendant and the response of the plaintiff to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons the motion for summary judgment of the plaintiff is granted and the motion for summary judgment of the defendant is denied. The matt...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed this action in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, asserting RICO and state law claims. Defendants timely removed the action based, upon this court’s diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Presently before the court is defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s (“State Farm”) Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on remand from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In its most recent opinion in this case,
Patterson v. McLean Credit Union,
No. 90-1729, 1991 WL 68811 (4th Cir. May 3, 1991) (per curiam) [931 F.2d 887 (table) ], the Court of Appeals instructed this Court to reconsider plaintiff’s refusal-to-promote claim brought...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Rawle Garnett filed this action in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, alleging causes of action pursuant to Pennsylvania’s Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (“MVFRL”), 75 Pa.Cons.Stat. Ann. § 1701,
et seq.
Defendant timely removed the action to this court based upon diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Plaintiff th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendants’ applications to dismiss the Complaint filed by Plaintiff on January 2, 1992.
1
The first four counts alleged in the Complaint are essentially identical as those brought by Plaintiff in a prior action
(Wiesner v. Willkie Farr & Gallagher,
No. 88 Civ. 8753). That action was dismissed by Judge Wood in two de...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending before this Court are motions to continue pretrial bond as appeal bond (Doc*318ument ## 120, 123) filed by defendants Jerry Canty (“Canty”) and LaTonya Moore (“Moore”). In the instant motions, Canty and Moore have requested to stay their reporting date for incarceration pending appeal. On November 14, 1991, the Court sentenced Canty to a four-month term of imprisonment and Moore to a...
Views: 0
ORDER On August 26, 1991, pro se plaintiff Johnnie B. Rose, then and presently an inmate at the Racine Correctional Institution (RCI), filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against RCI and various RCI officials and employees alleging a number of violations of his constitutional rights concerning treatment and conditions of confinement. On October 24,1991, United States District Court Judge John W. Reyno...
Views: 0
RULING David and Bernice Deville are farmers who own and operate a livestock and pecan farm in LaSalle Parish, Louisiana. This action began when the Devilles sought the benefit of the debt restructuring and loan servicing procedures provided by the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) pursuant to J.U.S.C. § 2001, 7 C.F.R. § 1951.909 and Subpart S of Part 1951 (1951-S procedures). The debt restructur...
Views: 0
OPINION
A nonjury trial was held in this case on September 26, 1991. Pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 52, the court is now prepared to issue its findings of fact and conclusions of law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
On August 5, 1987, the plaintiff, Anita Paxton, began work as the Deputy Circuit Clerk of Humphreys County, Mississippi. The circuit clerk, and Paxton’s immediate supervisor, was the la...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for a non-jury trial, at which time the Court
*964
considered the argument of counsel and the introduction of testimony and other evidence. Having reviewed the file and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
FINDINGS OF F...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff in the above-captioned case is incarcerated in the United States Penitentiary in Marion, Illinois. Defendants are employees of the United States and hold various positions with the United States Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”). 1 Plaintiff has filed a Complaint against Defendants in their official and individual capacities. In essence, the Complaint alleges that Defendants have misc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The instant action is an appeal from a final order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia (“Bankruptcy Court”) in a proceeding to determine the dischargeability of a debt pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2), granting to Morgan Talmage Nealy, III (“Nealy” or “appellee”) an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $10,525.00. For the following ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the order of the magistrate judge made in accordance with Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(A) and the standing order of this court dated June 19, 1990. Objections to the magistrate judge’s order to remand this case to state court were filed by the defendants on August 19, 1991 and August 26, 1991. Pursuant to Local Rule 12.08, DSC, t...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter is before the court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for judicial review of a final decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The plaintiff seeks disability and supplemental security income benefits (“disability benefits”) and the Secretary has denied plaintiffs claim for those benefits upon a finding of no disability.
The record before this court incl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on several motions for summary judgment filed by various defendants. The motions have
*973
been extensively briefed and oral arguments were heard on 6 January 1992. The matter is now ripe for disposition.
I.
Facts
The facts of this case have been recited in numerous prior orders and opinions, both published ...
Views: 3
ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The above-captioned matter is before the court on plaintiff Golden Rule Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The court heard oral arguments on January 24, 1992 and took the matter under advisement. Having reviewed the briefs and studied the applicable law, the court renders its order denying the Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
I. BA...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue filed by defendants James Moran, Janice Moran, James Moran, Jr., Patricia Moran, John McNally, Arlene McNally and A1 Hendrickson and a motion for summary judgment filed by all defendants.
1
BACKGROUND
In the 1960’s, defendant James Moran established a company...
Views: 3
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion for remand and defendants’ motion to transfer venue.
BACKGROUND
On September 27, 1991, plaintiff Thomas Bennett, Jr., brought this action against defendants Bally Manufacturing Corporation (“Bally”), Roger N. Keesee and Paul J. Johnson in the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas for the County of Charleston, and on Octob...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM We are considering the motion of defendant, Goodwill Industries of Central Pennsylvania, Inc. (Goodwill), to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 1 The plaintiff, Kathy A. Hollman, filed this lawsuit against the United States and Goodwill, alleging she was injured as a result of their negligence when she slipped and fell on some melted snow in th...
Views: 0
*940MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs brought this action seeking to compel the payment of certain claimed retirement benefits from the defendant Plan. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each side arguing that there are no material disputes of fact and claiming entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. The central...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
On March 25, 1991, plaintiffs Robert E. Birth and Lorraine Birth, his wife, proceeding pro se, commenced this civil action against a myriad of defendants alleging numerous acts committed under color of federal and state law resulting in the deprivation of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States. Although the Births have a long and troubled histor...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
This declaratory judgment action was initiated by Nationwide Insurance Company (“Nationwide”) to determine the limits of the underinsured motorist coverage under
*293
the automobile insurance policy issued by Nationwide to Marian Resseguie. Nationwide contends that the limits are $15,000 per person and $30,000 per each occurrence. The defendants, Ma...
Views: 0
ORDER ON RULE 59(e) OF FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE The Defendant raises a variety of separate objections to my opinion, 776 F.Supp. 1482, and order and asks me to reconsider under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I find that all of the defendants objections are groundless. Nonetheless, as the defendant raises some important issues, I will deal with them in detail. The defen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff filed this action on April 9,1991. The original complaint contained four counts against three different defendants. On November 6, 1991, this court dismissed much of the complaint, leaving only Count I in which plaintiff alleges that his employer, defendant DPCE, Inc., discriminated against him in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 200...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER AND NOW, TO WIT, this 18th day of February, 1992, upon consideration of defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings with respect to plaintiff’s allegations of bad faith, IT IS ORDERED that defendant’s motion is granted. Judgment is entered in favor of defendant and against plaintiff on plaintiff's claims of bad faith. Plaintiff, Eva Barbaro, commenced this action again...
Views: 0
785 F. Supp. 980 (1991)
Rosa HOBBS, Plaintiff,
v.
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and its agents, Jerry Gossett, Tony Chambers and Archie C. Burnham, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 4:89-cv-249-HLM.
United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Rome Division.
October 18, 1991.
On Motion for Reconsideration January 31, 1992.
*981 *982 Warren N. Coppedge, Jr., Mitchell Coppedge Wester Bisson & Miller...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
INTRODUCTION
School Director Districts for the Oakland Unified School District, last redrawn in 1984, are scheduled to be redrawn next year on the basis of the 1990 census. City of Oakland Charter § 208. Elections for four of the seven School Director Districts, however, will take place this year using the current 1984 Di...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Salomon Inc. and Salomon Brothers Inc. (“Salomon”) move jointly pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order consolidating, for pretrial purposes only, Discount Bank and Trust Company v. Salomon, Inc., et al., 91 Civ. 7525 (RPP), with In re Salomon Inc. Securities Litigation, 91 Civ. 5442 (RPP). Plaintiff Discount Bank and Trust Company ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Nancy Robinson and her child (hereafter collectively called “Robinson”) sued U-Haul Company of the West Coast of Florida and related companies (hereafter collectively called “U-Haul”) for personal injuries. The injuries resulted from an accident in which a tow dolly rented to Robinson by U-Haul allegedly failed. U-Haul has filed a motion asking for a pretrial determination that the ...
Views: 1
*207MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. “Findings of fact and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rule 12 or 56.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). While this matter thus properly could be disposed of wholly summarily, the Court does set forth its conclusions relatively briefly, without repeating the information evident in th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court are plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment, defendants’ motion to dismiss and cross-motion for summary judgment, the oppositions and replies thereto, and supplemental pleadings by plaintiff and defendants. Plaintiff brings this suit to challenge the final rule listing the Mojave Desert population of the desert tortoise as an endangered species under t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants Jose Acosta, Manuel Acosta, and Martha Ovalle are charged with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) & 846, possession of cocaine and cocaine base with the intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and aiding and abetting with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
In this action, plaintiff has moved for a protective order seeking an attorney’s fee as a prevailing party pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
1
For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion will be treated as an application for an attorney’s fee, and will be granted. Plaintiff will have fifteen days from the entry of this Me...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the court are plaintiff’s and defendant’s motions for summary judgment.
BACKGROUND
This case arises from a dispute over a group annuity contract (“the Contract”) issued by defendant Nationwide Life Insurance Company (“Nationwide”) to plaintiff, the Trustees of the Laborer’s Union No. 72 Pension Fund (“Trustees”). The Contract was issued on December 31, 1971.
...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER On June 27, 1991 I denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment striking a defense based on the liability limitation in Article 9 of the Warsaw Convention (the “Convention”), and in so doing found that this case is governed by the Second Circuit’s holding in Exim Industries, Inc. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 754 F.2d 106 (2d Cir.1985), which remains good law eve...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the Motion of Defendant Whitney National Bank to Dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the Application of Plaintiff Dewey Roddy for Review of the Order of the United States Magistrate denying a remand to state court in-this matter, and the Motion of Plaintiff Dewey Roddy for Voluntary Dis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the Court on the motion of defendant Leo J. Raymond Jr. to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). Defendant Raymond is a resident of Rhode Island.
1
Plaintiff Connecticut National Bank (“CNB”) is a federally chartered bank with its principal place of business in Hartford...
Views: 0
*162 ORDER Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court hereby issues the following order. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Susie Mae Gardner’s (“plaintiff”) husband, Willie Gardner, was operating a forklift on June 12, 1989, when it rolled over and killed him. The forklift had bee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff United States of America has moved the court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f) to strike certain affirmative defenses asserted by defendant Walerko Tool and Engineering Corporation (“Walerko”). The
*1387
United States has filed a three-count complaint against Walerko under sections 107 and 104(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Delco Cornett seeks relief for alleged violations of his constitutional rights under the First and Fourth Amendments. Defendants Congregane and McCabe move jointly to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) on the ground that Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against Defendants in their official capacities, and on ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment and on plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to defendant’s commercial impracticability defense. Defendant’s motion will be granted.
FACTS
This case, arising in the context of the highway construction industry, involves the purported modification to a contract for the sale of asphalt cement oil....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Arthur G. Veclotch (“Art”) belonged to the Indiana State Council of Carpenters. He married Dixie Lee Veclotch in 1960, and divorced her in 1986. A few weeks before the divorce, Art and Dixie executed a waiver of the joint and 50% survivor benefit that otherwise would be payable by the Council Pension Fund. As part of the decree dissolving the marriage, the court adopted the...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AGAINST PATRICIA NELSEN
Defendant Research Corporation of the University of Hawaii (“RCUH”) motion for judgment on the pleadings with regard to Patricia Nelsen’s (“Mrs. Nelsen”) claims was set for hearing before this court on February 18, 1992. This court, however, finds the matter susceptible of submission on the briefs and record. ...
Views: 0
Page 2156
*1505 ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Following briefing of these issues by the parties, these motions for partial summary judgment came on for hearing before the Court on February 10, 1992 at 10:30 a.m. The Court has fully considered this matter, including review of the papers filed by the parties, the authorities cited therein, and the arguments presented. ...
Views: 1
OPINION Sadly, newspaper headlines record daily our society’s growing willingness to do violence against those we live beside, those we do not know, and even those whom we love. Courts, long viewed as bastions of justice and security, now struggle against the same violence that invades our schools, roams our streets, and tears at the very fabric of our society threatening to rip it apart. In ...
Views: 0
783 F.Supp. 1217 (1992)
Lee COOK, Plaintiff,
v.
FOSTER FORBES GLASS, Defendant.
No. 91-1426-C(5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
February 21, 1992.
Samuel H. Liberman, Clayton, Mo., for plaintiff.
Thomas O. McCarthy, McMahon, Berger, Hanna, Linihan, Cody & McCarthy, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LIMBAUGH, District Judge.
Plaintiff Lee Cook filed this ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff initiated this securities fraud suit in 1989. After a procedural battle in which some defendants were dismissed, the case proceeded into the discovery stage, where it remains today. The instant motion is brought by two defendants, Dean and Calkins, to dismiss due to plaintiff’s continued failure to respond to interrogatories. In the alternative, defendants m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, JUDGMENT AND ORDER
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Melissa Jones is a severely retarded twelve-year-old girl. This action, brought on Melissa’s behalf by her father, alleges that her condition results from receiving defendant’s DTP vaccine at the age of two and one half months.
See Jones v. Lederle Laboratories,
695 F.Supp. 700 (E.D.N.Y.1988). The DTP vaccine is i...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs, current and former employees of the City of Oxford Alabama, Police Department, brought this action alleging that City officials had violated their constitutional rights through certain employment decisions. All of the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 3,1991 which is currently pending before the court. The Motion was converted to a motion for summary...
Views: 0
OPINION
Creditor-Appellant Escondido Mission Village, L.P. (“Escondido”) seeks to appeal
*115
from an order of the Honorable Tina L. Brozman,
Bankruptcy Judge,
of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York extending the time within which Debtors-Appellees Best Products,
et al.
(“Best”), may assume or reject unexpired leases ...
Views: 1
Page 2170
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On October 25, 1991, Associated Dry Goods Corporation (“ADG”) announced that the L.S. Ayres store it operates in the Scottsdale Mall in South Bend, Indiana would be closed as part of a company-wide reorganization. The mall’s owner, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“MassMutual”), brings this suit for temporary and permanent injunctive relief requiring ADG t...
Views: 1
This is a criminal case arising out of the failure of the Maryland-chartered Community Saving & Loan Association. Defendants Tom J. Billman, Clayton C. McCuistion, Barbara A. McKinney and Crysopt Corporation (“Crysopt”) have been named in a 20-count indictment which includes charges of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, substantive wire and mail fraud, as well as criminal violation of th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Petitioner John W. Flanagan, an inmate at the United States Penitentiary at Lewis-burg, Pennsylvania, (“USP-Lewisburg”), filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus
1
on August 20, 1991 challenging disciplinary action taken against him by the institution for possessing a weapon. During a routine security “shakedown” at the prison, the staff discover...
Views: 0
*276
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case, before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment, presents the question whether a deputy sheriff assigned to a canine unit is entitled to compensation for off-duty care of his police dog and related activities under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201
et seq.,
including the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, 29 ...
Views: 3
DECISION AND ORDER
The defendant, Gordon Urlacher, is charged in two separate indictments with conspiring to violate Title 18, United States Code § 666(a)(1)(A), and also with substantive violations of that section. Defendant now moves to dismiss the second indictment, CR-91-190T, on the grounds that it is multiplicitous.
Multiplicity occurs when a single crime has been arbitrarily d...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pursuant to an administrative order of Chief Judge Platt, I am serving in the Miscellaneous Part from February 10, 1992 to February 23, 1992. One of the duties of the judge assigned to the Miscellaneous Part is the review of applications for electronic eavesdropping orders pursuant to Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (“Title III”), 18 U.S.C....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Background The plaintiffs filed a citizens’ suit against the defendants to remedy alleged violations *21of 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7642, popularly known as the Clean Air Act. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants have not reviewed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) of the Clean Air Act for at least twelve years, despite an allegedly non-discretionary...
Views: 1
ORDER
The above entitled matter came on for hearing before this court on December 20, 1991 upon the motions of all defendants for summary judgment on plaintiff’s complaint, and upon the motions of all third-party defendants for summary judgment on the third-party complaint. For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motions for summary judgment will be granted, and plaintiff’s complaint will be...
Views: 1
ORDER The appellant and creditor-below, the Internal Revenue Service, appeals the decision of the bankruptcy court 1 disallowing an amended proof of claim by the IRS and discharging the debtor’s obligation to the IRS for income taxes for the 1985 tax year. 134 B.R. 370. On appeal, the appellant seeks reversal of the bankruptcy court’s determination that the IRS was required to seek an order o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This bankruptcy appeal raises the issue of whether a Bankruptcy Court properly held that a trustee in bankruptcy may recover preferential transfers from a bank that extracted itself from the debtor’s illegal check kiting scheme. The Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Tennessee held on February 8, 1991 that the debt- or’s checking transactions resulted in avoidable preferences ...
Views: 1
784 F.Supp. 1434 (1992)
LANDMARK BANK OF ST. CHARLES COUNTY, Plaintiff,
v.
Gustave J. SAETTELE, et al., Defendants.
No. 91-0787C(5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
February 18, 1992.
*1435 *1436 Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly, Davis & Dicus, Paul N. Venker, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
The Stolar Partnership, Charles Alan Seigel, Michael A. Fisher, E. Michael Murphy, St. L...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This case came on regularly for hearing before the court on Tuesday, February 11, 1992. Pending motions at issue are plaintiff’s (“MountainWest Financial”) Motion for an Order Enforcing its Rights Under Federal Banking Law, and defendant’s Motion to Dismiss counts VI and VII of the Amended Complaint.
After having considered the memoranda and submissions ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff County of Oakland and intervening plaintiff County of Macomb filed the instant civil action in 1984 to recover damages from defendants for allegedly violating the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act [“RICO”], 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68.
1
Plaintiffs named as defendants 14 officials and corporations, inc...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees. Defendant filed a memorandum in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion to which plaintiffs replied. Plaintiff Darlene Bagsby and her daughter, Jacqueline Pruitt, filed this action against two St. Louis police officers and the St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners for excessive use of force during the arrest...
Views: 0
ORDER
The defendants move to preclude the testimony of plaintiff’s expert witness based on a state statute requiring early disclosure of expert witnesses in professional liability cases. See Iowa Code § 668.11 (1991). This court must determine whether the state statute applies in federal court.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Richard E. Connolly Jr., originally filed this lawsuit in the Iowa District Court ...
Views: 3
ORDER Having reviewed the moving papers of the defendant Harley-Davidson, Inc., the court ORDERS that the defendant’s “Motion to Strike Demand for Compensatory and Punitive Damages and for Jury Trial” (filed February 26, 1992) IS GRANTED in keeping with this court’s previous decision that the damages provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 do not apply retroactively. See McKnight v. Merri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On April 15, 1989 Carol Ann Reiser died when the single-engine Cessna 152 airplane she was piloting crashed during an attempted landing at DuPage Airport near West Chicago, Illinois. Plaintiff, Robert R. Reiser, Sr., independent administrator of the estate of Carol Ann Reiser, deceased, filed this action against defendant United States of America, under the Fe...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
BACKGROUND
Defendant CVN TV Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of defendant CVN Companies, Inc. Defendants own and operate a home telemarketing service known as Cable Value Network...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This matter is before the court on cross motions for summary judgment. The court has previously ruled on plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. By order dated June 19, 1991, this court granted plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order, thereby restraining the Counties from enforcing the Designation Ordina...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In an Opinion and Order dated January 10, 1992, 780 F.Supp. 1013, this Court denied pro se plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend the Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P., and dismissed the ac
*832
tion for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Familiarity with that opinion is presumed. This matter is presently before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action on September 23, 1991, to recover for personal injuries she sustained in a work-related accident which occurred on June 14, 1991, while she was employed by Microfoam, Inc. (“Microfoam”) located in Utica, New York. The jurisdiction of this court is based on the diversity of citizenship of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. s...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Thom Rock Realty Co., L.P. (“Thom Rock”), has moved pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to amend its answer to assert an affirmative defense and for an order dismissing the action on the ground that Plaintiff Storwal International Inc. (“Stor-wal International”) is not authorized to do business in New York. For the reasons set forth below, Thom Ro...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The defendants have moved this court for a bill of particulars as to eight uncharged crimes about which the government will seek to introduce evidence at trial. Initially, the defendants sought several items of information about these uncharged crimes; however, in response to the papers submitted by the government on this motion (papers that provided additional information ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The defendant in this criminal action moves to compel disclosure of his grand jury testimony, to dismiss the indictment, and to suppress the fruits of certain electronic surveillance; the government cross-moves for a protective order with respect to the grand jury testimony of the defendant. For the reasons set forth below, the motions of the defendant are denied, and...
Views: 1
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’
1
Motion to Dismiss the Complaint or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment filed on October 3, 1990. The Plaintiffs responded on December 19, 1990. On January 16, 1991 the Defendants replied to the Plaintiffs’ response.
The Cou...
Views: 2
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This is a five-count class action
1
in which
*1103
twenty-two shareholders
2
(“the plaintiffs”) sue the Travelers Corporation (“Travelers”), Edward H. Budd (“Budd”),
3
Thomas 0. Thorsen (“Thorsen”),
4
Richard J. Shima (“Shima”),
5
(collectively, “the defendants”) for violations of federal secur...
Views: 6
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 17, 1987, Robert Hudson traveled from California to Chicago to pursue business interests and to reunite with old friends and colleagues of his in the railroad business. Around 6:30 p.m. the following day, Robert joined his brother, Ralph Hudson, who incidentally resides in Lisle, Illinois, and several other acquaintances at a cocktail reception tha...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, US West Financial Services, Inc., moves for summary judgment on a guaranty executed by defendants Stanley S. Tollman and Monty D. Hundley (the “Guaranty”), and to dismiss defendants’ counterclaims and affirmative defenses. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is granted.
*335
i.
Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c), summary judgment is ap...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff United Rope Distributors (“United Rope”) is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Minnesota. Defendant and third-party plaintiff Kim-Sail Ltd. (“Kim-Sail”) is a Cayman Islands corporation with its principal place of business in New York City.
1
Defendant and third-party defendant Sea-triumph Marine Corporation (“Seatri-umph”)...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SouthTrust Mobile Services, Inc., has appealed to this court from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, BK No. 90-71300, denying SouthTrust’s motion for relief from automatic stay, and simultaneously purporting to grant two conflicting motions, one by C. Michael Stilson, the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee, and the other by Sco...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This case presents an issue of apparent first impression under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
Specifically, where an employee benefit plan provides for group life insurance that permits the employee to change the beneficiary, is the exercise of a general power of attorney by the employee’s attorney-in-fact effe...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2257: Haggart Group v. Frontier Airlines, Inc. (In Re Frontier Airlines, Inc.)
Page 2257
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s February 27, 1989 ruling denying the Haggart Group’s motion to reconsider the disallowance of its claims. 1 In its order, the bankruptcy court upheld its earlier ruling striking the claims of all former Frontier Airline employees, including the members of the Haggart Group, who had executed written waivers of claims. T...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. The court heard this motion on January 24, 1991. Plaintiff, Phone Directories Company, Inc. (“Phone Directories”), was represented by Richard W. Casey and Mark Y. Hirata. Defendant, Contel Corporation (“Contel”), was represented by Reid E. Lewis and Mark W. May. Before the hearing, the court ca...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P. 60(b)(5) AND (b)(6)
This matter comes before the court on Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b)(5) and (b)(6) filed on December 4, 1991. Defendant Oklahoma City Board of Education (“Board”) filed its response to the inst...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss the six-count Indictment returned by the grand jury on December 5, 1991. Each count charges a separate violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), which prohibits, inter alia, a convicted felon from knowingly possessing a firearm. 1 On January 31, 1992, the Court received evidence relevant to the motion and heard the argument of counsel. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on motion of third-party defendant Louis Sullivan, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) to dismiss the third-party complaint (Doc. 63).
This is a class action brought by long-term care nursing facilities against the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (“SRS”), the Secretary of SRS, and t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves to substitute the United States as defendant pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(1). Plaintiff moves to remand this action to state court. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially assist their resolution. The attorney general’s designee certified here that Neuger was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of pl...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
In reviewing this case, the Court finds that the caption might more appropriately read the “Clash of the Titans.” These two pharmaceutical giants have manufactured and produced some of the most reputable products sold, not only in this country, but around the world.
In particular, two brand names intimately connected to these companies are known to virtually every h...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Roger Kirby has brought this diversity action against Daniel Wildenstein and the Fondation Wildenstein (together “Wildenstein”) alleging the tort of product disparagement. Presently before us is Wil-denstein’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons discussed below, Wilden-stein’s motion is granted.
Background
A.
Factual History.
Plaintiff...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
The superseding indictment (the “indictment”) charges defendants with:
Count One: a conspiracy, the objects of which were (i) use of unauthorized access devices in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1029(a)(2), (ii) the violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956, (iii) the transportation in interstate commerce of a stolen Ferrari automobile in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314, ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Pro se
plaintiff Mark Threat filed this action on August 22, 1991, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges that his parole was revoked in violation of his fourth and fourteenth amendment rights. The defendants in this action are Paul Rus-si,
1
the Chairman of the New York State Board of Parole; Norman Lewis, plaintiff's parole...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On July 1, 1990, Growth Horizons entered into a contract to provide Community Living Arrangements [“CLAs”]
1
to
Pennhurst
2
class members residing in Delaware County.
3
The plaintiff understood that Delaware County could cancel the contract by giving sixty days notice.
See
N.T. at 57-58; N.T. at 83-84. Delaware ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER This is a civil action under section 340(a) the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to revoke the citizenship of Defendant Nikolaus Schiffer. 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a). Schiffer has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) stating several grounds, including mootness, failure to state a claim and laches. Having carefully considered the defendant’s motion...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The court has for consideration the motion of Scottie D. Englebert and Sandra D. Englebert, appellees-debtors in the above-entitled cause, for a stay pending their appeal to the Eleventh Circuit from the order of this court entered on January 21, 1992, in SouthTrust Mobile Services, Inc. v. Englebert, 137 B.R. 975 (N.D.Ala.1992), remanding the matter to the bankruptcy court for...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter has been heard on the motion of Fashion Victim, Ltd. (“Fashion”) for a preliminary injunction against Sunrise Turquoise, Inc. (“Sunrise”). After its early issuance of a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) that has since been continued in effect by agreement between the parties, this Court has conducted a preliminary injunction hearing (t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a declaratory judgment action to determine whether coverage exists under a policy of liability insurance issued by plaintiff, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London and Associated Companies (collectively “Lloyd’s”) to Pacific Southwest Airlines (“PSA”). Defendant USAir, Inc. (“USAir”) is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaw...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case comes before the court upon a petition by the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”) for an order requiring Ernst & Young to show cause why it should not be required to comply with an administrative subpoena
duces tecum
served upon Ernst & Young, and for an order requiring the production of certain records and documents as set forth in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The motion will be granted.
FACTS
The Automotive Employee Benefit Trust (the Trust) was created in 1982 to provide health care and other benefits to the employees of its member employers; the operations and business of the Trust constituted an employee welfare benefit plan under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 100...
Views: 0
*245
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Georgia Carpet Sales, Inc. (“GCS”) has filed a two-count Complaint against SLS Corp. (“SLS”), purporting to ground federal jurisdiction under Lanham Act, § 43(a), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (“Section 1125(a)”), in Count I and then invoking the supplemental jurisdiction provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (“Section 1367”) to advance a claim of violation of the Illinois t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case raises challenging questions about the rights of a non-biological “family” to claim rights of family association under the United States Constitution. After this Court assumed responsibility for the case by random reassignment last November upon the retirement of its former colleague Honorable Nicholas Bua, its ex
*1345
amination of the ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Claiming misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential and proprietary information, the plaintiffs move, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(a), for a preliminary injunction to prevent the defendants from misappropriating, using, releasing or repro
*984
ducing the computer software system known as “CA-ESTIMACS” or “ESTI-MACS”. In this regard, the plaintiffs al...
Views: 1
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Plaintiff Providence Washington Insurance Group (“Providence Washington”) seeks a declaratory judgment that, under a contract of insurance with defendants Val-erio Albarello, Inc., and The Preisner Co., Inc., it has no obligation to undertake the legal defense of those defendants in a pending state court case brought against them by defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In Count 3 of its complaint the plaintiffs seek to avoid a $4,000,000 preferential transfer made to United Missouri Bank (“UMB”) as an insider pursuant to 11 U.S.C.A. § 547. The plaintiffs have filed a renewed motion for summary judgment on the issue of defendant UMB’s insider status.
1
STANDARDS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Summary judgment is appropriate w...
Views: 2
Page 2351
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER.
In ancient times, the dagger used to stab a person to death was forfeited to the Crown — a practice having both legal and religious significance. 2 Sir Frederick Pollock & Frederic W. Maitland,
The History
*184
of English Law
473-74 (2d ed. 1968);
Exodus
21:29. Recently this concept of the deodand has been extended to permit the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This action is brought pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202. Plaintiff FMC Corporation (“FMC”) owned and operated, from 1963 to 1976, the Avtex site in Front Royal, Virginia, (“the Facility”), a site which has been listed on ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter came on for consideration of the plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed July 15, 1991, and the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment, filed August 1, 1991. The Court heard oral argument on January 9, 1992, at which time the Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and remanded this ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 6, 1991, I granted plaintiff Patricia L. Buell (Buell)’s motion for summary judgment on her declaratory judgment claim and granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment on Buell’s damage claims. Final judgment was entered accordingly. On December 6, 1991 Buell filed a motion to reconsider. Before me now are Buell’s December ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case is presently before the court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Plaintiff, Marsha Yates (“Yates”), is a resident of Dickenson County, Virginia. Defendant, Volunteer Health Care Systems, Inc. (“Volunteer”), is a Tennessee corporation with its principal place of business in N...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant appeared before this court on December 2, 1991, to plead guilty to Count One of his Indictment: conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.1 Among the offenses Defendant is alleged to have conspired to commit (i.e., among the objects of the conspiracy) was possession and receipt of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On June 24, 1991, this court ruled that the United States, when sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq., for an alleged act of medical practice committed in Indiana, is entitled to the protection of the $500,000.00 limitation on medical malpractice awards that Indiana law provides to “qualified health care providers”. IND. CODE 16-9.5-2-2. Ca...
Views: 0
OPINION
Social Security Widow’s Benefits.
When is a dead man’s wife not his widow?
For social security purposes, it is when she is married to her third husband when her first husband, from whom she was never divorced, dies and she applies for benefits as the widow of her first husband
*1322
while concealing her marriage to the third husband.
Cross-motions for s...
Views: 0
*48 MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiff Gerald Jordan brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the Supplemental Security Income Act (“SSI”) to challenge the final administrative determination of the defendant, Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) that he is not disabled and thus is not entitled to disability insurance benefits. The Secretary now moves for an order reman...
Views: 0
*1376
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PERTINENT TO SENTENCING RANGE
Ainsley Richards has pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. 21 U.S.C. § 846. As part of his plea agreement, the government agreed to dismiss one count of operating a continuing criminal enterprise, 21 U.S.C. § 848, ten counts of possession wi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CAME ON to be considered the Plaintiff Nancy Petkovsek’s Motion for Judgment to Enforce Settlement Agreement in this cause, and the court, having considered the motion, the defendants’ response, and the exhibits, is of the opinion that the motion should be GRANTED. FACTS The plaintiff filed...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
These actions were brought by plaintiff, Bank of New York (“BNY”), to enforce the terms of a personal loan to Enriko Sasson, 90 Civ. 4860 (“Personal Loan Action”), and to enforce the terms of a guaranty executed by defendants Sasson and Michael E. Thomas, whereby they agreed to ensure the payment of all principal and interest on plaintiff’s loan to the Techtron Centre Li...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff moves for an award of attorney’s fees against the Secretary of Health
*313
and Human Services (“Secretary”) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Plaintiff commenced a civil action in this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 405(g) for judicial review of the Secretary’s decision t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on a pair of related motions. Defendants Syntex Agribusiness, Inc. (Syntex), Independent Petrochemical Corp. (IPC) and Northeastern Pharmaceutical and Chemical Co. (NEPACCO) (collectively “settling defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss the cross-claim of their codefendant Olympia Holding Company (Olympia), formerly known as Ryder/P-I-E Nationwid...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff William Sullivan, Jr., is the former owner of the New England Patriots (Patriots) football team. In 1987, Sullivan sought to sell a 49% interest in the Patriots to an investment banking company which was not then engaged in the operation or
*1078
management of professional football teams. Sullivan claims that the defen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The Court has before it the plaintiff’s motion to remand this action to the Circuit Court for Robertson County, Tennessee (filed January 21, 1992; Docket Entry No. 9).
For reasons set forth below, the Court grants the plaintiff’s motion and remands this action.
*708
I. Background.
Plaintiff Nasco, a Tennessee corporation, originally brought this action o...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I.
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the Motions to Dismiss, or in the alternative, for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendants, the United States Postal Service (the “USPS” or the “Postal Service”) and the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association (the “NRLCA”). The parties have waived oral ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Petitioner, Derrick White, is currently serving a 27 year sentence for murder. He was convicted of the murder of Edward Sanders who was fatally shot on January 31, 1981, while riding as a passenger in a taxicab. White seeks habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and petitions the court to review the constitutionality of his conviction. Background Following a 1986 j...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Doctors Erich Platzer, Karl Welte and Roland Mertelsmann commenced this action to recover a share of the royalties stemming from a discovery they made while in the employment of Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research (“Sloan-Kettering). Sloan-Kettering now moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons co...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are (1) the defendant, Crescent River Port Pilots Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment and (2) the defendant River Port Pilot Commissioners’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Because the plaintiffs allegations against each defendant involve similar issues,
1
the Court shall treat the motions together. After reviewing the motions, memoranda...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is Consolidated Rail Corporation’s (“Conrail”) motion to dismiss the amended complaint of Wortham McCullough, Robert McCullough, and Gerald Gore (collectively “plaintiffs”). For reasons detailed below, the motion is granted.
FACTS
Plaintiffs filed their complaint in March, 1990, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
for conduct occurr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The defendant in this criminal action seeks to dismiss both counts of the indictment against him on the ground that the indictment was filed in violation of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 et seq. For the reasons indicated below, count one of the indictment is dismissed without prejudice; count two of the indictment is not dismissed.
FACTS
The defend...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs seek a return of funds lost, and damages they claim to have incurred, as a result of their purchase of securities offered by defendant Applied Vision Systems, Inc. (AVSI). Plaintiffs commenced this twenty-two count lawsuit on August 30, 1990. They claim violations of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77a
et seq.
(the 1933 Act); the Securities Exchange Act...
Views: 2
*1534
ORDER
In this action, plaintiffs appeal the August 29, 1990, decision of a New Hampshire Department of Education hearing officer which found that the 1989-90 Individual Education Plan (“IEP”) proposed for plaintiff was both procedurally and substantively in compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400,
et seq.
(Count ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
A motion for summary judgment on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Bankers Trust of Louisiana, N.A. (the “Receiver”) (Doc. 51), and a motion for summary judgment on behalf of Bob A. Hardesty, Raymond A. Lapine, Sr., Myron E. Moorehead, and Robert L. Karem
1
(the “Directors”) (Doc. 41) were filed and taken on the papers. Having...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Appellants bring this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) challenging the order of the bankruptcy court awarding sanctions to ap-pellee. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid their resolution. Because the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion and its findings are not clearly erroneous, the order of June 18, 1990 is” affirmed. I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the motion to dismiss of defendant Altama Delta Corporation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), based on lack of personal jurisdiction. Discovery on the jurisdictional issue has taken place, the motion has been fully briefed,
1
and is therefore ripe for consideration.
Background
2
Defendant Altama Leather...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is an age discrimination case arising under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
Plaintiff, William R. Just (“Just”), contends defendant, James River, II, Inc. (“James”), discriminated against him when it eliminated his position following a reorganization at the plant. James has moved for summary judgment. This Court has jurisd...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case involves allegations of unlawful employment practices under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.,
and violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
A related violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.,
is also a...
Views: 1
OPINION
This matter comes before the court on defendants’ Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
I. INTRODUCTION
This action, originally filed October 7, 1985, arises out of a series of transactions involving Harrah’s Marina Hotel & Casino in Atlantic City, New...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court is the motion of Plaintiff, Armond Budish, for a preliminary injunction. A hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction was held on September 30 through October 2, 1991, and was concluded on October 9, 1991.
At the outset of the hearing, the Court directed the parties to focus on the Tables in the books at issue here. Theref...
Views: 1
*652
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT
I. INTRODUCTION
This criminal action is presently before the Court on Defendant Deondre Hammonds’ Motion to Dismiss his one-count indictment for failure to state a crime. Hammonds contends that, based upon recent federal decisions construing the interplay between federal and state firearms laws, his 1984...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s adversary complaint raises the issue of the preclusive effect of a judgment rendered in a previous adversary proceeding. For the reasons discussed below, defendant’s motion will be granted in part and most claims raised by the complaint will be dismissed. The remaining claims will be best adjudicated by the bankruptcy ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The subjects of this memorandum opinion and order are the federal defendants’, i.e. Lujan and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), motion to dismiss filed April 22, 1991 and defendant San Juan County’s motion to dismiss filed May 9, 1991. After careful consideration of the pleadings, facts and law, and being otherwise fully advised in the matter, I have decide...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is Defendant Ingersoll Cutting Tool Company’s Motion to
*151
Transfer to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In addition, Plaintiff Schwarzkopf Technologies Corporation (Schwarzkopf) has filed a Motion to Strike Defendant’s Inequitable Conduct Defenses and Defendant Ingersoll Cut...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the motion to remand of defendant/third-party plaintiff Robert G. Harvey. For the reasons set out below, the Court finds that the motion is not well taken. Accordingly, this Court denies the motion and retains jurisdiction over the case.
I.
Facts
Plaintiff Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 began this action by filing its compl...
Views: 1
ORDER
This action arises out of the financial collapse of the Mascot Pecan Company (“Mascot Pecan”), and contains allegations of fraudulent business operations, negligent government inspections, parsimonious insurance practices, and reckless lending procedures. To date, the parties have filed six summary judgment motions and three motions to dismiss, as well as numerous other miscellaneou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED CAME ON TO BE HEARD this day the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), and the court, after considering said motion and the responses of the plaintiffs, is of the opinion that the moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT HOWARD’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CAME ON TO BE CONSIDERED, Defendant, Stephen C. Howard’s, Motion for Summary Judgment. After considering the motion, the response, the pleadings, the exhibits, and the affidavits, this court is of the opinion that as a matter of law Stephen C. Howard is entitled to a partial su...
Views: 0
Page 2530
*349
OPINION AND ORDER
Much has been made of our Constitution’s “most majestic guarantee”
1
— the freedom of speech. No doubt one of the more familiar theories of free speech is the often-quoted passage of Justice Holmes that “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market”
(Abrams v. United States,
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION, RULING GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lynn Martin, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor (“Secretary”), brings suit against defendant ConAgra, Inc., doing business as Northwest Fabrics and Crafts (“NWF & C”), under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (“Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 201
et seq.,
to enjo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Waltham (“Waltham”) opposes construction of a regional mail processing facility by the United States Postal Service (“Postal Service”) at 200 Smith Street, Waltham. Waltham alleges that the Postal Service, in deciding to locate the facility at the Smith Street site, violated substantive and procedural requirements of the Postal Reorgan...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a forfeiture action brought by the United States of America (“the government”), pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7) (1988), against real property based on that property’s use to facilitate narcotics transactions. A bench trial was held on January 7-8, 1992, during which the court found in favor of the government.
16 Clinton Street (“the property”) is a five-story brick building with...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, a 17 year old female, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a violation of her constitutional rights when the vehicle in which she was riding was stopped by officers of the 19th Judicial District Drug Task Force and she was strip searched in the back seat of a patrol car at the scene. Pending before this Court are motions for summary judgment filed by t...
Views: 7
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 3, 1989, Matthew Solomon (“petitioner”) was convicted of Murder in the Second Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law § 125.25[2], depraved mind murder. Having exhausted his state remedies, petitioner now seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on the following grounds: (1) there was insufficient evidence for a rational jury to have found ...
Views: 3
Page 2552
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This action arises under the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-l — 2000e-17 (1988 & West Supp. 1991). Plaintiff alleges that she was sexually harassed by the defendants during her tenure as an employee of the defendant New York State-Council 82/AFSCME Joint Committee on Quality of Working Life. There are three motions now before th...
Views: 2
*1494
ORDER
Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and motion to strike came before the court on October 1, 1991. Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set forth below and their motion to strike is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
This action involves a challenge by ten plaintiffs
1
to the constitutionality of the procedural sche...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Bonnie Cook (“Cook”) seeks injunctive and declaratory relief and monetary damages from the Rhode Island Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals (“MHRH”) for what she alleges was discrimination based on her obesity in violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the “Rehabilitation Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 794. This case is presently before the Co...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Professional Building Concepts, Inc. (PBC) challenges the validity of a contract award to Marón Construction Company, Inc. (Marón) for general improvements to two elderly housing projects in the City of Central Falls. The disputed contract is funded by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Professional Building Concepts filed this action af...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this diversity action, plaintiff Star Enterprise (Star), as assignee, seeks specific performance of a $90,000.00 purchase option contained in a July 15,1968, lease from defendants R. Harold Thomas and Camella Thomas to Texaco, Inc. (Texaco).
Mr. Thomas began his business relationship with Texaco in 1963 as an operator of a Texaco gasoline service station in Peace-dale, Rho...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES PURSUANT TO EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT
The Court has before it at this time in the above matter Plaintiff’s counsel’s Application for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (hereinafter “EAJA”) (Docket No. 82), filed on December 27, 1991. The application seeks an assessment of attorney’s fees against...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiffs allege that they suffered bodily injuries and mental anguish as a result of an incident involving a security guard at the Caribe Hilton Hotel, Miramar, Puerto Rico, which is operated by Hilton International of Puerto Rico, Inc. Plaintiffs have named as defendant Hilton Intern...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court for a decision is the motion of plaintiff, James R. Bastían, for
*1254
remand. The court has determined that the motion should be denied.
I.
Nature of the Action
Plaintiff instituted his action in a state court of Texas by a pleading in which he alleges causes of action based on (a) negligence of defendants, The...
Views: 1
ORDER
On this date came on to be heard Plaintiffs Motion to Remand and Motion for Sanctions (Instrument #6), together with the Defendant’s Response (Instrument # 8). The Plaintiff was injured in an automobile accident on September 22, 1989. The party responsible for the accident was an underinsured motorist, so the Plaintiff sought to recover his damages through the underinsurance terms o...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. On October 21, 1991, this Court ordered both parties to brief the issue of whether Plaintiff has standing to prosecute the anti-trust claims alleged in this case. The parties have submitted those briefs. After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the depositions and the entire record, the Court concludes that P...
Views: 2
ORDER
This case concerns the lending practices of the Defendant corporations. The Plaintiffs allege that these practices violate Georgia’s usury law, O.C.G.A. § 7-4-18 (1989); Georgia’s RICO Act (“Georgia RICO”), O.C.G.A. § 16-14-1
et seq.
(1988 & Supp.1991); the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Statute (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq.
(1988);...
Views: 1
Page 2587
ORDER ON MOTIONS
This cause is before the Court on the following motions and responses:
1.Defendants American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus, Inc. (American Family) and American Family Life Corporation (American Corporation)^ motion to dismiss Counts I, II, and VI of third amended complaint, motion to stay pending arbitration and memorandum in support thereof, filed Novemb...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Philips Consumer Electronics Company (“Philips”) commenced this action against the Arrow Carrier Corporation (“Arrow”) for wrongful conversion and for breach of contract. Philips has now moved for summary judgment on its claims against Arrow. Intervenor Royal Insurance Company of America (“Royal”) has moved for summary judgment against Philips declaring that Arrow’s liab...
Views: 5
ORDER
On September 16 and 17, 1991, the six remaining plaintiffs in this case presented their evidence at trial. At the close of plaintiffs’ case, defendant moved to dismiss, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The Court took defendant’s motion under advisement and asked the parties to brief the issue of whether plaintiffs had carried their burden of proof in this case.
...
Views: 0
ORDER The plaintiffs in this case have requested an immediate hearing on their motions for a temporary restraining order and for preliminary injunctive relief. They seek immediate reinstatement for Christy Hardaway to the Newport High School basketball team. The plaintiffs have alleged that Ms. Hardaway was dismissed from participation on the basketball team and the track team at Newport High...
Views: 0
784 F.Supp. 690 (1992)
ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
E. Louis WERNER, Jr., Defendant.
No. 91-1334C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
February 20, 1992.
Peter B. Hoffman, Robert E. Tucker, Krotenhof & Ely, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Robert Allen, Lewis, Rice & Fingersh, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
GUNN, District Judge.
This is a declaratory j...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on the motion of Harold Wittes (Wittes) for mandatory withdrawal of reference to the bankruptcy court or in the alternative for a stay of proceedings in the bankruptcy court. The motions arise out of a claim filed by Wittes in the Chapter 11 reorganization proceeding involving Interco Incorporated (Interco) and 30 affiliated companies. The claim ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM This is a pharmaceutical product liability action brought by Matthew Allen Hunt, a minor, against Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. (“Roche”). 1 Plaintiff suffers from certain *548 birth defects apparently caused by his mother’s ingestion of Accutane, a prescription drug manufactured and distributed by Roche. The theory of plaintiffs case is that Roche failed to provide adequate warnings c...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action was tried before United States Magistrate Judge Alex H. McGlinchey, without a jury, by consent of the parties and pursuant to the March 25, 1991 Order of Reference from United States District Judge, David O. Belew, Jr., [Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(c) ], and in accordance with the appellate direction of
Archie v. Christian,
808 F.2d ...
Views: 0
Page 2630
ORDER GRANTING CLAIMANTS’ REQUEST FOR RULE 56(f) DISCOVERY In this civil forfeiture action brought under 18 U.S.C. § 981 and 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6), Plaintiff filed on January 6, 1992, its Motion for Leave to File Motion for Summary Judgment beyond the expiration of the date set for filing motions. The Court granted the motion on January 24, 1992, over the objection of Claimants, thus activating th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE
The matter is now before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Reduction of Sentence (Docket No. 63), filed in November of 1990, and on which decision has been delayed to this time at Defendant’s request. This Defendant and his case have occupied the Court’s attention off and on for the past several years. The entire history ...
Views: 0
OPINION
These cases, a bankruptcy appeal and a declaratory judgment action, both concern the status of a commercial sublease for the 11th floor of premises located at 470 Park Avenue South in New York City, and involve three corporate entities, the Sanshoe Worldwide Corp. (hereinafter “Sanshoe”), McLaren/Hart Environmental Engineering Corp. (hereinafter “Hart”), and EBG Midtown South Corp...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint in this action for compensatory damages on May 19, 1989. This Court, by opinion and order dated October 9, 1990, 748 F.Supp. 190, dismissed the second amended complaint as against all Defendants other than Defendants Leonard Smith, Stephen Maloney, and Monroe Birnberg..
1
Subsequently several Corporate Defendants...
Views: 3
ORDER
Plaintiff filed his “Petition for Damages” (hereinafter referred to as “complaint”) against defendant as a result of defendant’s allegedly improper actions during an arrest of plaintiff for possible violations of the Missouri Wildlife Code. Of the five counts in plaintiff’s original complaint, the first two are based on 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, plaintiff claims his constituti...
Views: 0
Page 2637
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Westnau Land Corp. (“plaintiff”), brings this action against defendant, United States Small Business Administration (“defendant” or “SBA”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2410 and § 1501(4) of the New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law, to quiet title on the premises known as 1279 Sycamore Avenue, Bohemia, Suffolk County, New York (the “premises”). The...
Views: 0
Page 2639
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On September 23, 1991, this Court granted summary judgment to the American Express Company (“American Express” or “plaintiff”) in the above-referenced action against American Express Limousine Service (“AELS”) and its owners Ralph Can-tone and Donald Barfield (collectively “defendants”) for defendants’ use of plaintiffs trade names in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Petitioner Stephen K. Leonard filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus
with this Court on June 26, 1991, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2241, for the purposes of judicial review of a decision of the Commander of the Naval Military Personnel Command, Department of the Navy, denying his Request for Di...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner, Mario Russo (“Russo”), appearing pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Russo claims that he was deprived of his constitutional right to effective assistance of trial counsel. For the reasons set forth below, his application is dismissed. BACKGROUND On March 29, 1977, Russo was convicted after a jury trial in Supreme Court, Suf...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant United States of America’s Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment. The United States argues that several counts of the Plaintiffs’ amended complaint should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Fed.
*218
R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), ...
Views: 1
In the above-referenced admiralty action, Donald Karshan (“Karshan”), the owner of the 50 foot yacht, “WAVELENGTH,” (the “vessel”) and R.J. Kershaw and Certain other Underwriters at Lloyd’s (collectively “plaintiffs”) bring suit against Mattituck Inlet Marina & Shipyard (“Mattituck” or “defendant”), which sold the vessel to Kar-shan, under a strict product liability theory to recover $89,620.82...
Views: 1
Page 2653
DECISION AND ORDER
“I’m on 25th and State, and there is this young man. He’s buck naked. He has been beaten up ... He is really hurt ... He needs some help.”
With these words, a caller asked a Milwaukee Emergency 911 operator to send help to a person in need of assistance. When the call was made, on May 27, 1991, the name Jeffrey Dahmer was largely unknown. Today, everyone knows the ...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case involves a stockholders’ class action and two derivative stockholder actions brought against the directors of Neco Enterprises, Inc. (“NECO”), a Rhode Island corporation. The complaints allege that the Defendant directors breached their fiduciary duty to the corporation and violated Rule 14(a)-9 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which prohibits the issuance of mate...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The petitioner, Doris Medina, has filed “Motion for Mandamus Pursuant to 28 USC 1361”, seeking to compel the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to expeditiously begin deportation proceedings against her and to deport her to her native country, Columbia, pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(i). In the alternative, Ms. Medina seeks to co...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court are the objections of defendant The Society of Lloyd’s (“Lloyd’s”) and defendants Harris Bank Glencoe-Northbrook, N.A. and Harris Trust and Savings Bank (together “Harris Bank”) to Magistrate Judge Gottschall’s September 26, 1991 report and recommendation (attached as Appendix A) that plaintiffs Kenneth F. Bonny and Francesca B. Bonny’s (the “Bonnys”) motion for a p...
Views: 2
ORDER
Currently pending before the court in the above-captioned matter are four motions for summary judgment. As the facts which have given rise to plaintiff’s claims and defendants’ contentions are intertwined so, too, are the elements of analysis which pertain to any ruling on the motions presented. It is the intention of this court to address each of the motions presented in a single o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendants’ post-trial motions for judgments of acquittal pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29(c), or, alternatively, for a new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 33.
On November 11, 1988 the defendants, as well as D. Ronald Yagoda and Marcus Schloss & Co. Inc., were charged in a 31— count indictment charging,
inter alia,
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I.
Introduction
Plaintiff National Precast Crypt Co., (“Precast”), an Illinois corporation, brought this contract action against defendants Dy-Core of Pennsylvania, Inc. (“Dy-Core”) and Romani Industries, Inc. (“Romani”), both of which are Pennsylvania corporations, pursuant to this court’s diversity jurisdiction. Defendants filed an answer and co...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I.
On October 6, 1983, Francis Girard was using an HD-21 crawler tractor (bulldozer) manufactured by Allis Chalmers Corporation, Inc. (Allis Chalmers), when the engine stalled for undetermined reasons. The bulldozer rolled downhill backwards, and Girard was injured. On August 12, 1985, he filed a products liability complaint alleging that the bulldozer was defectivel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiffs Joan A. Shawley, William Cala-boyias, James Vogel, and Paul Percherke filed a complaint on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated against defendant Bethlehem Steel Corporation. Plaintiffs are approximately 762 current or former members of United Steelworkers of America Local Union No. 2635, who worked during the 1970’s at the former Freig...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This securities fraud class action settled in 1988 and 1989. The settlement was $9,900,000. The settlement fund has been held in an escrow account and also includes interest that has been accumulating since December 1989. The settlement, which was approved by the court, provides that the attorneys for the class could request attorneys fees to be paid from the ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ various motions to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. On consideration of the entire record, the Court grants the defendants’ motions.
1
“Findings of fact and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rule 12 or 56.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). While the Court wishes to utilize tha...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this civil action, an insurance agency seeks recovery of more than $95,000 for unpaid insurance premiums for coverage provided for a real estate development. Plaintiff contends that Bank Five for Savings (“Bank”), is liable for the monies owed because the relationship existing between the insured and Bank allegedly went beyond that of borrower and lender and was actually a partne...
Views: 0
OPINION
On November 15, 1991 the court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs on their conversion claim against defendant First Fidelity Bank. First Fidelity has moved for reconsideration. Plaintiffs have moved for sanctions against First Fidelity for making this motion.
First Fidelity has shown good grounds for asking the court to reconsider the summary judgment ruling. The...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The bankruptcy court found the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) willfully violated the automatic stay set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 362 (“§ 362”) by seizing Jerri Taborski’s postpetition income tax refunds and applying those overpayments to her husband’s income tax liability.
1
As a consequence of these actions, the bankruptcy court awarded Jerri Taborsk...
Views: 2
*1366
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before this court is David Gladney’s petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Gladney’s sole assertion is that he was denied due process of law because the instructions given to the jury at trial allowed the jury to return a verdict of murder despite findings that should have resulted in a verdict of voluntary ma...
Views: 1
*781
ORDER
Before the court is American Airlines, Incorporated’s (“American”) motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12 to strike and dismiss portions of Count I and the entirety of Count II of Jefferey L. Sofferin’s (“plaintiff”) First Amended Complaint. For reasons detailed below, the motion is granted.
FACTS
The Amended Complaint and briefs reveal that pl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Robert Logan brings this civil rights action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Michael Drew and John O’Leary, two Chicago police officers. Presently before the court are (1) Logan’s motion in limine to exclude from evidence his July 29, 1986 conviction for the unlawful use of a credit card under Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 17, ¶ 5921, (2) defendants’ motion to ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case, which is the damages phase of a trial conducted in this Court in 1986, was tried to the Court between July 8 and July 16, 1991. Defendant Gabriel’s liability for infringement of Plaintiff’s Knop patent was established by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in
Andrew Corp. v. Gabriel Electronics, Inc.,
847 F.2d 819 (Fed.Cir.1988). The Knop patent, U.S...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES
This case involves a plaintiff class action challenge to a United States Department of Health and Human Services (hereinafter “HHS” or “Federal Defendant”) regulation governing the extent to which child support payments collected on behalf of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (hereinafter “AFDC”) program recipients ...
Views: 2
Petitioner, Douglas Player (“petitioner”), appearing
pro se,
petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For the reasons set forth below, petitioner’s application is denied.
BACKGROUND
On January 14, 1986, two men forcibly entered a dwelling in Brentwood, Suffolk County, New York. One of them, later identified as petitioner, was wearing a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case was removed to this court from the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, Pennsylvania on January 30, 1990. The cause of action arose out of a motorcycle accident which took place on July 16, 1988 along Route 20 in Ripley, New York. Plaintiff Lawrence Eimers alleges that the sidestand on his 1983 Honda CB550SC Night Hawk motorcycle failed to retract upon contac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff American Guaranty Insurance Co. (“American Guaranty”) filed this diversity . action1 against defendant Asbestos Control, Inc. (“Asbestos Control”) to recover premiums allegedly owed for insurance coverage which American Guaranty provided for the period from February through September, 1989. American Guaranty is a corporation created under the laws of the British We...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss (Dk. 4). Plaintiff, Robert L. Mahaffey, Jr., brings this suit to recover for his injuries sustained when a vehicle in which he was a passenger left the roadway and overturned. In his complaint, Plaintiff alleges the vehicle was negligently operated by defendant’s agent. Plaintiff further alleges that...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss Counts I, II, III, IV, V, VI & IX of the Complaint.
Background
This case concerns the relationship between defendant General Motors Corporation (“GM”) and its franchisee, plaintiff Freedman Truck Center, Inc. (“Freedman”). Since 1936, Freedman, a truck dealership, has sold and serviced trucks manufactured by GM pursua...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS This cause is before the Court on the following motions and responses thereto: 1. Defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed on August 23, 1991. 2. Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed on August 30, 1991. 3. Plaintiff’s supplemental authority in opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed on December 3, 1991. 4. Plaintiff's motion for leave to f...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court following a bench trial held on October 28, 1991 in Lafayette, Indiana. Post-trial briefs have been submitted by the plaintiff and the defendants, and the court is now fully advised of the issues and controversies of this case. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The substantive law of Indiana applies. The court finds ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and/or to dismiss complaint, filed September 10, 1991 and response thereto, filed October 10, 1991. For the following reasons, the motion for summary judgment is granted. This circuit clearly holds that summary judgment should only be entered when the moving party has sustained its burden...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The court has before it two reports and recommendations from Magistrate Judge Rosemond. One recommends that the Plaintiff’s claim for widower’s insurance benefits be remanded to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The second recommends denying Plaintiff’s attorney’s application for fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). No objections were filed to the Ma...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Walter Lang, objects to the notice of removal filed by the defendant, National Electrical Contractors Association (“NECA”), and moves for remand. The court has been fully briefed on the issues presented and held an oral hearing on the matter on January 24, 1992. Now, for the reasons stated below this court grants the plaintiff’s motion to remand.
I...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS On February 10, 1977, the plaintiff, Claude Farley, filed an application for insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (the “Act”) alleging that he became disabled commencing August 29, 1976. The application was denied initially and on reconsideration. (Exhibit 1 of Affidavit). On September 18, 1978 an Administrative Law Judge (“AU”) upheld the denial,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE is before the court on the following motion of Plaintiff Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, (“Revere”) for summary judgment filed September 16, 1991 and response thereto filed September 30, 1991; and, Defendant Edward Dietz, Jr., (“Dietz”) for counter-summary judgment filed September 18, 1991 and response thereto filed October 1, 1991. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is R.J. O’Brien & Associates’ (“R.J.O.”) “Motion for Leave to File Appeal of Interlocutory Order Or, In the Alternative, Motion That Order of Janüary 22, 1992 Be Made A Final Order”, and Mark E. O’Brien’s (“plaintiff”) motion to vacate stay of enforcement of judgment. For reasons set forth below, the court enters an order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) an...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Alan Raphael (“Raphael”) has moved to dismiss the second superseding indictment (the “Indictment") filed against him on grounds that it is barred by the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy clause and that the Government has used the Grand Jury improperly. In the alternative, Raphael seeks an order limiting the Government’s use of evidence obtained in recent Grand Jury proc...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Gilbert, Segall and Young (“GSY”) instituted this action for a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202 for the purpose of determining its liability under a lease of commercial office space if it vacates the premises prior to the expiration of the term of the lease and makes no future rental payments to defendant Bank of Montreal (...
Views: 4
*790
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Investors in two commodity pool limited partnerships, Advanced Portfolio Management, Limited Partnership (“Advanced”) and Compass Futures Fund (“Compass”), bring this class action against numerous defendants related in various ways to Stot-ler Funds, Inc. (“S Funds”), general partner and operator of the two pools. In an action that stems from the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION The Defendants have moved for leave to reargue the Court’s prior opinion in this matter dated January 2, 1992, 781 F.Supp. 999 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (the “Opinion”), pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 3(j) of the Civil Rules of the Southern District of New York. For the reason set forth below, the motion is denied. To be entitled to reargument under...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff David Towns filed petitions to be nominated as the Republican Party Candidate for Boone County, Illinois State’s Attorney. Plaintiff Ken Swanson is a voter who supports Towns and who signed a nominating petition' for him. Defendants are the members of the Boone County Officers Electoral Board and the Illinois State Board of Elections, all sued in their offici...
Views: 1
785 F.Supp. 1369 (1992)
U.S. DURUM MILLING, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
FRESCALA FOODS, INC., Defendant.
No. 89-1697C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
March 4, 1992.
*1370 Bill Bay, Charles M. Poplstein, Joseph R. Dulle, Thompson & Mitchell, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Fairfax Jones, Mark Brittingham, Casserly & Jones, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
GUNN, Distr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a lawsuit by a licensed teacher based on the alleged deprivation of a property right without Due Process of law within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. The property right at issue is the right of a licensed teacher to a meaningful opportunity to seek employment in the New York City Public School System. This action is one brought directly under the Due...
Views: 1
ORDER
Background
Plaintiff was employed as MeraBank’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) from May, 1984 through January 31, 1990, when his employment was terminated by Defendant Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC). First Amended Complaint at para. 4. In 1982, plaintiff and MeraBank executed a “Salary Continuation Agreement”
1
(Agreement), which provides, in part, as follows:...
Views: 1
ORDER
Petitioner Romero & Busot, Inc. (“Romero”) appeals an administrative order issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), ordering compliance with various regulations authorized pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f-300j-25 (“SDWA”), and assessing civil penalties totalling $29,500 for violations of EPA regulations. The g...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
This is a negligence action under New York law brought by plaintiff Thelma Walker (“plaintiff”), individually and as ad-ministratrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Father Patrick DeSouza Walker, against defendant Eastern Air Lines, Inc. (“Eastern”). Eastern previously moved for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the g...
Views: 0
CONTEMPT
FINDINGS OF FACT
Pursuant to Rule 60(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court amends its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law issued on February 28, 1992 as follows:
1. This Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order on October 2, 1991, which clearly and unambiguously prohibited “defendants, its officers, directors, employees, shareholders, agents, and ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the issue of reasonable accommodation, (Filing No. 60), the Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment on the issue of reasonable accommodation, (Filing No. 63), and the Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment on the issue of reasonable accommodation, (Filing No. 66). Th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION Willie Hugh Morris, Kenneth Leon Morris, and Billy Edd Farmer have been indicted for commission of various drug-related felonies. Each wants to employ John Line-barger, an attorney licensed to practice before this Court, to represent him at the trial of the case. But the government objects to Linebarger’s representing any of the 23 defendants in this case because it believes he ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss Count One of plaintiff’s complaint. *1584 After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order. FACTS Plaintiff United States filed this action under the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act (“FDCPA”) (Counts One and Two) and the Georgia Fr...
Views: 2
RULING ON MOTION FOR SANCTIONS1
The question of whether to impose sanctions on attorneys and their clients is almost always a difficult one for a judge. As in this 'case, the issues presented are often complicated, and the decision is close. Three pleadings by a creditors’ committee, seeking to modify orders of this court in proceedings in which the committee had no obvious right or basis to inte...
Views: 0
Page 2820
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is before the Court on Plaintiff Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s (“Chesapeake”) Application for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees. Plaintiff’s underlying lawsuit was brought under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). Plaintiff now seeks recovery of its attorneys’ fees and litigation costs from the Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E),...
Views: 0
ORDER On this date came on to be heard Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Instrument # 7), and Defendant Bell Helicopter Textron Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss (Instrument # 3), together with all relevant Responses. The Plaintiffs filed this case in state court to *1242 recover damages for the alleged wrongful death of Charles Phillips who was killed in a helicopter crash approximately 25 miles off the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this legal malpractice action, with jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and the presence of a federal question, defendants, Colton, Hartnick, Yamin
&
Sheresky (“Colton Hartnick”) and Newman, Tannenbaum, Helpern, Syracuse & Hirschtritt (“Newman Tannenbaum”), now move the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 12(c), to dismiss the claims aga...
Views: 3
OPINION
Plaintiffs Jennifer Loper and William Kaye, on behalf of themselves and the class they represent, have moved for summary judgment against defendants New York City Police Department (the “Police Department”) and Commissioner Lee Brown of the Police Department pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, their motion is denied.
Prior Proceed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiff, Thomas Dooley, has brought an action against numerous defendants alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, Title 18, United States Code, sections 1961
et seq.
(“RICO”), and supplemental state law claims. Several defendants, including the United Technologies Corporate (“UTC Corporate”) defendants
1
,...
Views: 1
Page 2842
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is one of the 43 consolidated cases that comprise the litigation captioned In re NBW Commercial Paper Litigation, Master File No. 90-1755. In a status call attended by attorneys from virtually every law firm in the District of Columbia, all counsel agreed to use the action brought by the American Federation, of State, County, and Municipal Employees (“AFSCME”) as a te...
Views: 3
785 F. Supp. 1417 (1992)
Philip K. SADOWSKI, Petitioner,
v.
Jack McCORMICK, Warden, Montana State Prison, Respondent.
No. CV-91-023-BU.
United States District Court, D. Montana, Butte Division.
March 6, 1992.
*1418 Philip K. Sadowski, pro se.
Marc Racicot, Joseph E. Thaggard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Helena, Mont., for respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HATFIELD, Chief Judge.
BACKGROUND
Philip K. Sadows...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This action is plaintiff’s latest civil rights action to obtain Social Security disability benefits. Four previous in forma pauper-is proceedings have been dismissed. Although the claims advanced in each complaint are similar, different defendants are named in each suit. The case is now before the court on plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The plaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Rozanna Elliott and the Estate of William Frank Elliott bring this diversity of citizenship action to recover damages for alleged negligent medical treatment provided to plaintiff’s decedent. The plaintiffs claim Dr. Kitowski’s failure to timely diagnose and treat William Elliott’s cancer deprived him of a complete cure and caused his death. Alternatively, plaintiffs contend ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment dated September 30, 1991 (Doc. #20). In its motion for summary judgment, plaintiff sought judgment against defendant Kenneth H. Koger on a note dated May 15, 1990 executed by Kenneth H. Koger in favor of the plaintiff in the principal amount of $460,500. Plaintiff also sought judgment against d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on defendant United States of America’s motions for partial summary judgment (Doc. 16, 17) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The government’s motions seek rulings on two issues: (1) whether the plaintiffs (taxpayers) are entitled to relief under § 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978, for both their sign and decal salespersons, and (2) whether the ta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against defendants Central Air Control, Inc., Dennis A. Gerstner, and Debbie M. Gerstner. (Doc. 17) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the receiver of Boulevard State Bank of Wichita (Boulevard), filed this action to recover on six promissory notes, four guaranties executed by the...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on motions by defendant Lou Ann Dunn for a partial stay of this court’s February 5, 1992, order freezing specific property (Doc. 99), for an administrative stay pending this court’s resolution of the motion for a partial stay and, in the alternative, a temporary stay to enable the defendant to seek a stay from the Tenth Circuit (Doc. 113). In considering such ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on two appeals by debtors, John Curtis Stanton (“Stanton”) and John Christopher (“Christopher”) from orders of dismissal of the bankruptcy court.
1
In the bankruptcy orders below, the court found that the debtors’ petitions were barred under the United States Bankruptcy Code because the only debts listed by petitioners were n...
Views: 0
*1113
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Employers Mutual Casualty Company (“Employers”) for an order disqualifying the law firm of McDonald, Tinker, Skaer, Quinn & Herring-ton, P.A. (“McDonald, Tinker” or “Respondent”) as counsel for plaintiff. (Doc. 278). The court held a hearing in this matter on January 16, 1992. Having heard the t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On November 26, 1991, the jury returned its verdict finding all five defendants guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1509. Section 1509, a misdemeanor offense, prohibits the willful obstruction or impedance of court orders through the use of threats or by force.
Motions for acquittal or in the alternative for a new trial were subsequently filed by defendants Charles W...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs instituted this action by filing a four-count Complaint against Chrysler Corporation in Superior Court in New Castle
*481
County. (App. to Pis.’ Opening Br., (Docket Item 7 [“Dkt.”]) at A-l). Plaintiffs’ original Complaint alleged that Chrysler was liable to the plaintiffs by virtue of alleged violations of the Consumer Product Safety Act. (Dkt. 7 at A-l-6)...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Raymond Bernatowicz and Kenneth Williams worked as hourly employees at the now defunct Jersey City plant of the Colgate-Palmolive Company
*489
(“Colgate”) for approximately 30 years, progressing from factory work to skilled labor during their employment. Bernatow-icz was employed from 1952 until 1956 and from 1960 to 1988, and Kenneth Williams was...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiff Thomas S. Dodge alleges in this ADEA action 1 that he was discharged from his employment as business manager at Susquehanna University (“the University”) because of his age. 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1). Dodge left the University’s employ on November 19, 1989. His departure was preceded by a discussion which took place on November 16, 1989, between Dodge and his sup...
Views: 0
*946
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter was heard by the court sitting without a jury on January 30-31,1992. The parties announced ready for trial, opening statements were made, evidence was presented, and closing' arguments were made.
This case involves an accident that occurred in a national park and arises under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671 [hereinaf...
Views: 0
Page 2896
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The above-entitled case originated with a complaint filed by Janice L. East in the Circuit Court of Etowah County, Alabama, CV 91-1086-WWC. East there charged that defendant, B.L. Long, individually, and as agent for Congress Life Insurance Company, the other defendant, committed fraud upon East in the sale of a policy of medical insurance. East sought both compensatory...
Views: 0
Page 2900
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On March 11, 1992, Congress Life Insurance Company, the defendant which filed the notice of removal referred to in this court’s memorandum opinion of March 4, 1992, responded to the said opinion, not by attempting to demonstrate that defendant, B.L. Long, was served with the summons and complaint in state court on or after January 22, 1992, as requested, but by admitti...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In a four-count indictment filed July 11, 1991 and superseded in January 1992, the grand jury has charged Defendant Eugene Romero with (1) conspiracy to violate the narcotics laws of the United States from late 1979 to the filing of the superseding indictment in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; (2) conspiracy to prevent one Warren Tyson from communicating information to federal law...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM and ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Company’s (MDHC) motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Dennis O’Day’s (O’Day) complaint that his employment with MDHC was wrongfully terminated. Having reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties, the Court finds that MDHC is entitled to entry of judgment in its favor, as O’Day has no reme...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This diversity action is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgement. Plaintiffs have sued defendant under theories of strict liability, negligence in manufacture and testing, failure to warn of possible adverse reactions, misrepresentation, and breach of express and implied warranty in connection with Plaintiff's use of Defendant’s pr...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to join an indispensable parties filed on October 24, 1991, response thereto filed November 13, 1991, and request for oral argument filed on October 24, 1991.
A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought by Macmillan, Inc. (“Macmillan”) against an insurer, Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), seeking reimbursement of. litigation fees incurred in defending lawsuits brought against Macmillan’s former independent directors. Before the Court are (1) Macmillan’s motion pursuant to Rules 26 and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order compell...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Dan Rindal, instituted the above-entitled action seeking monetary damages for the defendants’ purported breach of contract. Plaintiff’s complaint also asserts claims for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, constructive fraud, fraud and conversion, as well as a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT CREDIT TOWARDS TIME SERVED The above-captioned matter presents the Court with the following question: may the Court grant a defendant credit for time served prior to the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment for time spent prior to that sentence in a residential drug treatment facility? INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Defendant Donald Goetz was arrested by ag...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are the plaintiff/counter-defendants’ third amended complaint seeking a declaratory judgment upholding the validity of a redistricting plan for the Illinois General Assembly approved by the Illinois Supreme Court on January 14,1992, and counterclaims by two sets of defendant/counter-plaintiffs challenging parts of that redistricting plan. A trial was conducted on February 4 ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Sandra DeBotello is charged in the superseding indictment with one count of knowingly transporting monetary instruments of more than $10,000 from Montreal, Canada to Chicago, Illinois, in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§ 5316(a)(1)(B) and 5322(a), and with one count of falsely representing that she was not transporting currency in excess of $10,000, in violation of ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant Rachel Holland is a nine year old girl who is moderately mentally retarded. She has an I.Q. of 44 and on academic testing functions at about the level of a four year old child. She is well behaved and popular with her second grade classmates. She enjoys school and is motivated to learn. . Plaintiff Sacramento Unified School District (the “District”) proposes to educate Rachel half...
Views: 1
Page 2942
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On April 23, 1990, this court awarded partial summary judgment to plaintiff Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc., 735 F.Supp. 1404, (“Atlantic States”) on the issue of defendant Universal Tool & Stamping Company’s, (“Universal Tool”) liability for discharging excessive amounts of pollutants in violation of its permit limitations under provisions of the Fede...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on defendant Allen Santos’ motion for summary judgement. The primary issue raised by defendant’s motion is whether plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations provisions contained in 28 U.S.C. § 2415. Upon consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, it is the ruling of this court that defe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending before this court is plaintiffs’ motion for award of attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Having considered the merits of the arguments presented by the parties in support of their respective positions, the court is prepared to rule. BACKGROUND The present class action, initiated before this court in 1985, sought relief for all visitors to the Montana State Pris...
Views: 0
*235
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
After prevailing in an action against the government on a question of her vicarious tax liability, Vicki Chambers moved for and was awarded attorneys fees’ and costs against the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice (“the Government”) pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7430. This matter is before the court on the United States’ motion for a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On October 3, 1989, the United States of America filed this civil lawsuit against the City of Beaumont and the State of Texas, alleging the City of Beaumont had failed to properly implement a required pretreatment program for wastewater, in violation of the terms of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The suit seeks relief under 33 U.S.C. § 131...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant National Association of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO (“NALC”) has filed a motion for Rule 11 sanctions against plaintiff Cusandra Ridge and her attorneys. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the motion in part, and enter sanctions against Ridge’s attorneys.
I.
Ridge is a former employee of defendant United States Postal Service (“Postal Service”). She wa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LATCHUM, Senior District Judge.
The United States of America filed a complaint for forfeiture
in rem
under § 881(a)(7)
1
against the defendant, one parcel of property located at 200 Pennsylvania Avenue.
2
(Docket Item [“D.I.”] 1.) Before this Court is the United States’ motion for summary judgment on the grounds that probable cause e...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM We currently have before us the motion of defendant, Gettysburg College, to reconsider our order, dated November 1, 1991, which denied its motion for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Oral argument on the reconsideration motion was held on January 30, 1992, and the parties subsequently submitted additional legal authorities. We will evaluate the current motion under the same st...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
The Securities and Exchange Commission brought this action against defendants Thomas C. Payne, Payne Financial Group and Mark P. Malenfant, alleging that they have manipulated the price of Texscan common stock, or were about to do so, in violation of Sections 9(a)(1), 9(a)(2) and 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78i(a)(l), 7...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
The defendant, Burnup & Sims, Inc., has filed a “Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law and/or for a New Trial, or, in the Alternative, for Remittitur” after a three-day jury trial in this negligence action. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the *545plaintiff, Reynaldo Garcia, and against the defendant, assessing damages in the amount of $212,200.00. In its motion, the defendant ...
Views: 0
Page 2965
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is an interpleader action in which the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Department of Revenue of the State of Colorado (State) have both asserted an interest in funds held by the stakeholder, the PIMA Financial Service Corporation. The FDIC and the State have filed cross motions for summary judgment, each claiming its interest...
Views: 1
ORDER Margarito Domantay (Domantay) filed suit in this Court against the United States Department of the Navy (Navy) for injuries sustained while working on the USNS SEALIFT INDIAN OCEAN. Plaintiff Do-mantay alleged jurisdiction upon the Maritime Law of the United States (46 U.S.C.App. § 688, et seq.) including the Suits in Admiralty Act (46 U.S.C.App. § 741 et seq.) and the Public Vessels Act (46...
Views: 0
785 F.Supp. 277 (1992)
BASCOM CONSTRUCTION, INC.
v.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION as Receiver of City Bank and Trust.
Civ. No. 91-177-D.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
March 10, 1992.
Michael A. Fuerst, Claremont, N.H., for plaintiff.
James M. Costello, Manchester, N.H., for defendant.
ORDER
DEVINE, Chief Judge.
This action involving the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpora...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Plaintiff, TechniCAL, Inc., and counter-defendants, Leon J. Cabes, Jr., Louis Bonnecaze, Jr., and David K. Park (collectively referred to hereinafter as “TechniCAL”), filed a motion on December 11, 1991, to reopen this case and to rescind the settlement agreement. Defendants, Allpax Products, Inc., Steve B. Hudson, Timothy A. Haley, Michael F. Blattner, D. Randolph Waesche, an...
Views: 0
Before the Court is the plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand. The plaintiffs, both Louisiana residents, originally brought this suit against Phillips Petroleum Company (“Phillips”) and Herman S. Ballay, Jr. (“Ballay”) in the 25th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Plaquemines, Louisiana as an admiralty and maritime claim in accordance with the Saving to Suitors Clause, 28 U.S.C. § 1333(1). The d...
Views: 0
ORDER The matter before the court is the motion of defendant Robert L. Pike for the entry of final judgment (# 360). On February 1, 1991, Pike filed a Chapter 7 proceeding in bankruptcy. On September 6, 1991, this court granted Pike’s motion for summary judgment. In so doing, this court adopted in its entirety the Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge William M. Dale in which Judge Dale ...
Views: 0
OPINION
A motion has been made to dismiss the claim of the Long Island Railroad and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (the “LIRR/MTA”) against plaintiff Poling Transportation Corp. and the Motor Vessel Poling Bros. No. 7 (collectively, “Poling”) for indemnification and its cross-claims for indemnification against claimants David Theophilous (“Theophilous”), Antonio Coca (“Coca”) (...
Views: 8
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND Plaintiff Linda Lacatena was denied Social Security disability benefits and lost her administrative appeals. She then retained attorney David Zube on September 9, 1984, to seek judicial review of the denial of those benefits. Following the filing of this action, all litigation was stayed when it became apparent that plaintiff’s application for benefits...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, members of a putative class of all African-American public school students in New York City, bring this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. They name as defendants the Secretary of Education and the U.S. Department of Education (“the federal defendants”); Thomas Sobo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A witness who has been served with a subpoena to testify in this criminal matter has moved to quash that subpoena on the grounds that it is oppressive and unreasonable. In the alternative, the witness moves this court to declare her “unavailable” as a witness and to admit into evidence certain statements that she has made to a federal investigator. The government has opposed h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Counts II and IV of plaintiffs’ complaint. 1 For the reasons hereafter stated, *668 defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part. I. FACTS Plaintiffs’ action arises out of the defendant’s transfer of approximately 27.597 acres of real property located in Marysv...
Views: 0
CORRECTED ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION OF MARY ARRIAGA TO INTERVENE (F.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2))
This is a Title VII action (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
et seq.)
brought by the United States of America, on behalf of Mary Arri-aga. The complaint alleges that Defendant discriminated against Ms. Arriaga on the basis of her national origin/ethnicity (Mexican-American) by failing to promote her to the...
Views: 0
OPINION
Nature and Procedural Posture of Case
The plaintiff, Dorothy J. Williamson, brings this action both in her individual capacity and as the administratrix of her deceased minor son’s estate. In the Second Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) she seeks damages on her own behalf and, through the estate, on behalf of her son and his statutory beneficiaries. The defendants are the C...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case involves an application for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). The defendant, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”), maintains that the application should be denied because the plaintiff’s motion was untimely-
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff filed applications for Supplemental Se...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion to Intervene as a Plaintiff, Docket Entry No. 7, *786filed by Mr. Andrew Jeffries. Also before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment, Docket Entry No. 12, filed by the plaintiff, the United States of America. For the reasons discussed below, the Motion to Intervene as a Plaintiff will be denied and the Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted.
I. BAC...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The instant lender liability action stems from the financial harm allegedly suffered by Temp-Way Corporation (“Temp-Way”) and Denis J. Spellman and Martin F. Spell-man (“the Spellmans”), resulting from a banking relationship with Continental Bank (“Continental”) and several of its officers and employees, namely, Ronald Vicari, Frank Leis, and Francis Conway (the “defend...
Views: 0
ORDER
On January 8, 1992, this Court heard plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees. Candace C. Davenport appeared on behalf of plaintiff Roberta Salvador. Assistant United States Attorney Dennis Mulshine appeared on behalf of defendant. Having considered the papers submitted, the arguments of counsel, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, the Court DENIES plaintiff’s motion.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from an order entered September 23, 1991, by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Arkansas arising out of the bankruptcy of Larry D. Gould. Mr. Gould appeals from the entry of the order which denied confirmation of his Chapter 13 plan and ruled that he was ineligible to proceed as a debtor under Chapter 13. The order further g...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is a motion by defendant AH Development, S.E. (“AH”) to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction the action brought by plaintiff F & R Construction, S.E. (“F & R”). AH is a special partnership organized under Puerto Rico law with the purpose of acquiring and developing real property. The liability of each partner is limited to the amount of his or her capital contributi...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Fed.R.Civ.P.). Plaintiff, by her guardian (collectively, the plaintiff), seeks an order directing the defendants to fund and develop a community-based residential placement for her, so she may avoid transfer to a state-owned regional treatment cent...
Views: 0
This is a suit under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973 et seq., challenging the multimember district for state representatives in a portion of Sebastian County, Arkansas. 1 Voters in the district in question elect three members of the House of Representatives of the Arkansas General Assembly. The essential theory of the complaint is that this multimember arrangement submerg...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Paul S. Damron filed his complaint in Wayne County Circuit Court against defendants officers D. Pfannes, H. Misc.er, Ridener, Borisch and certain unidentified officers [collectively “Officers”], the City of Westland [“Westland”], the Westland Police Department [the “Department”] and the Westland Chief o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case comes before the Court after trial and on the parties’ post-trial proposed findings of fact and memoranda of law. The issue posed is whether the Boy Scouts of America properly may exclude from membership persons who are unwilling to profess a belief in and duty to a supreme being under Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, wh...
Views: 1
ORDER Lomas Mortgage USA (“Lomas”) appeals from the Bankruptcy Court’s confirmation of the Roberts’ Chapter 13 Plan for the adjustment of their debts. Lomas makes four contentions. First, Lomas contends that the Bankruptcy Court erred by not including Lomas’ mortgage insurance in the value of its secured claim. Second, Lomas contends that the Bankruptcy Court *344 erred by permitting the modi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought by the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization (“ILGO”) against the organizers of New York City’s Saint Patrick’s Day Parade. ILGO alleges that the New York State and the New York County Boards of the Ancient Order of Hibernians (“AOH”) have violated the plaintiff’s First Amendment free speech rights under the Constitution by failing to grant ILGO’s ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on the motion of both defendants to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint under Rule 12 or, in the alternative, to grant summary judgment under Rule 56. Plaintiffs are a Rhode Island taxpayer and a retirement association of which he is a member. They have alleged that the State of Rhode Island (“the State”) has violated their fe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.
Statement of the Case
The plaintiff, Peoples Bank and Trust Company of Mountain Home, conservator of the estate of Nellie Mitchell, an aged person, by amended complaint filed September 24, 1991, brought defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against the defendant, Globe International, Inc. d/b/a
“Su...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the plaintiff’s motions for summary judgment and dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaim, as well as a host of non-dispositive motions brought by the defendant. Since the non-dispositive motions will become moot once the summary judgment motions are resolved, the Court shall not address them.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Vital Health and Its Product...
Views: 0
*247MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Diego J. Herbstein (“Herb-stein”) has moved for an order requiring Defendants Martin E. Bruetman (“Bruetman”), High Tech Medical Parks Development Corp., Ronald Tash, Douglas Keill, Mauricio Agudelo, and Alta Tecnología Medica S.A. (collectively the “Defendants”) to post a security bond to cover costs pursuant to Rule 39 of the Civil Rules of the United States Cou...
Views: 0
BACKGROUND
This case involves a question of statutory construction: Does the Niagara Redevelop
*318
ment Act (“NRA”), 16 U.S.C. § 836(b)(3), prohibit the Power Authority of the State of New York (“PASNY”) from selling Replacement Power from its Niagara hydroelectric project at a rate greater than its cost of producing that power? Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that PAS...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Thomas M. King filed a Complaint against Dartmouth Banking Co. (“Dartmouth”) 1 and Sanders & Mock Associates, Inc., (“Sanders & Mock”) on March 1,1990. Sanders & Mock filed an amended answer on March 22,1991, and a Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment on April 3, 1991, arguing that the statute of limitations period for actions against it had expired. King opposes this m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court (for the second time) on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss under the theory of
forum non conveniens.
For the reasons stated below, we will deny these motions without prejudice.
I.
Relevant Facts and Procedural History
The plaintiff in this case, Graeme ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before us are cross motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff Healing the Children, Inc. and defendants Heal the Children, Inc. d/b/a/ Heal the Children Pa., Inc., and Judith Staeger. As the reader may have guessed from the caption of the case, this action is based on alleged infringement of federally registered service mark, false designation of origin ...
Views: 0
OPINION
We have before us plaintiffs “Motion to Amend Complaint” and the defendant’s Memorandum in Opposition thereto. The plaintiff seeks to add claims for punitive and compensatory damages, and recovery of expert fees as well as a trial by jury on her Title VII sex discrimination claims. The basis for these additional claims are sections 102 and 107 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub....
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant, Rosalie Wilkinson’s, (“Ms. Wilkinson”) Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), (6), 56(c). Plaintiff Theodore Wilkinson (“Mr. Wilkinson”) brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment that his former spouse, Ms. Wilkinson, forfeited any interest she might have had in his foreign service...
Views: 0
Page 3114
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a Petition for Injunction Under Section 10(Z) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, filed December 9, 1991, by Elizabeth Kinney, the Regional Director of Region 13 of the National Labor Relations Board. By her Petition, the Director requests this Court to enjoin the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 105, AFL-CIO (the “Union”) and...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff, Christine Aldana’s (“Aldana”), Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint filed on December 18, 1991. By her Motion, Aldana requests leave pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to include in her prayer for relief a claim for damages and for trial by jury under her Title VII claim. To date, Alda-na’s Motion remains unoppos...
Views: 0
*39
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case concerns a dispute between Hartford Insurance Company (“Hartford”), a Connecticut corporation, and its insured, Methodist Hospital (the “Hospital”), with its principal place of business in New York, regarding payment in a malpractice action of a settlement exceeding the Hospital’s insurance coverage. Hartford seeks a declaratory judgment that it...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On March 27, 1990, plaintiff Woman Golfer, Inc. commenced this diversity action against defendants Meredith Corp. and Golf for Women, alleging misappropriation of an idea, breach of implied contract in fact, fraud, and quasi-contract. Defendants now move for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
1
Sometime prior to March, 1989, Tom O’Keefe and Bren...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs move, pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P., for summary judgment. Defendants the City of New York; Douglas White, Personnel Director of New York City; New York City Department of Personnel; Lee Brown, Police Commissioner of New York City; and the Police Department of the City of New York (“Municipal Defendants”) and intervening defendants Hispanic Society of the New York C...
Views: 1
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3130: Bishop v. New York City Department of Housing Preservation & Development
Page 3130
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief and damages brought by two employees of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (“HPD”). Plaintiffs allege that HPD has discriminated and continues to discriminate against a group of its black employees in HPD’s Division of Code Enforcement (“DCE”) on the basis of race in violation of the Fourte...
Views: 0
Page 3131
CORRECTED OPINION AND ORDER
By Order of March 19, 1990, the Hon. Prudence B. Abram of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York authorized Trustee Garrity to retain the firm Arent, Fox, Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn [“Arent Fox”] as special counsel, and authorized that firm’s request for compensation. The United States of America has appealed those orders. This Co...
Views: 3
ORDER Before the court is the defendant’s motion for release on bond pending appeal filed on February 7, 1992. The government opposes the defendant’s motion. The defendant pleaded guilty to a one count information charging the defendant with embezzlement in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 657. The information alleged that the defendant embezzled $92,675.00 from the Ouachita County Hospital Credit Union f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 19, 1991, a trial to the court was held on this action. At the close of the trial the case was taken under advisement and the parties were directed to submit briefs to the court. The court has received the briefs from the parties. This matter is ripe for determination. The court heard testimony on the plaintiff’s claims of sex discrimination, wrongful discharge, t...
Views: 0
ENTRY
William A. Pickard III has filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against him on the basis that the government’s conduct was “outrageous;” Pickard claims that the government targeted him for investigation without a reasonable basis, manufactured a crime through repeated requests and coercion, and inflated the seriousness of the offense. Pickard’s motion has been fully briefed, and...
Views: 0
ENTRY
7.
Background
“Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale” of what happened when David Reuther, while vacationing in the Cayman Islands at the Pirates Point Resort hotel, decided to go SCUBA diving — “a .fateful trip that started from this tropic port, aboard this tiny ship.”
1
Pirates Point could not accommodate Reuther’s desire to go diving and arranged —...
Views: 1
This matter is before the court to address Martin Marietta’s motion to dismiss. Upon review of the record, this court GRANTS, in part, and DENIES, in part, that motion.
I. Background
O.K. Sand and Gravel produces (not surprisingly) sand and gravel. The Martin Marietta Corporation sells (and produces) sand and gravel, as well as crushed stone and other aggregate-type material. In A...
Views: 0
ORDER Presently before this court is plaintiffs’ March 7, 1992 motion, filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a), to compel nonparty deponent Dr. Robert J. Beaumont (“Dr. Beaumont”) to answer certain questions which plaintiffs propounded to Dr. Beaumont during a January 17, 1992 deposition. For the reasons below, this court denies plaintiffs’ motion. Background On July 5, 1991, plaintiffs comm...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT FINDINGS OF FACT The plaintiff, Jay Dee Contractors, Inc. (“Jay Dee”), is a construction firm from Livonia, Michigan. Jay Dee was founded in 1965 and is known for its work in building tunnels and underground structures for municipalities primarily in the Midwest. Jay Dee is an expert in tunneling and in the capabilities of tunnel bo...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This action concerns a public offering of limited partnership interests in Balcor Film Investors (“BFI”). BFI was formed to pro
*1460
duce and distribute movies pursuant to an agreement with a motion picture company, New World Entertainment, Ltd. (“New World”). The initial offering was unsuccessful, and the Securities Exchange Commission r...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Great Frame Up Systems, Inc. (GFU) seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent defendants from operating a picture-framing store in San Jose, California. Pursuant to a ruling in open court on December 20, 1991, this court denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction as to all defendants except Mohammad Z. Ja-zayeri, a/k/a D.J. Jazayeri. We requested ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Michael Sartori was a Chicago police officer who suffered severe injuries after tripping over a piece of railroad equipment while pursuing burglary suspects on a railroad right-of-way. He filed a one-count complaint alleging negligence against Defendants Wabash Railroad Co. (“Wabash”) and Norfolk and Western Railway (“Norfolk”) in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A class of private plaintiffs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought two civil rights actions in 1973 against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (“NMDU” or “Union”) and more than fifty news publishers and distributors within the Union’s jurisdiction. Both suits charged that the Union, with the acquiescence of the p...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
All that plaintiff still seeks in this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) case are several documents in which the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) describes and implements the computer algorithm it relies on to weight the various factors used by it to determine a motor carrier’s safety rating. The issues are before the Court on cross motions for summary judgment that ha...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, Mr. Kisser, a former employee of DeFranceaux Group, Inc. (“DRG”), a company that co-insured loans made for projects sponsored by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), has been prevented from participating in primary and lower tier covered transactions “throughout the executive branch of the Federal Government” since March 22, 1989. See 24 C.F.R. §§ 24....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, a private, non-profit Head Start Program incorporated in Utah in 1965, challenges by motion for preliminary injunction a decision of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to disallow certain costs associated with two buildings plaintiff obtained to house its operations. HHS disbursed funds to plaintiff to cover the costs associated with the buildings, but subseq...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, a union that represents mine workers, challenges a decision of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) to exclude union representatives from certain interviews conducted during an investigation by MSHA of a mine explosion. The issues are before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment that have been fully briefed. There are no material facts in dispute. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, a national association of persons providing Extra-Corporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (“ESWL”) on an outpatient basis to patients eligible for Medicare benefits, challenges a final notice of the Health Care Financing Administration (“HCFA”) that classifies ESWL as a surgical procedure and sets a prospective Medicare rate for ESWL performed in ambulatory surgical centers...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court has already dismissed Defendants Ohio Department of Human Service and Judge John H. Leskovyansky, and granted summary judgment for defendant Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on most of the issues presented in this litigation. Order of December 11, 1991, 787 F.Supp. 724. The Court also heard oral argument on the remaining issue of d...
Views: 0
Page 3178
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, plaintiffs’ opposition thereto, and defendant’s reply. The briefs are supported by documents and declarations. There are no material facts in dispute. The Court has federal question and declaratory judgment jurisdiction.
Background
Plaintiff, North American Fund Management Cor...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Indiana Waste Systems, Inc.’s (“IWS”) Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed on March 20, 1990, and Motion for Summary Judgment filed on May 16, 1990. Before the Court is also the County of Porter, Brian Gesse, William Carmichael, Larry Sheets, Porter County Board of Health and Gary A. Babcoke’s (“Defendants”) Motion for Summary Ju...
Views: 0
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES
This Cause comes before the Court upon the application of Claimants Hernán Montoya Franco and Socorro de Montoya, (“Montoyas”), for attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
I. BACKGROUND
The facts leading up to the filing of this action are set forth in
United States v. Eight...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This is hopefully the final stage in the drawn-out controversy over the Department of Labor’s (“DOL’s”) attempt to set a prevailing wage for seed cane cutters in the Florida sugar cane industry for the 1990-1991 harvest year. The only remaining issue before the Court is whether a group of over 100 foreign workers should be treated for purposes of DOL’s calculation of the rate on remand ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant, Heywood Brody’s (“Brody”), Motion to Stay This Action and Compel Arbitration filed February 25, 1991, Defendant, Whale Securities Co.’s (“Whale”), Motion to Stay this Action and Compel Arbitration filed February 7, 1991, and Plaintiff, Dr. Jack H. Ziegler’s (“Ziegler”), Motion to Compel and for Sanctions filed February 27, 1991. For the ...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff General Environmental Science Corporation’s Renewed Motion for Sanctions and the various memoranda, documents, deposition transcripts, affidavits and other materials submitted by the parties concerning this motion. On November 26, 1991, the Court heard the arguments of counsel and testimony from Defendant Frank Horsfall. Plaintiff contends that...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ronald Winston, an inmate at Wende Correctional Facility (“Wende"), has brought this action pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Thomas *119Coughlin, Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services (“DOCS”), Dominic Mantello, Superintendent of Wende, Acting Captain C. Walker, Lieutenant Sheldon, Sergeant R. Cooks and Corrections Officer J. Zi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The United States Department of Education (“Education”) appeals from the Bankruptcy Court’s Order granting monetary relief to plaintiff, Gail I. Hankerson (“Hankerson”), and against Education. For the following reasons, the Order of the Bankruptcy Court shall be REVERSED and VACATED, and the case shall be DISMISSED. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Hankerson applied for a Guaranteed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this action Plaintiff Frances Bolton contests the disposition by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) of her application for Disability Insurance Benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), as well as the denial of Supplemental Security Income Benefits under Title IX of the Act. Since the Plaintiff has exhausted her administrativ...
Views: 0
Page 3197
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The National Canada Corporation (NCC) appeals from the bankruptcy court’s judgment of March 12, 1991, entered on March 25, 1991. In that judgment, the bankruptcy court permitted the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) to file a proof of claim after the bar date, deeming it timely, because the RTC’s predecessor-in-interest, Otero Savings, failed to receive notice of t...
Views: 0
OPINION Presently before the court is Government’s motion for reduction of the sentence of defendant James J. Fredericks pursuant to Rule 35(b) for his “substantial assistance to law enforcement authorities subsequent to his sentencing.” For the reasons set forth below this motion is denied. I. BACKGROUND Beginning in about 1981 James J. Freder-icks developed a scheme to solicit money from investo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before me is plaintiff Hoerl & Associates, P.C. (Associates) December 6, 1991 motion for summary judgment on its claim for a partial refund of FICA taxes. The motion has been briefed and submitted on stipulated facts. While defendant United States has not filed a cross motion for summary judgment, it asserts, and Associates does not disagree, that this case ca...
Views: 0
785 F. Supp. 1181 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Bernard G. JONES.
Crim. A. No. 91-00200.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
March 16, 1992.
*1182 Joseph G. Poluka, Emily McKillip, Asst. U.S. Attys., Philadelphia, Pa., for U.S.
Robert O'Shea, Philadelphia, Pa., Jay Irwin Block, Owings Mills, Md., for Bernard G. Jones.
MEMORANDUM
KATZ, District Judge.
Following his conviction fo...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court for decision of Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 motions for partial summary judgment filed by the Defendant (United States of America) and for summary judgment filed by the Plaintiff (Jim T. Spears). Plaintiff seeks a refund of taxes paid, alleging same were improperly assessed against him. Defendant, in its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, requests the assessment to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
By motion for summary judgment Plaintiff seeks a declaratory ruling establishing the policy limits of underinsured motorist coverage on a 1983 Datsun Sentra owned by its insured, Homer Spinks.
On August 28, 1987, the insured vehicle was involved in an accident with an automobile operated by Wayne Casey and owned by his wife. Kristina R. Harper, Barbara Wh...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jones Chemical, Inc. moves to remand this case to New York State Supreme Court, County of Genesee. I heard oral argument on plaintiff’s motion on June 19, 1991.
For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is granted.
FACTS
On January 16, 1991, plaintiff commenced this action against defendants Distribution Architects International Inc., ...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Currently before the court are the following motions: (1) plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed on February 27, 1992; (2) Defendants U.S. Bancorp and U.S. Bank of Idaho, N.A.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on March 2,1992; (3) and Defendant Comptroller of the Currency’s Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are motions for partial summary judgment on the issue of indemnification by Forman Brothers, Inc. (For-man Brothers) and Falstaff Brewing Corporation (Falstaff). Both parties seek indemnification from Glenshaw Glass Company, Inc. (Glenshaw Glass) in the event that they are found liable to plaintiff.
The following facts are taken from the complaint and the amend...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In November, 1989, Congress enacted comprehensive multititle legislation known as the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (the “Act”), 5 U.S.C. app. §§ 501
et seq.,
Pub.L. No. 101-194, 103 Stat. 1760, intended to reinforce standards of integrity within the federal government, both in fact and in the public’s perception. Among its manifold provisions the Act undertook...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1); defendants’ motion to strike a portion of plaintiffs' request for relief pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f); plaintiffs’ motion for a continuance to take discovery pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f); and on defendants’ motion for a protective order staying discovery pursuant to Fe...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case, one of first impression in this circuit, explores the tension between the privacy interests of mental health patients housed in New York State facilities and the rights of Security Hospital Treatment Assistants to bid for assignments regardless of their gender as guaranteed by their collective bargaining agreement and secured by Title VII.
BACKGROUND
Mid-Hudso...
Views: 0
789 F.Supp. 247 (1992)
Joseph PUDLO, M.D., Plaintiff,
v.
E. ADAMSKI, M.D., Jr., J. Schneider, M.D., S. Borushek, M.D., J. Daddino, M.D., Gary Fahrenbach, M.D., D. Larson, M.D., B. Levy, M.D., J. Nabolotny, M.D., L. Pankau, M.D., V. Vohra, M.D., Individually, T.P. Nassos, M.D., E.W. Beutel, M.D., Y. Kim, M.D., J. Coughlin, M.D., W. Davidson, M.D., F. Grabiner, M.D., S. Hadawi, M.D., F. Mariano, M....
Views: 1
OPINION
Debtor/appellant, William E. Richards, appeals from a ruling that his income tax liability for the years 1982 through 1986 is not discharged in bankruptcy.
. The issues presented on appeal are whether the 240 day period for assessment of income tax priority was suspended during debtor’s first Chapter 13 bankruptcy, pursuant to title 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(7)(A)(ii); and whether s...
Views: 0
Page 3245
*603
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs’ amended complaint for a permanent injunction, declaratory relief and attorneys’ fees.
Reference is made to the memorandum order entered in this action on August 9, 1991, 787 F.Supp. 590 for the background giving rise to this dispute.
1
In that order, the court determined that the defendants h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Before me are Wang’s motion for summary judgment on Systemcare’s Section 1 Sherman Act claim, and Systemcare’s and third-party defendant Michael Wright’s motions for partial summary judgment on Wang’s claims for trademark infringeihent and false designation of origin. At a February 5, 1992 hearing on the motions I instructed the parties to file sup...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the court on Defendant Stacy Michelle Rosoff’s Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, made orally at trial pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29. This criminal action came before the court for trial to the court on January 6, 1992 and the court took the motion and the determination of guilt under advisement. Defendant Rosoff was the only Defendant t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
INTRODUCTION:
In this bankruptcy appeal, a mortgagee, Horizon Financial, F.A. (“Horizon”), has sought appellate review of a May 10, 1988 Order of the bankruptcy court sustaining the objection of Susan J. Norris (“the Debt- or”) to the secured proof of claim of Horizon and granting recoupment of $1,000.
Jurisdiction over this bankruptcy appeal in this court is pursuant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff, Carol Pegg (“Pegg”), was employed by the defendant, General Motors Corporation (“GMC”), until her termination in December of 1986. The plaintiff alleges she was denied certain benefits and was terminated in breach of an implied contract and, alternatively, an express contrac...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case has been tried before a jury and to the court. It is now before the court upon defendants’ motion for new trial, for alteration or amendment of the judgment and/or for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The motion is addressed entirely toward the jury verdict in this case.
Defendants have objected to a response brief plaintiff filed after defendants’...
Views: 0
CROW, District Judge.
This case presents the thorny issue of whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which was signed by President Bush on November 21, 1991, applies to the plaintiffs Title VII claims which were pending at the time the Act became law. Steinle filed this case on July 11, 1990. The discriminatory and retaliatory conduct which Steinle alleges occurred prior to November 21, 1991...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION This criminal case under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) is before the Court on issues regarding the sentencing of Mr. Darren Custis and his motion for new trial. First, Mr. Custis has challenged the constitutional validity of his prior convictions, arguing, inter alia, that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, as set forth in Strickland v. ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION This action was filed in May 1988 by black voters within various judicial circuits and districts in Alabama. Defendants are the Alabama Attorney General, the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, the Alabama Secretary of State, and various probate judges. Plaintiffs claim that the system for electing judges in Alabama leaves black voters without an equal opportunity “to...
Views: 4
ORDER
Before the court are the motions to dismiss of defendants Sue Suter (“Suter”), Hephzibah Children’s Center (“Hephzi-bah”), and Lutheran Child and Family Services (“Lutheran Child”). For reasons that follow, the motions are granted.
FACTS
The plaintiffs, Joseph and Marjorie Pro-copio (the “Procopios”), were foster parents to Ashley K. from June 1984, when Ashley was approxi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1331, 1343 (West 1976). For the following reasons, we grant the permanent injunction based on the findings and conclusions set forth below.
*1462
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, MEDCARE HMO (“MED-CARE”), is an Illinois not-for-profit...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before me are plaintiff’s motions for summary judgment on counts 1 through 3 of its first amended complaint and for dismissal or summary judgment on Adams Newspapers, Inc., Stephen Adams and Adams Publishing of Royal Oak, Ine.’s (Adams defendants) counterclaim. Because I find that no issues of material fact exist and plaintiff is entitled to relief as a matter of law, th...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above-captioned matter came for trial on October 15 and 16, 1991, before Senior United States District Judge James F. Battin, sitting without a jury. Thomas E. Towe and Gerald B. Murphy represented the Plaintiff, Towe Antique Ford Foundation (hereinafter “TAFF”). Kirk C. Lusty and Keith P. Duet, Trial Attorneys, United States Department of Justi...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The plaintiffs, John M. Mock and Marjorie Mock, filed this action in the District Court of the State of Idaho, in and for the County of Nez Perce, on February 8, 1991. The defendant, Potlatch Corporation (“Pot-latch”), filed a Notice of Removal to this court on March 11, 1992, and filed an Answer on March 18, 1...
Views: 0
OPINION
In the above-captioned case, the plaintiff, an African-American female who is an attorney-advisor for the Postal Rate Commission (“PRC”, “Commission”), contends that the PRC has failed to promote her because of face and gender discrimination. She brings this action pursuant to Title YII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16.
Trial was held in this case on Janu...
Views: 1
OPINION
These two actions are brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Juan Candelaria,
pro se,
a former inmate of Green Haven Correctional Facility (hereinafter “Green Haven”) who is currently incarcerated at Clinton Correctional Facility (hereinafter “Clinton”). Plaintiff’s claims in the first action (hereinafter “Action I”) arise out of an alleged assault on plaintiff by a correcti...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 970 (1992)
Robert CORT, Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION and Does 1 Through 12, Defendants.
No. C 91-4316 BAC.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
March 10, 1992.
*971 Robert Cort, pro se.
John S. Warnlof, Nelson, Warnlof & Vencill, San Ramon, Cal., for defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
CAULFIELD, District Judge.
Plaintiff Robert Cort sued the American Arbit...
Views: 1
CORRECTED OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING (1) THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE PARTIES’ FEBRUARY 1991 MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (2) PLAINTIFFS’ NOVEMBER 7,1991 MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND (3) DEFENDANTS’ OCTOBER 1991 MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNTS III AND IV
I. INTRODUCTION
A. PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
On July 12, 1990, Plaintiffs Fran...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, plaintiff, Bull & Bear Group, Inc. and counterclaim defendant Bassett S. Winmill (collectively “Bull & Bear”), now move the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, for summary judgment or, in the alternative, for an order, pursuant to
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States,
424 U.S. 800, 96 S.Ct. 1236, 47 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976), ab...
Views: 0
BACKGROUND
This is an action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
Plaintiff, Lawrence D. Smith (“Smith”), seeks to recover damages based on his claims that he has been denied benefits to which he is entitled under certain employee benefit plans.
The complaint names thirteen defendants. Two defendants, Rochester Telephone Busi...
Views: 0
Page 3316
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Solomon Myree, Sr. (“plaintiff”) is a black male, born November 27, 1936. In 1985, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit alleging that the defendant Local 41, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (“Local 41”) discriminated against him because of his race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
et seq.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves serious issues of the rights of freedom of religion and of association under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, Article 1 § 6 of the Texas Constitution, and the governmental rights of the State of Texas in
*691
enforcing its laws regarding non-profit corporations chartered under state law.
On Nove...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by those Defendants who are partners of the law firm Cohen,
*2
Todd, Kite and Stanford (“Cohen, Todd”).
1
Upon further consideration of Defendant Cohen, Todd’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff QueTel’s opposition thereto, the applicable law and the entire record herein, the Court shal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss, which has been fully briefed. No oral argument is necessary. The case involves a health insurance contract rescinded after almost a year, on account of alleged misrepresentations by the insured in procuring the policy. The plaintiff has abandoned Counts III and IY of his complaint, thereby mooting so much of the moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Teamsters Local 623 (“Local 623”), brings this action pursuant to Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185.
1
Local 623 alleges that the defendant, United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”), is improperly seeking to re-arbitrate an issue which was decided in an earlier arbitration under a collective bargaining agree
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
As a result of personal injuries suffered on April 4, 1989, plaintiff Mark Weinerman (“Weinerman”) has brought this diversity action against the City of Philadelphia (“City”), A & J General Carpentry Company, Inc. (“A & J”), the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation (“PHDC”), and Domenic Monte, individually and doing business as A & M Welding Services (“Monte”). Mark Wei...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I.
Introduction
Plaintiffs, Timothy and Catherine Griggs (the Griggs), instituted this products liability action on behalf of their minor son, Zachary, for injuries sustained in a fire, allegedly started by a disposable butane lighter manufactured by defendant, BIC Corporation (BIC). Defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. We ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
The losing candidates in a Court ordered, Labor Department supervised, rerun union election seek revocation of the Court’s Order declaring their opponents elected in accordance with the Secretary of Labor’s Certification of Election. Thus, the Court has before it the motion of Captains Lowen and Kyser to Revoke the Court’s Order (Declaring. Officers Elected in Accordance with ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action arises as a result of defendants* challenge of a judgment by confession' entered by the Clerk of the Court against defendants on August 16, 1990. Spécifically, defendants, Ronald C. Stanko and Patricia A. Stanko, move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to open or vacate the judgment by confession entered by the Clerk of the Court on November 15,1990 in the amount of $...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1
Plaintiff Wal
*518
ter T. Peters, Jr. (“Peters”) alleges that the defendant Delaware River Port Authority of Pennsylvania and New Jersey (“DRPA”) has infringed his constitutional rights of free speech and association, by failing to reappoint him as its Secretary solely because he is a ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is the defendant’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s memorandum and order of December 11, 1991, the plaintiff’s response, and the defendant's reply. For the following reasons the motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
The factual and procedural background of this matter has been set forth in this Court’s prior memorandum of Decem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case concerns a fire which occurred on or about June 8,1989 at plaintiff’s place of business. On October 25, 1990 plaintiff, Great Northeastern Lumber & Millwork Company (“Great Northeastern”), commenced suit against the Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Company (“Pepsi”)
1
and the Vendo Company (“Vendo”). The complaint claimed that a soda vending machine located...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This ease involves a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit brought jointly by pro se plaintiffs Lucinda Hammond and James L. Martin against various defendants. Defendants have moved for a dismissal of the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs have responded to defendants’ motions and have filed a motion for summary judgment. For the reasons discussed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises as a result of the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s enactment of *107automobile insurance reform legislation in February of 1990. See 75 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 1791-1799.7 (“Act 6”). Act 6 required insurers, inter alia, to reduce private passenger motor vehicle insurance by between ten (10) and twenty (20) percent. In reaction to this change in Pennsylvania’s regulatory...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
This action was commenced by plaintiffs on May 6,1991. On September 3,1991, the defendants filed a counterclaim and third party complaint. In response to the plaintiffs’ and third party defendants’ motions to dismiss the counterclaim and third-party complaint, the defendants filed an amended counterclaim and third-party complaint on October 22, 1991. Once again,...
Views: 1
OPINION
Currently before the court is the motion of defendant George G. Zimmerman & Company, Inc. (“Zimmerman & Co.”), Zimmerman Line Slip, Inc. (“ZLS”) and George
*73
G. Zimmerman ( Zimmerman”) (collectively, the “Movants”) for (i) reconsideration and clarification (the “Motion for Reconsideration”) of the letter-opinion and order, filed 8 January 1992 (the “8 January 1992 O...
Views: 2
ORDER
Plaintiff, Robert L. Percell, brings this action alleging that he was terminated from his position with defendant, International Business Machines, Inc. (IBM), on account of his race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq.
The matter is presently before the court on plaintiff’s motion for a jury trial and plaintiff’s motion fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an automobile insurance case in which defendant has moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). Plaintiff has responded. Following an order for additional briefing, defendant filed a second motion to dismiss, to which plaintiff responded, but defendant was vague about the procedural grounds for this second motion. For the reasons given below,...
Views: 3
OPINION
This lawsuit was commenced by the Newark, New Jersey Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, New Jersey State Conference, National Association for the Advancement, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (collectively, the “NAACP”) against the Township of West Orange (“West Orange”) on 31 July 1989 under Title VII of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action based on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), and common law fraud. Defendants Dieker, Kreutzer and Youngers bring before this court motions to dismiss, challenging the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ claim, the particularity of the pleading, the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, and the constitutionality of the RICO sta...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before me on the motion by the Trustees of the Colorado Laborers Health and Welfare Fund (Trustees) for summary judgment in an action under the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 270a-270c. The Trustees argue that the general contractor, John Bowman, Inc. (Bowman), and its surety, the American States Insurance Company (American States), are obliga...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant pled guilty to procuring $263,-200 in home loans by fraudulent misrepresentations, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 2. On September 23, 1991, the court sentenced defendant to twelve months imprisonment and $4,050 in fines. Defendant filed notice to appeal his sentence on October 2, 1991, and on October 4, 1991, defendant moved to stay execution of his sentence o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Richard deY. Manning filed this SEA action
1
to recoup financial losses caused by defendants’ alleged negligence and fraud in inducing plaintiff to purchase Public Service of New Hampshire (“PSNH”) corporate bonds. Plaintiff purchased the PSNH bonds on the recommendation of Frederick M. Fair, an employee of the brokerage firm of Thomson & Mc...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiff Irose Harries commenced this diversity action on September 5, 1991, to recover damages for injuries sustained in an automobile accident while riding in the rear seat of an automobile manufactured by the defendant, General Motors Corporation (“GM”). Harries claims that the back seat was defectively designed and seeks redress based on theories of strict liability...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
These consolidated cases arise out of a dispute between seven Florida hospitals and the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) over whether certain assessments paid by the hospitals into a state-operated malpractice insurance fund constitute costs reimbursable under Medicare’s old system of reimbursement for inpatient hospital services. Before the court ar...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages brought by Rabbi Avi Weiss (“Rabbi Weiss”) against Cardinal Jozef Glemp (“Cardinal Glemp”) alleging slander and defamation. Cardinal Glemp moves to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(2), 12(b)(5), and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds that: (1) the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the Defendant ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before the court are defendant’s omnibus pre-trial motions. Oral argument was heard on February 14, 1992 in Syracuse, New York.
I. BACKGROUND
1
Defendant is charged with five counts of knowingly possessing firearms in or affecting interstate commerce, having previously been committed to a mental institution, in violation of the Gun...
Views: 1
*104
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In this civil case brought pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq.
(“RICO”), after approximately ten weeks of trial, a jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff Nu-Life Construction Corp. (“Nu-Life”) against defendants John Tra-panotto and Stanley Dobrowolski. The jury a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs brought suit alleging violations of their substantive and due process rights *1023 under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (“EHA”), Pub.L. No. 94-142, 89 Stat. 773 (codified as amended at 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1461). Before the Court are defendants’ amended motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment, plaintiffs’ motion for summa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced case, Eugene Iovine, Inc. (“Iovine”), the general contractor for the New York City Health and Hospital Corporation (“NYCH & HC”), brought suit against Rudox Engine and Equipment Company (“Rudox”) for breach of warranty based on Rudox’s contract with Iovine to supply twenty-six motor generator sets to upgrade the elevators at Kings County Hospit...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) charges defendant Martin B. Sloate (“Sloate”) with violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, under the misappropriation theory of liability. This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Sloate to reargue this Court’s denial of his motion t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner Lyn White has petitioned this Court for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and has filed a Motion to Correct Sentence by a Prisoner in Federal Custody, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The petitioner requests that this Court order the United States Bureau of Prisons to credit her eighteen-month sentence, earlier imposed by this Court, with the six months and twenty-one day...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the court is plaintiff’s motion for declaratory judgment and a permanent injunction, and defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint against them for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Background
Plaintiff James Johnson filed a complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(2), 1986 & 1988, alleging violations of his Fifth, Sixth, Eight...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action brought by plaintiff Jeanne C. Casper (“Casper”) against her former employer Paine Webber Incorporated (“PaineWebber Inc.”), its parent company Paine Webber Group, Inc. (“Paine Web-ber Group”) and Ronald M. Schwartz (“Schwartz”), Casper’s former supervisor (collectively, the “Defendants”), for alleged violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizatio...
Views: 3
ORDER AND OPINION
Defendant Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. (“Manufacturers Hanover” or the “Bank”) moves for summary judgment on plaintiff Ross Suttell’s (“Suttell”) age discrimination claim. For the reasons stated at oral argument and below, defendant’s motion is granted.
FACTS
Suttell was hired by Manufacturer Hanover’s Stock Transfer Administration Department as an Account A...
Views: 2
Page 3435
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is currently before the Court on plaintiff’s motion pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B), for reasonable attorney’s fees as the prevailing party in a case against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. For the reasons discussed below, this Court finds the motion premature. Under the analysis set...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Ricardo Andrade brings this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act against Crawford & Company for race and sex discrimination in employment. Andrade alleges that he was effectively forced to leave his job as a casualty adjuster because he was subjected to harsher working conditions than similarly situated white and female employees. Relying on the Civil Rights...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Thomas Delaney, Terrence Delaney and Catherine Delaney (“plaintiffs”) have brought this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against David Gerdon, individually and as a Suffolk County police officer; “John Doe,” individually and as a Suffolk County police officer, and Suffolk County (collectively “defendants”), for alleged violation of plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment right to b...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff John M. Discher filed his complaint March 14, 1991, in Wayne County Circuit Court. Defendant Bridge-stone/Firestone, Inc. [“Bridgestone”] removed the action May 2, 1991.1 Bridge-stone then filed the instant motion for summary judgment January 30,1992. Plaintiff filed his response February 20, 19...
Views: 0
OPINION ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this case, plaintiff Richard Kaufman alleges that his former accountant gave him false and misleading investment advice, resulting in substantial losses for Kaufman and the Kaufman family businesses. Kaufman’s amended complaint charges that between 1983 and 1986, defendants BDO Seidman, Kaufman’s accounting firm, and David Fies, a partner in the accounting firm, fai...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Contrary to the well-known adage that “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery,” in the instant case, imitation has resulted in a charge of trade dress infringement against the defendants. This case involves a rarely-visited area of the law— the interaction of the Lanham Act with the marketing and sale of limited editions and fine art posters based upon the work of a...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Caraneita Bush filed her complaint against defendants Kevin Wheeler, Kevin Glenn and the City of Detroit in Wayne County Circuit Court. Defendants removed the case to this court July 18, 1990, and this court remanded all state law claims July 27, 1990. Defendants filed the instant motion for summary judgment January 15, 19...
Views: 0
Amplicon brought this contract action against Marshfield, alleging that Marsh-field is in breach of its lease agreement. Presently before the court is Amplicon’s motion for summary judgment. Amplicon contends that the undisputed facts establish as a matter of law that Marshfield owes a deposit and interim rent pursuant to the lease agreement. Amplicon contends further that it is entitled to the...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed this complaint with the Wisconsin Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations, Equal Rights Division (DILHR), claiming that defendant violated the Wisconsin Family and Medical Leave Act, Wis.Stat. § 103.10. Defendant removed the case to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). It is before the court now on DILHR’s motion to intervene and on DILHR...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Once again, the Court visits the Picillo Pig Farm, a hazardous waste site in Coventry, Rhode Island. The United States government, through the Environmental Protection Agency, sued American Cyan-amid Company and Rohm & Haas Company for recovery of clean-up (“response”) costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42...
Views: 3
ORDER AND OPINION
This is a consolidated appeal from the bankruptcy court’s denial of appellant’s motions to reject what it contends are unexpired leases with appellees. Appellant brought the proceeding in bankruptcy court pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365(a), which requires a debtor in possession to choose between assumption or rejection of all of its still-to-be-completed (executory) contract...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This is a “reverse” Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case in which the plaintiff seeks to enjoin the government from disclosing certain information in a contract between it and the Air Force for medium launch vehicles and related services (the MLV II contract). The information has been requested by McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co., an unsuccessful bidder'for the MLV II c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
I.
This is an ERISA1 case involving an employer’s liability for withdrawing from a multiemployer pension plan. It arises out of the withdrawal of Middle Fork Corporation (“Middle Fork”), in April 1987, from the United Mine Workers of America 1950 and 1974 Pension Plans (“the Plans”), which are multiemployer pension plans under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(37), 1301(a)(3). Middl...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM On September 15,1986 President Reagan issued Executive Order 12564 1 which requires federal agencies to develop and implement plans to attain a drug-free workplace, in part by the use of compulsory drug testing. Pursuant to this order, the Department of Health and Human Services developed its “Drug-Free Workplace Plan.” The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO STRIKE I. THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Finding that there are material factual disputes which preclude the Court from granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the motion is denied. Robert I. Garcia was hired by the defendant, Ecotech, Inc., on ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is United Airlines, Incorporated’s (“United”) motion to strike portions of Cynthia C. Ribando’s (“plaintiff”) Second Amended Complaint. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants the motion.
FACTS
Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that she was employed as a scheduler in the station services department of United at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Theodore Randall drowned while attempting a swing rope transfer from a fixed platform in the Gulf of Mexico to the M/V SEA SAVAGE. At the time of his death, he was employed by Chevron U.S.A., Inc. (“Chevron”). Chevron had time chartered the M/V SEA SAVAGE, from Sea Savage, Inc., owner of the vessel. Plaintiff, Barbara Randall, individually, on behalf of the estate of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a diversity action and jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Third-
*915
party defendant now moves for summary judgment on the ground that he did not breach any duty owed to third-party plaintiff. I apply the law of Colorado, the forum state. The issue is adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid its resoluti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Margaret Crosby and defendants Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. (“Metropolitan”) and General Motors Corporation (“General Motors”) have filed motions for summary judgment. Metropolitan has also filed a motion for summary judgment on its cross-claim against Joan Crosby. After a consideration of the pleadings, finding no disputed issues of material facts, Defendants’ moti...
Views: 1
On Appeal from the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands BEFORE: STANLEY S. BROTMAN, Acting Chief Judge, District Court of the Virgin Islands, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Sitting by Designation; EDWARD N. CAHN, Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Sitting by Designation; MARIA M. CABRET, Judge of ...
Views: 0
785 F. Supp. 1250 (1992)
FIRST HERITAGE CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITY DEALERS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Robert Volger, Peter S. Viviano, and Harold I. Gach, Defendants.
No. 91-CV-75400-DT.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan.
February 5, 1992.
Stephen M. Landau, Southfield, Mich., for plaintiff.
Wallson G. Knack, Warner, Norcross ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Parties Plaintiffs LaRouche and McCarthy are erstwhile candidates for nomination by the Democratic Party to be President of the United States. They sought to be placed on the presidential preference ballot in the Party’s primary scheduled in accordance with Connecticut law for March 24, 1992. Their request was denied by defendant, who is sued in her official capacity ...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendants Ford Motor Company (Ford) and International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) filed a joint motion for summary judgment on both counts of plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiff has not filed a brief in opposition to the motion. The court has reviewed ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Both defendants in this case were charged with (1) possession with intent to distribute five or more grams of cocaine base (crack) under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(l)(B)(iii), and (2) possession with intent to distribute a detectable amount of cocaine base within 1000 feet of a school under 21 U.S.C. § 860(a).
1
Each was acquitted by the jury. The Court orally...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Defendant NYNEX has filed several motions, in addition to the many previously filed and disposed of by the Court.
1
There is also one new motion by the government. None of the recent motions has substantial merit, and all of them must be denied.
I
Defective Indictment
NYNEX requests that the indictment be dismissed for failure to charge that that c...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, a French bank, has sued the Republic of Paraguay and Banco Central del Paraguay, to enforce the terms of six loan agreements, all but one of which were guaranteed by the Central Bank. Plaintiff now moves for partial summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(a) Fed.R.Civ.P., seeking judgment on Claims One and Four, which relate respectively to the Hospital Loan Agreement ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the pretrial motion of the defendant Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter “FDIC/Receiver”), as receiver of a defunct lending institution (“Vernon”), to appoint a receiver of plaintiffs’ California commercial real estate (the “Property”) pending the foreclosure of a mortgage to which the FDIC has succeeded. The m...
Views: 0
Page 3518
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiff Cummings Properties Management, Inc. owns a parcel of real property which it had been leasing to a bank until the bank was declared insolvent in 1991. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was appointed liquidating agent of the bank, and acquired all of the bank’s assets. On February 13, 1992, agents ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER The petitioner, Tyrone Chavers, currently incarcerated at the Milwaukee county jail, filed each of the above-captioned actions in rapid succession. A review of the complaints in the three actions discloses that the allegations in each stem from the same series of events—Mr. Chavers’ arrest, prosecution and conviction on first degree murder in Wisconsin state court. Accordingly, ...
Views: 0
*760DECISION AND ORDER The petitioner, Tyrone Chavers, currently incarcerated at the Milwaukee county jail, filed both of the above-captioned actions in rapid succession. A review of the complaints in the two actions discloses that the allegations in each stem from the same series of events: Mr. Chavers’ arrest, prosecution and conviction of first degree murder in Wisconsin state court. Accordingl...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On February 10, 1992, defendant American Medical Electronics, Inc., filed a “Notice of Removal” of this action asserting state law breach of contract and Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law claims. The action was originally brought in the circuit court of Ozaukee County, Wisconsin. In its notice of removal, the defendant asserts that this action is properly removable under 28 U.S.C...
Views: 0
RULING ON JOINT MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING STANDARD OF CARE
This case requires the Court to determine the standard of care required of officers and directors in managing and operating a federally insured financial institution under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).
1
The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Cor...
Views: 1
RULING ON FDIC’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO REGULATORY EXCLUSION IN AMERICAN CASUALTY POLICY
This matter is before the Court for a determination of whether the regulatory exclusion set forth in a policy issued to the officers and directors of Sun Belt Federal Bank, F.S.B. (Sun Belt) is valid.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has filed suit against Ameri...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY S & S SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC.
The issue before the Court on this motion for summary judgment is whether an indemnification agreement requires S & S Sprinkler Company, Inc. (hereinafter “S & S”) to indemnify BASF Corporation in this *1237case.1 For reasons which follow, the Court finds that the motion of S & S for summary judgment is granted.
Plaintiffs fil...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS
Plaintiffs for and on behalf of all others similarly situated, brought this action for age discrimination pursuant to The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) (29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.).
This action also includes claims for age discrimination brought under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; Article III, section 2, of the F...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds of res judicata, the statute of limitations, and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted is now before the Court.
1
For the purposes of this motion, the court must accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true and construe all allegations in the...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOTION TO DECLARE THE PENALTY SCHEME OF THE STATUTE AND RELATED SENTENCING GUIDELINES UNCONSTITUTIONAL On September 13, 1991, defendant plead to one count of growing in excess of 100 marijuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The penalty for this offense includes imprisonment for not less than 5 years, nor more than 40 years. 21 U.S.C. *1106 § 841(b)(l)(B)(vii). The sen...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff sues New York State Department of Social Services (“NYSDSS”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 42 U.S.C. § 1985, and 42 U.S.C. § 1988, claiming that defendant violated his rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Defendant moves to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. For the many reasons set forth belo...
Views: 1
OPINION
Mara Kirsh petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus preventing the Sheriff defendants from imprisoning her pursuant to an order of the New York City Civil Court. She also advances a claim for the same relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The history of this case is essential to the determination of the petition, and accordingly is set forth below.
Mara Kirsh and her husband...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING DISCOVERY (# 48)
The issue before the Court is whether a non-party deponent should be compelled to answer questions that he refused to answer at his oral deposition. To place the controversy in context, a recitation of the underlying background facts of this litigation is in order. As culled from the verified complaint and relevant m...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq.,
alleging sex discrimination. In view of the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (“the Act”), plaintiff seeks to amend her complaint to claim compensatory and punitive damages.
1
Defendant objects, arguing the Act sho...
Views: 1
Page 3560
OPINION AND ORDER
Sitting by Designation.
I.
BACKGROUND
The Amended Complaint, following a denial of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, asserts that plaintiffs Lindsey Meader, Harry Williams, Robert Owens, Theodore Bamford, and Ainsley McPhee were disciplined by District Lodge No. 4 Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, AFL-C...
Views: 0
*89 OPINION Plaintiffs Crowd Management Services, Inc. (“Crowd Management”) and James J. DeLoretto (“DeLoretto”) brought this action seeking a refund from the' Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) of payments made to the IRS for assessments and penalties. Plaintiff DeLoretto also brought claims for damages against the United States (“Defendant”) pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7432 (Damages for Fail...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Before the Court is a motion of the plaintiff, Eli N. Bontigao, to enforce an alleged settlement in an employment discrimination action against the defendant Villanova University (“Villanova”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. On December 23, 1991, this Court granted Villanova’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court entered the judgment i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter came before me on the motion of defendants Ricardo Sanz Perez, Ricardo Sanz, S.A., and Nostra, S.A., to open or set aside a default, and on plaintiffs’ competing motion to approve the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge William F. Hall, Jr., recommending entry of default judgment in the amount of $34.4 million.
1
The defendants, Spanish citizens...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff, Donna Combs, as personal representative of the estate of Glen Dale Combs, deceased, filed a petition in the Circuit Court of Texas County, Missouri to recover the benefits of a life insurance policy on the life of Glen Dale Combs. The defendants are Koch Industries, Inc. (“Koch”) and the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Met”). The case was removed to this Court on th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs moved this court on March 13, 1992, to remand the above-entitled action to Rutland Superior Court. They allege that defendant improperly removed the case since the complaint avers no federal question and, alternatively, defendant manifested clear intent to subject itself to state court jurisdiction and to waive its right to remove to federal court.
Sectio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Court has before it the motions for summary judgment of the plaintiffs (filed December 31, 1991; Docket Entry No. 54) and of the sole remaining defendant, the Metropolitan Government 1 (filed January 21, 1992; Docket Entry No. 58). The parties conceded in open court that there is no genuine issue as to a material fact and, therefore, that summary judgment is appropriate. Theref...
Views: 0
Page 3587
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Clay Statmore, an attorney at law and former counsel to the debtors in this Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding and related adversary proceedings, appeals the decision of the bankruptcy court 1 requiring him to disgorge all attorney fees paid him by the debtors. These consolidated appeals, CV91-3246, CV91-3247, and CV91-3248, involve the core bankruptcy proceeding, BK-868, a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff brings this action in diversity to recover on a promissory note and security agreement signed by the defendants. Plaintiff accelerated the note after defendants defaulted twice in making payments and after plaintiff sent a notice of intent to accelerate, giving defendants an opportunity to cure. Although there is really no factual dispute that plaintiff complied wit...
Views: 0
This action calls into question the rights of a private landlord who has leased premises to a foreign mission to the United Nations which has concededly defaulted on its rental obligations for over a year and a half. The premises at issue are the entire twenty-fifth floor of a commercial office building. The action presents the important question, apparently of first impression, whether such a ...
Views: 1
OPINION This § 1983 case involves allegations that the defendant sheriff refused to comply with a state court order which directed that the plaintiff be released from jail during the day to go to work. Presently before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment on the question of liability only. FACTS The underlying facts of this case are not in dispute. On April 27, 1990, plaintiff S...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Cleveland Institute of Electronics (“CIE”) brings this action for a refund of taxes, interest, and penalties that were assessed against, and collected from, CIE by the United States. The government claims that CIE’s sales persons are employees from whom CIE must withhold federal income taxes. CIE counters that its sales persons are independent contractors, a...
Views: 0
*64
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Grant Peck, sues under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, to compel defendant, the Central Intelligence Agency, to release certain classified documents. Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is gr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ON ROGER M. MARINO’S MOTION TO STRIKE AND FOR COSTS AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES . This case arises in the wake of a general downward trend in the value of computer industry stock. Plaintiffs, as members of a class of purchasers of shares ...
Views: 2
ORDER MODIFYING AND FINALIZING TENTATIVE ORDER
On January 21,1992, this court entered a tentative order specifying the claims plaintiff may pursue in this action and the relief to which plaintiff is entitled if she prevails. We invited the parties to file briefs by February 6, 1992 contesting any matter addressed in the order. The tentative order was to have become final on that date with...
Views: 2
In this securities fraud case, Moore Medical Corporation (“Moore Medical”) and its numerous individual codefendants move to dismiss the complaint
1
pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 9(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.
The motion is denied.
*182
I.
Plaintiffs are shareholders who bought stock in Moore Medical, a pharmaceuticals company, during the asserted class period of May 10, ...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss those claims in Counts I, II, and III of the Complaint that arise from transactions which occurred in 1985 as barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and to dismiss Count II in its entirety for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court has carefully considered the submissions of th...
Views: 0
*321
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
On February 28, 1992, the court ruled from the bench that defendant Bonita House owed a duty to provide COBRA continuation benefits to Isis Coble under the circumstances described below. This written order is intended to explain the court’s analysis of this novel ERISA issue.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS.
The f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a declaratory judgment action to clarify counter-plaintiff The Gillette Company’s (“Gillette’s”) right to recover damages, in its counterclaim for patent infringement, against counter-defendant Scripto-Tokai Corporation. Counter-defendant Scripto-Tokai Corporation is the successor by merger to Scripto, Inc.
The counter-defendant’s motion to clarify Gillet...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action concerns the alleged breach of a settlement agreement. In 1983, plaintiff Carpenter Technology Corp. entered into a settlement with defendant Armco, Inc. which resolved a patent validity suit filed by Carpenter against Armco in 1982. In 1990, Carpenter filed the present action alleging that Armco breached the settlement agreement by according a lower effec...
Views: 2
OPINION
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Before the Court is an issue arising from the ongoing bankruptcy proceedings of Continental Airlines, Inc. (“Continental”), one of the nation’s largest airlines. In 1987 Continental entered into an agreement (“Joint Venture Agreement”) with Air Micronesia, Inc. (“AMI”) to provide air service to certain areas in the Pacific.
1
The Ban...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court are Harold Adkins’ (“Adkins”) and Mid-America Growers, Incorporated’s (“Mid-America”) objections to Magistrate Judge Gottschall’s January 24, 1992, Report and Recommendation (“Report”). The Report is modified as set forth below.
FACTS
Adkins filed suit claiming Mid-America deprived him of overtime wages to which he was entitled under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is Billy LeMarr’s (“Le-Marr”) petition for costs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). For reasons set forth below, the court denies the motion.
FACTS
The amended complaint and counterclaim reveal that LeMarr advertised his 1972 Turbo Super Viking Bilanca single engine plane for sale in the February, 1987 edition of a national magazine. Kenneth C. Knud-son (“Kn...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This petition to compel arbitration is before the court on respondents’ second notice of removal. Petitioner opposes the removal, contending that respondents should not be permitted to remove on a ground that could have been presented in the first removal petition they filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) and because all of the respondents have not joined in the removal...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
This removal action poses difficult and challenging questions implicating the federal removal statute, the Wisconsin “direct action” statute, and “pendent party” jurisdiction. The action, which was improperly removed, will be remanded to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
I.
The action stems from the tragic death of Tracy L. Gibson following ...
Views: 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction and Analysis. 1239-1240
II. The Secretary’s Motion to Dismiss Shall be Granted in Part and Denied in Part
A. Given the Secretary’s Own Policy Statements, Plaintiffs May Defend Against Collection by the Secretary on the Basis of an Alleged Origination Relationship Between the Lenders and CSW 1241
B. Plaintiffs Have Adequately Alleged an Estop...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action for review of an agency decision or for declaratory relief brought pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. Plaintiffs are challenging defendant’s decision to deny them payments under the Disaster Assistance Act of 1988. Defendant found plaintiffs to be persons whose qualifying gross revenues exceeded $2 million annually, and thus ineligible for disaster payments....
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is a class action on behalf of those who bought stock in Adobe Systems, Inc. (“Adobe”) between March 6 and May 24, 1990. The plaintiffs allege that during that period defendants artificially inflated the price of Adobe's stock by issuing false or misleading public statements in violation of §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Ex...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is the Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC”) Petition for Summary Enforcement of Twelve Administrative Subpoenas
Duces Tecum
which were served upon American Casualty Company, Continental Casualty Company, and James DeRoberts and Dick DeRoberts & Company. The Court heard arguments on this petition on March 18, 1992, and upon careful consideration of the a...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This is an action for breach of contract, fraud, and bad faith refusal to pay benefits allegedly due under an insurance contract. Defendant filed a notice of removal in this Court on January 30, 1992, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441(a). Plaintiff now moves to remand this action to state court on the grounds that removal was untimely. BACKGROUND On De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, Jonathan Muenstermann, a minor, and his mother Margaret Muenster-mann, both as mother and next friend, bring this suit against the Government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b), 2671-2680. Gerard E. Mitchell and Christopher Mitchell represented the Plaintiffs. Counsel for the government were Dale Kelberman an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
These consolidated cases
1
are before the court on defendants’ Motion to Vacate Preliminary Injunctions maintaining the status quo and prohibiting the lodging of two inmates in one cell, referred to herein as “double celling” or “double bunking,” in B, B North, C and D blocks within the Was
*1009
atch Unit of the Utah State Prison (USP...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Mileto and McCormick were hired as general inside laborers at the Defendant’s Pursglove # 15 Mine in February 1981. Their employment was governed by the National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreements between the UMWA and the Defendant.
In December 1985, Plaintiffs filed separate complaints with the EEOC, alleging that they had been subjected to continuous form...
Views: 1
On May 9, 1991, Bass instituted this suit against Energy Transportation Corporation (ETC)
1
under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.App. 688 (1988) and under general admiralty law for injuries which Bass sustained on board one of ETC’s vessels, the S.S. LNG Aquarius, while employed by ETC as an unlicensed seaman. Plaintiff alleges that on February 11, 1989, when the S.S. LNG Aquarius was off t...
Views: 0
ORDER This is an employment discrimination case. Plaintiff, Brunetta Thomas, claims that she was discriminatorily discharged by Victoria’s Secret Stores, and has been continually harassed by employees of that company ever since. The court has issued a number of prior orders in this case dealing with her requests for injunctive relief, and also dealing with discovery-related issues. Thomas' deposit...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION
Early on the morning of August 4, 1991, a Sunday, defendants Merrick Bill Thomas, Jr., Milton Rodriguez Valencia, and Victori-ano A. Minotta were stopped on a highway near Carthage, Texas, by an officer of the Texas Department of Public Safety for alleged safety-belt law violations. At the present time, they are awaiting trial on federal felony cocaine trafficki...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER REJECTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
This matter is presently before the Court on the Objections of the Respondent to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Virginia M. Morgan in which the Magistrate Judge recommended that this Court grant Petitioner David Bunker’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus purs...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court upon the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On December 2, 1991, the Defendant, R.D. Jones Excavating, Inc. filed a memorandum contra to which the Plaintiffs filed a reply.
FACTS
On March 26, 1991, the Plaintiffs, M. L. Noe, Administrator and the Trustees for the ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
The three plaintiffs are stockholders of defendant; in addition, plaintiff Stewart Austin is a business agént and plaintiffs Daniel J. Daly and Leonard Hoffman are shop stewards of Local 1-2, Utility Workers Union (the “Union”), which represents defendant’s employees. They sue as shareholders only. Defendant supplies gas, electricity and steam to customers in the New Yor...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This Motion for Prejudgment Attachment has been made by the plaintiff in the
*767
action, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (“Nationwide” or “Plaintiff”). Nationwide has moved this Court for an order to attach certain assets and bank accounts of the individual defendant in the action, Ronald Whiteford. For the reasons that follow, Nationwide’s motion for ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, asserting that she is a “prevailing party” under that section in having successfully secured the relief sought in this action.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Jennifer Kissinger, is a veterinary student at the defendant veterinary college (hereinafter the “colleg...
Views: 0
ORDER
Melvin Coney (“plaintiff”) filed the instant action on August 7, 1987, against the defendants, Georgia Department of Human Resources (“DHR”), the Commissioner of DHR, James G. Ledbetter (“Ledbetter”), and the Superintendent of Central State Hospital, Myers Kurtz (“Kurtz”), in both their individual and official capacities, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he was racially harasse...
Views: 2
Page 3683
ORDER
This action is before the court on Magistrate Judge Feldman’s Report and Recommendation [# 60-1], and on plaintiff’s motions to introduce additional evidence [# 67-1], amend the pretrial order and complaint [# 67-2], and try the case to a jury [# 67-3]. Both plaintiff and defendant have filed objections to Magistrate Feld-man’s Report and Recommendation, and defendant opposes each o...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Vincent H. Alvarez-Pisanelli, a citizen of New Jersey, commenced this personal injury action against defendants Hertz Puerto Rican Cars, Inc. (“Hertz”) and its insurer Corporación Insular de Seguros (“CIS” or “insurer”), both Puerto Rico corporations, for injuries sustained when he was struck by one of defendant Hertz’ leased autos. The vehicle was being driven by Rubé...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case involves several complicated sentencing issues. Kenneth F. Boula and Earl Dean Gordon, the defendants, were convicted of mail fraud in 1990 and were sentenced accordingly. The defendants appealed their sentences. On appeal, the defendants’ original sentences were vacated; and the case was remanded on May 14, 1991 for resentencing.
BACKGROUND
In the l...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION TO DISMISS, MOTION TO ALTER FINAL PRE-TRIAL ORDER, AND MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS LIST
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s motion in limine and/or for a partial summary judgment (doc. 59), the Defendants’ response (doc. 63), and the Plaintiff’s reply (doc. 66). Also before the Court is the Defend...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The present action is a class action prosecuted pursuant to section 10701(a) of Title
*938
49 of the United States Code and former section 1(5) of the Interstate Commerce Act (49 U.S.C. § 1(5)). The class which the plaintiffs represent consists of all persons, partnerships or entities who, during the two-year period from September 12, 1978, to September 1...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Commercial Union Insurance Company seeks a declaratory judgment against Defendants Leon and Carol Horne, declaring a marine insurance policy void and thereby precluding any recovery by Defendants for the loss of their yacht.
1
This Court has admiralty and maritime jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Plaintiff and Defendants each move pursuant to Fed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of the plaintiffs’ civil rights, the ten defendants uniformly move to dismiss the action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), or to transfer venue of this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.
The primary iss...
Views: 3
*137
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Graduate Management Admission Council (“GMAC”), moves pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65 for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendants (collectively referred to as “the State”) from enforcing New York Education Law sections 341 and 342 (“Standardized Testing Act” or “STA") against GMAC of in connection with tests or rel...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Juan Lacen-Remigio, commenced this action alleging negligence in the administration of loan agreements on the part of the Veterans Administration (“VA”) and of various federal officials. Specifically, plaintiff claims that defendants mistakenly sought payment from him of monies owed on a VA loan granted to a different person. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Rosevita Charter Construction Corporation (“Rosevita”), commenced this action against the United States government and the United States Department of Justice seeking release of the vessel “Lady Sasson”, which was seized by the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”). Plaintiff also seeks damages in that the charter company was deprived of the vessel’s use dur...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs are students in Massachusetts public institutions of higher education who are not citizens of Massachusetts. They have brought this case seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the Members of the Massachusetts Board of Regents of Higher Education (the “Regents”) and the President and Trustees of various Massachuset...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it a bankruptcy appeal brought by creditor-appellant Caribe Hydroblasting Corp. The Court finds that no oral argument is necessary in this case because “the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Bankruptcy Rule 8012(3).
The issue on appeal is w...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, in this suit for age discrimination by a former secretary of Hospital Auxilio Mutuo. The plaintiff claims age discrimination pursuant to both federal and Puerto Rico Commonwealth statutory laws. The defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment must be granted and the Jury Trial of March 24, 1992 vacated, for the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it a number of Motions to Dismiss submitted by defendants: New York City Board of Education (docket entry No. 21); New York State Commissioner of Education (docket entry No. 23); the United Federation of Teachers (docket entry No. 32); and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (docket entry No. 6). The plaintiff Eligió Castro has brought suit
pro se
...
Views: 0
OPINION REGARDING JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Professional Hockey Club Central Sports Club of the Army’s (“Hockey Club”) Motion for Temporary and Preliminary Injunction. In that motion, Plaintiff asks the Court to issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction barring Defendant Red Wings, Inc. (“Red Wings”) from inte...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case is before the Court for review of a Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The Magistrate Judge recommends reversal of a decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”) denying Sandra Suranie’s claim for disability benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (1988)....
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL AND STATE CLAIMS
Deborah Witte sues her employer, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, for depriving her of due process in violation of her federal constitutional rights in connection with a promotion she was allegedly promised but which was given to another employee.
See
42 U.S.C. § 1983. She does not sue any of the defendant’s officials in their personal ca...
Views: 0
Defendants Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Comptroller of the Currency of the United States (the “Comptroller”) move to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
*1311
BACKGROUND
The plaintiffs, Hale House Center, Inc., Canaan Baptist Church of Christ, Canaan Housing Development Fund, Inc., Canaan Baptist ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This is a motion by the plaintiff to amend her complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). This action arises under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), alleging discrimination on the basis of sex. In January, 1988, the plaintiff filed a charge of employment discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). The EEOC d...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This Motion to Dismiss/Motion for Summary Judgment arises out of an action to recover amounts allegedly due the plaintiff, Homewood Corporation (“Homewood”), from the defendant, Jack Kemp, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). For the reasons discussed below, the Court concludes that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking. In lieu of dismissal, the Cour...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
Yahya Ahmed (“defendant” or “Ahmed”) is charged, under Title 18, United States Code, section 3146, with failing to appear before the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, as required by the conditions of bail established in this District by Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger. Defendant has moved for my recusal, or, in the alternative, for dismissal o...
Views: 4
ORDER NO. 449 IN THE MATTER OF JOHNSON CONTROLS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND BILL OF COSTS
Before the Court are several motions filed by Johnson Controls, Inc. for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees Under Puerto Rico Rule 44.1(d) or, in the Alternative, Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (docket No. 15821), filed on October 25, 19901 and Bill of Costs (docket No. 15709), filed on October 9, 1...
Views: 1
Page 3714
ORDER THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon Tandy Credit Corporation’s (“Tandy”) appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida denying Tandy’s Application For Order Directing Trustee Or Debtor To Deliver Possession Of Consumer Goods. 127 B.R. 285. The parties have fully briefed the issues herein, and the Court heard argument of counsel on Fr...
Views: 0
Page 3715
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court are Plaintiff Old Republic Insurance Company’s (“Republic”) Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiffs Steve Tarris, Jr. and Comprehensive Health Care Associates, Inc.’s (“CHCA”) Partial Motion for Summary Judgment; and Third-Party Defendant Unigard Security Insurance Company’s (“Unigard”) Motion for Summary Ju...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR REHEARING AND RECONSIDERATION This cause is before the Court on Plaintiffs motion of March 12, 1992 requesting the Court to reconsider the dismissal of her action for failure to serve the appropriate parties within the six (6) month statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b). 787 F.Supp. 197. Plaintiff asserts that the Court should reconsider its denial of permitting...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this civil action, the plaintiff, Lotus Development Corporation (“Lotus”), seeks damages and equitable relief for alleged infringement by defendant, Borland International, Inc. (“Borland”), of the Lotus copyright in its computer software program, Lotus 1-2-3. This is the same copyright for the infringement of which Lotus has obtained relief under this court’s decis...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it (i) a Request for Summary Judgment on plaintiffs Complaint filed by defendants Larue, Angleró, Del Valle and PREPA, (ii) a Request for Summary Judgment on plaintiff’s Complaint filed by defendants Ruiz, Smith, Joyce, Soto and Schellekens, (iii) a Request for Dismissal of Claim Regarding Denial of Tenure filed by defendants Ruiz, Smith, Larue, Joyc...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Gail Whitaker, brings this action against the Clementon Housing Authority and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) alleging statutory and constitutional violations in connection with her termination from the section 8 low income housing program of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437. The case is presently before the c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
We attach the “Report of the Special Master Regarding the Resolution of Asbestos Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases in the Federal and State Courts in New York City” and congratulate him and his staff for a job well done. As a result of the efforts of judges and staff and the Special Master in the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, coupled with the resolution of the Manvi...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction In this case, plaintiffs, two lending associations within the Farm Credit System, are suing the Farm Credit Administration (“FCA”) for allegedly violating their right under the Farm Credit Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2001, et seq. (the “Act”), to be free from competition within their exclusive territories. Essentially, at issue here is whether the FCA misconstrued ...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION
Applicant, Reginald Dean, filed this ha-beas application under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, attacking his sentence and convictions for his participation in two bank robberies, which were in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113.
1
An earlier application raising different claims had been dismissed on the merits. The civil action was referred to the Honorable Judith Guthr...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
The third-party defendants in this action have moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss the third-party complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons stated below, the motion of the third-party defendants is granted.
Background
I. The Main Action
Plaintiffs have brought this action against defendan...
Views: 0
OPINION ON PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES Plaintiff has moved to reopen this case under Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the purpose of awarding counsel fees pursuant to the Social Security Act (SSA), 42 U.S.C. 406(b), and the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d). The Government does not oppose the award of fees under the SSA, or the reopening of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This Part I matter arises out of the government’s attempt to enforce an Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) summons over the Fifth Amendment objections of respondent Ira Blumberg. For the reasons set forth below, the summons will be enforced. BACKGROUND On May 14, 1987 the IRS served Blum-berg with a Collection Summons requiring him to appear at the White Plains ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it Defendants’ Motion for Judgment of Acquittal After Dis
*276
charge of Jury, which was filed pursuant to Rule 29(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is hereby DENIED.
I. Background
Defendants’ motion arises out of the trial of four defendants, Joaquin Cardona Sandoval, Alej...
Views: 0
ORDER The Court has before it petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The petitioner challenges the legality of his confinement on the grounds that: his guilty plea was not voluntary; the United States Sentencing Guidelines are unconstitutional; mandatory minimum sentences deprive the Court of necessary sentencing discretion; and that the impos...
Views: 0
OPINION
This suit arises out of picketing by the defendant unions at the offices of plaintiff R.M. Perlman, d/b/a Rebecca Moses Collection (“RMC”), a garment industry concern, and at various other locations where RMC was doing business directly or through its contractors. The objective of this picketing, conducted between September 15, 1990 and March 28, 1991, was to compel RMC to enter into a jo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights when he was held in segregated housing for more than two weeks after being classified to general population immediately after his transfer to the Northern Nevada Correctional Center (NNCC). This court previously granted summary judgment fo...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In the summer of 1989, I presided over a sixteen week trial, following which defendant Eugene Robert Wallaeh was convicted by the jury of various violations of federal criminal law arising out of his activities in connection with the Wedtech Corporation. That conviction was reversed on May 31, 1991 by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and remanded for a new trial, s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER The issue before the Court is one of apparent first impression in this circuit. A tax protester filed income tax forms seeking a refund, setting forth huge sums of money as his earnings, which sums were obviously fictitious. There was no tax evasion, no tax loss and no false tax credits involved. No one at the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) seriously considered m...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER The Court has before it defendant Secretary of Health and Human Services Opposition to Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (EAJA). The defendant claims that the Application for Attorney’s Fees is untimely. In addition the defendant asserts that the requested fees should be reduced, as much of the legal work docume...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case is related to
Jordan v. Ber-man,
758 F.Supp. 269 (E.D.Pa.1991). The published opinion sets forth the facts which underlie this litigation and they will not be recounted at length herein. As in
Ber-man,
plaintiffs assert a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants deprived them of property without due process. Presently before the cou...
Views: 0
Page 3771
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this case, a landowner, Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company (“RF & P”) sued numerous defendants for dumping hazardous waste at its scrap recycling and disposal site, claiming the defendants were liable for cleaning up the site under CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9607, and Virginia common law. One of the defendants, Washington Gas, allegedly sent to RF & P’s s...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
Familiarity with this case is assumed. Therefore only the facts necessary to an
*74
understanding of the issues raised by Magistrate Judge DiBianco’s January 28, 1991, report-recommendation and the objections thereto will be set forth herein.
This court previously granted the motion for summary judgment of foreclosure and sal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
The court has before it the above-referenced matter on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Western Division 130 B.R. 990; jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
The proceeding below involved the debtors’ objection to claims filed by the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”); the litigation that ensued ...
Views: 1
Page 3849
ORDER
Before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
FACTS
Plaintiff William P. Healy (“Healy”) brought this action under Section 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132, seeking declaratory and other equitable relief. In a four count complaint, Healy claims he is entitled to be...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING FINAL JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Judgment, file dated September 9, 1991. Having considered the Motion, response, replies, and the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, THE COURT herein files the following Memorandum Opinion. MEMORANDUM OPINION Background Plaintiff Beatriz Bor...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Brosse U.S.A., Inc. (“Brosse”) has moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss Plaintiff Leon Firman Wood, Jr.’s (“Wood”) diversity complaint. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part,
Background
Wood is a resident and citizen of the State of New Jersey who alleges that he is “over the age of forty...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced prosecution, defendants are charged with, inter alia, narcotics-related offenses and attempting to interfere with the testimony of a witness in an official proceeding. More particularly, count one charges Juan Molina (“Molina”), Luis Francisco Cortez (“Cortez”), Jaime Luis Figueroa (“Figueroa”), and Edwin Skerrett Melendez (“Melendez”), with conspiracy...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION Plaintiffs allege that the defendants’ policy regarding the seizure of Food Stamp Identification Cards (“the Cards”) contravenes the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution (applied against the defendants by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment) as well as the Food Stamp Act. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief; they have also moved for class certification. In ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff, Levelt Francois, filed this
pro se
action against the defendant, the University of the District of Columbia (“UDC”), alleging that UDC violated rights guaranteed under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (“FERPA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, and under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by releasing a transcript of his academic record to an agent of the United States Attorney’s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Anthony Pisa’s tavern, the Golden Dream Restaurant, in Tiverton, Rhode Island, burned down on December 5, 1989. Pisa had insured the premises with a policy (“the Policy”) from Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London (“Underwriters”), which covered damage resulting from fire. Pisa brought this diversity suit
1
roughly one year after the fire to ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it a sentencing determination with respect to defendant Harvey Alter. From 1987 to early 1989, Alter directed Manhattan House, a now defunct halfway house under federal contract and located in the heart of New York City
1
. In June, 1990, Alter was indicted on twenty criminal counts, including several counts of sexual abuse of federal pris...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION AND FACTS
Plaintiff Theodore di Stefano has moved for a preliminary injunction to prevent the Treasury Department’s Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”) from enforcing a Temporary Cease and Desist Order (“OTS Temporary Order”) issued on October 31, 1991, pursuant to a provision of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter came before the court upon the verified petition of Robert H. Miller, Regional Director of Region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, supported by affidavits, declarations, and exhibits, for a preliminary injunction pursuant to Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (29 U.S.C., § 160(j)), herein called ...
Views: 1
*177MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs filed this action in San Francisco Superior Court on August 12, 1991. On September 30, 1991 defendants timely filed a notice of removal in which it was alleged that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185. On January 31, 1992 this court sue sponte is...
Views: 1
Page 3879
OPINION
This is a dispute between a labor union and a number of railroads
1
over the carriers’ plan to reduce certain crews on their trains. An Arbitration Panel awarded to the railroads the right to reduce train crews to a single engineer and one brakeman, and it also gave the railroads the right involuntarily to buy out the remaining, surplus workers. The railroads seek to ha...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) (West Supp.1991), seek an award of attorney fees after successfully challenging a denial of disability benefits by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”). They also have requested a cost-of-living increase using the “Legal Services” category of the Con...
Views: 0
*1100
OPINION AND ORDER
On September 13, 1991, this court dismissed, on the ground of the statute of limitations, the § 10(b)-5- claims which plaintiffs had brought against defendant Price Waterhouse & Co. Plaintiffs now bring this motion pursuant to section 27A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asking the court to reinstate those claims. Price Waterhouse opposes this motio...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This litigation concerns the validity of a government contract award made to inter-venor-defendant AUTEC Range Services (“ARS”) by defendant United States Navy. Plaintiff GE Government Services, Inc. (“GEGS”), a bidder for the contract, challenges the award’s validity under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), as amended, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701
et seq.,
the Com...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in this civil RICO action allege in their complaint that the defendant, *169James Wade, conspiring with Marcus A. Foster Community Health Center (“Marcus Foster”), fraudulently induced plaintiffs to lend money to Marcus Foster so that it could buy stock in Wade’s company, Wade Communications Inc. (“WCI”), a cable franchise. Plaintiffs claim that, in violation of th...
Views: 0
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is the motion of United Merchants and Manufacturing, Inc. (“UM & M”) to dismiss the bankruptcy appeal filed by the ILGWU National Retirement Fund (“the Fund”), and UM & M’s motion for an appeal bond. UM & M contends that the Court should dismiss the Fund’s appeal because substantial consummation of the reorganization plan of UM & M has rendered the ap...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled action came on regularly for trial before the court sitting without a jury on July 8-11 and 22, 1991. Fred R. Silvester and Claudia F. Berry appeared as counsel for plaintiff and Jean Reed
*998
Haynes, Thomas E. Dutton and James S. Jardine appeared as counsel for defendants. Having heard the testimony, examined the ot...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION 1 The court has before it the Motion by plaintiff Granite School District (“Granite”) for Summary Judgment and the Motion by Shannon M. (“Shannon”) to Affirm Judgments of Administrative Hearing Officer and of State Review Panel. Shannon also requests attorney’s fees. Subsequent to argument on this matter, Shannon also moved the court for reheari...
Views: 0
Page 3900
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case is before the Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Virginia, Lynch-burg Division, from an order entered August 28, 1991, denying Hutter Associates’ Motion to vacate the Court’s Order for Relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. Hutter Associates maintains the Bankruptcy Court erred in denying their motion to vacat...
Views: 0
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner filed an “Amended Petition Re: I.R.S. Summons” seeking an order to quash an Internal Revenue Service Collection Summons. Subsequently, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the- petition on the ground that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and that the petition fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and (6) o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a diversity libel suit. Plaintiffs, an individual fundraiser and one of his nonprofit organizations, sue various media defendants for alleged defamations arising out of a newspaper report about a charitable project to send holiday care packages to American military personnel stationed in the Persian Gulf during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The cent...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on Defendant Arlington County’s Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 56 on the grounds that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
In order to resolve the Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment as to Count II of the Complaint, the court ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This appeal arises out of the bankruptcy court’s confirmation of a Chapter 9 Plan
*613
for Adjustment of Debts for the Wolf Creek Valley Metropolitan District No. 4 (hereinafter, the “District”). The effect of this plan, which was an eleventh-hour amendment of a previous plan, was to discharge all properties from previous years’ tax levies, save t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action filed under the Federal Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 794 (1988)) (the Act). Federal question jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1980). Defendant Weld County Sheriffs Department (the Department) moves for partial summary judgment regarding compensatory damages. Plaintiff Bret Tanberg (Tan-berg) moves for summar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is a civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1
Plaintiffs M. Matthew Lahaza and Yolanda M. Lahaza (“Plaintiffs”), who are husband and wife, seek to recover damages from defendants Gerald J. Azeff (“Azeff”), Code Inspections, Inc. (“CII”), Mary K. Smithson (“Smithson”), Newtown Township, and Norman McGinnis (“McGinnis”).
Defendants have all filed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On March 26, 1992, Louis F. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services and the defendant in this action (“the Secretary”), released statistics revealing that over one million Americans are currently infected with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, HIV. In February of this year alone, 209,693 people were diagnosed as having Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, AIDS, a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs are 26 former class 1 Foreign Service Officers (“FS-ls”) who were obliged to leave the Foreign Service after they were not promoted into the Senior Foreign Service (“SFS”). They challenge a decision of the Foreign Service Grievance Board upholding the personnel system developed by the Foreign Service in response to a congressional directive that the Service assure a proper fl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs filed this action seeking a declaratory judgment from this Court establishing that they were entitled to overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. They also sought back pay for the two years before they filed their complaint as well as the time from the date of filing *598 to the date of the decision for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter comes before the court on defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment. After careful consideration of the defendants’ motion, the plaintiff’s opposition, the defendants’ reply to the opposition thereto, and the entire record in this case, the Court concludes that the motion for summary judgment should be granted.
I. Background1
On September 13,...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This cause of action arises on the application of the following (hereinafter “the Plaintiffs”): Haitian Centers Council, Inc., National Coalition for Haitian Refugees, Inc., Immigration Law Clinic of the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization, (the “Haitian Service Organizations”), Dr. Frantz Guerrier, Pascal Henry, Lauriton Guneau, Medilieu Sorel St. Fleur, Dieu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a private response cost recovery action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601
et seq.
Plaintiffs also aver claims under Michigan statutory and common law. Defendant Hoover Group has filed a counterclaim under CERCLA for contribution.
This matter is before the Court on ...
Views: 1
Page 3948
ORDER
Plaintiff’s motions for remand (document # 12) and to designate and join a “DOE” defendant (document # 13) are presently before the court. The motion for remand argues that there is no diversity of citizenship due to the insurance “direct action” exception of the diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). The motion to join the “DOE” defendant seeks to add as a defendant one of the ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Following a month long trial, the jury returned its verdict in this case on December 20, 1991. The jury found that the defendants had violated Section 10(b) of the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act, Section 12(2) of the 1933 Securities Act, and Section 80A.01 of the Minnesota securities laws, and that defendants had committed common law misrepresentation. It found the federal securit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Anna Valmonte, whose name is listed in the New York State Central Register of Child Abusers, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 challenging the constitutionality of Central Register’s procedures. Currently pending before this Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion is granted ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Third-party defendant, Total Minatome Corporation (“TMC”), filed a motion for summary judgment seeking contractual indemnity from defendant, Penrod Drilling Corporation (“Penrod”). Penrod filed a timely opposition and a cross-motion for summary judgment seeking contractual indemnity from TMC. Having reviewed the memoranda in support, the oppositions, and the applicable l...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the above-styled action, presented on briefs and documents and taken under submission for consideration of the issue of permanent injunctive relief. The Court hereby issues its findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). To the extent that any of the following findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopte...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs in civil action 90-0849 have filed a motion to reinstate their previously dismissed claims. Plaintiffs’ motion was heard on February 19, 1992. Defendants’ opposition to plaintiffs’ motion involves a constitutional challenge to a Congressional statute. Consistent with Local Rule 1.10, the court has therefore withheld ruling until the Attorney General has had an opportunity to address ...
Views: 6
Page 3989
*479 MEMORANDUM The Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) moves the Court to reconsider the Court’s denial of FNMA’s appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court dated January 31, 1991. The bankruptcy court’s order denied FNMA’s “Motion to Vacate Voluntary Dismissal Order and Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Section 109(g) and for Sanctions Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9011,” which were fi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case concerns a $10 million loan commitment in connection with the attempted purchase of a 177 acre tract in Springfield, Michigan. Plaintiff LLMD of Michigan, Inc., General Partner, trading as Wintoll Associates Limited Partnership (“LLMD”), the potential purchaser, has brought this diversity action against potential lenders, Marine Midland Realty Credit Corporation (“Mar...
Views: 0
Page 3991
OPINION
Presently before the court are the following partial summary judgment motions:
1) plaintiff Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. (“Chemical Leaman”) moves that this court find:
*848
a) that the cleanup costs which it is obligated to pay pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) with respect to ground and surface ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendant New Jersey State Commission of Investigation (“SCI”), an agency of the
*236
State of New Jersey created by N.J.S.A. § 52:9M-1, has moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted and on the ground that the claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For the rea...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is Jeffrey L. Sofferin’s (“plaintiff”) motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), for an order allowing interlocutory appeal of the court’s March 9, 1992 order. As stated below, the motion is granted. FACTS Plaintiff sued American Airlines, Inc. (“American”) and certain of its employees alleging that American discriminated against plaintiff because of his religion. Plaintiff s...
Views: 2
ORDER The order entered February 4, 1992 (document $ 3), is hereby amended to read as follows: On January 22, 1992, plaintiff filed a Joinder of Plaintiff Barry L. Solomon in Motion for Withdrawal of Reference (document $ 1) in this Court. Defendant had filed a motion for withdrawal of reference (document #7 of BK-N-91-24JHT) in the Bankruptcy Court. Such motion, however, does not appear in the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative for Summary Judgment, and the Plaintiff’s Motion
*1180
for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff District of Columbia seeks a determination that the Bureau of the Census’ inclusion of Lorton Correctional Facility inmates in the 1990 Census as residents of Virginia rather than of the District of...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEPENDANT GEORGE’S MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OP SUMMONS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION OR TO DISMISS
On October 18, 1990, plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint adding Sherman George and Planned Facilities Corporation as defendants. Plaintiff asserts that defendant Extradition Corporation of America:
was the alter ego of defendant SHERMAN GEORGE and PLANNED FACILIT...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This case arises out of an employment dispute in which plaintiff Michael Cohen alleges that he was treated unfairly by officers of the City of Haverhill in his attempt to become a police officer. Cohen is not new to the judicial system. He prevailed against the City of Haverhill on complaints filed with the Civil Service Commission in ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff alleges that he was removed from the position of Chief of the Nevada Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Abuse (“BADA”) in violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 § 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that he lost his job because he was an alcoholic, although (he alleges) he was fully able to perform the d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
F.W. Sims, Inc. (“Sims”), a sub-contractor who worked on the construction of the Wind Watch Hotel in Islip, New York, brings this action against Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), seeking tó collect $118,101.93 on a labor and material bond issued by Federal which guarantees payment to those who furnished labor and materials under contract to E.W. Howell Co., Inc. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In this case, what would normally be a typical state court tort action, is complicat
*573
ed by the fact that both the plaintiff and the respective defendants have ties to Capital Resources Corporation — an entity now in the midst of Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.
The defendants move, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1412, to transfer venue of th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Margiotta alleges that this court committed error in sentencing him to a 5-year term of supervised release to follow his incarceration. For the reasons set forth below, Margiotta’s section 2255 petition to vacate his sentence is denied.
On November 3, 1988, Margiotta pled guilty to a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, conspiracy to distribute and possess wi...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ORDER TO REQUIRE PRODUCTION OF TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS AND SENTENCING TRANSCRIPTS Presently before the Court is Defendant’s December 23, 1991 Motion for Order to Require Production of Trial Transcripts and Sentencing Transcripts. Defendant, now serving a sentence in federal prison, claims to be in the process of preparing a motion to ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION
In this action, plaintiffs, Albradco, Inc. (“Albradco”) and Elias Strum (“Strum”) (collectively “declaratory plaintiffs”), now move the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, for a declaratory judgment, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202, declaring that N.Y.B.C.L. § 630 is preempted by section 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §...
Views: 1
Page 4026
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s February 15, 1991 motion for summary judgment. In this motion, Defendant argues, in major part, that an implied covenant of good faith does not limit its right unconditionally to contract with Plaintiffs’ competitors. Oral argument was heard on January 30, 19...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of Country National Bank and certain of the Bank’s directors to dismiss Marshall S. Mayer’s second amended counterclaim and third-party complaint for failure to state a claim. For the reasons explained herein, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
I
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Country National Bank (“Bank”)...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and defendant/counterclaimant’s cross-motion for preliminary injunction. Oral argument was heard on March 13, 1992. After careful consideration of the parties’ oral and written arguments, and documents and declarations filed in support thereof, the court hereby GRANTS ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Now before the Court is the motion by the Connecticut Department of Children and Youth Services to set aside two decisions of the United States Department of Health and Human Services Grant Appeals Board, and the motion by the United States Department of Health and Human Services for judgment of affirmance of the same decisions. Essentially, the case involves a challenge to the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON STIPULATED RECORD This class action is before the Court by agreement of the parties for a judgment on a stipulated record. Plaintiffs 1 brought suit on February 21, 1992 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking declaratory and temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. They allege that regulations promulgated by Defendant pursuant to a new ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND RULING ON APPEAL FROM ORDER OF BANKRUPTCY COURT
The debtors, Daniel W. Brouillet and Peggy Brouillet, converted approximately $100,000 in accounts receivable, in which the Merchants National Bank (“the bank”) had a security interest, for the purpose of paying employee wages, income taxes, and other bills prior to the failure of the debtors’ business. The bankruptcy court di...
Views: 0
Page 4034
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
China Resource Products (U.S.A.) Ltd. (“China Resource”) filed an action against Fayda International, Inc. (“Fayda”) on a breach of contract claim on April 6, 1990. Docket Item (“D.I.”) 52 at ¶ 1. China Resource now moves for an order permitting the filing of an amended complaint (“Amended Complaint”) that would add CPM Industries, Inc. (“CPM”), S.H...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons discussed below, the defendants’ motion to dismiss will be GRANTED, and the case will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The plaintiffs filed suit against t...
Views: 1
This action arises from a contract entered into between Hospital Computer Systems, Inc. (“HCS”) and Staten Island Hospital (“SIH”) on September 26, 1985 (“the Agreement”). Under the Agreement, HCS agreed for a fee to provide SIH with computer software development and management services to create for SIH a custom computerized billing and accounting software system. HCS filed the complaint in th...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. *869 Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court denies defendants’ motion. 1 BACKGROUND Defendant Curtins, Inc. d/b/a Ambassador Communications (“Ambassador”) is a telephone answering service located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Defendant Kenneth Curtins is the sole shareholder o...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint and defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants plaintiff’s motion to amend, and grants in part and denies in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Nancy C. Schiele (“Schiele”) brings the prese...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendants Venturian Corporation (“Venturian”) and Gary Rappaport (“Rappaport”) to dismiss Counts IV through X of plaintiffs complaint. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants the motion in part and denies the motion in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Norwest Financial Leasing, Inc. (“Norwes...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an interpleader action in which the parties have stipulated to the facts. In their cross-motions for summary judgment (Dkt. Nos. 19 & 23), the parties dispute the nature, extent and priority of competing liens in defendant Charles King’s property interest.
*994The plaintiff, Koch Oil Company (Koch), is the purchaser of oil and gas from certain leases in which the defe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742(g), the appellant challenges the sentence (three years on probation, with a condition that he “remain in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a period of sixty (60) days during the first year of the probation period”) imposed upon him by a Magistrate Judge of this Court for conviction of violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1382, a Class B misdemeanor. Th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a pro se civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is an inmate in the custody of the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Corrections. Plaintiff commenced this action in April 1988 while housed at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas. In this action, plaintiff alleges the named defendants, the former...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiff, W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. (“Gore”), seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent Totes Incorporated (“ ‘totes’ ”) from making false and misleading descriptions and/or representations of fact in its advertising and from infringing on its trademark.
1
The plaintiff questions whether ‘totes’ is telling the whole truth about its product in its advertisements ...
Views: 3
ORDER
In the above captioned case, the undersigned was assigned the single issue whether to quash subpoenas for oral depositions served on J.D. Munn, Britt Buchanan, and Michelle Bray, law clerks who worked in this case for Judges Will L. Garwood, James R. Nowlin, and Walter S. Smith.
This is a highly political case and has generated immense media coverage. The Defendants Bob Slagle, Chairman of ...
Views: 1
OPINION
The Constitution does not guarantee to each patron of a bar and dance hall the right to hear the music he or she prefers.
Baur’s Opera House is a dance bar in Springfield, the capitol city of Illinois, and this lawsuit — brought under the public accommodation provision of § 2000a of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — alleges that Baur’s discriminated against Plaintiff because he ...
Views: 1
OMNIBUS ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Tamiami Partners Ltd.’s (“Tamiami Partners”) Motion for Preliminary Injunction to compel arbitration, pursuant to the terms of a management agreement between Tamiami Partners and the Miccosuk-ee Tribe of Indians of Florida (“Tribe”) for the operation of the Tribe’s gaming establishment; and to stay the Tribe from impeding Tamiami Partner...
Views: 2
*546
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama, James Louderbaek and Norman Love. After due consideration of the briefs and evidence submitted by the parties and of the applicable law, the Court concludes that the defendants are entitled to summary judgment.
FINDINGS OF ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), or to transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) or dismiss pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) or the doctrine of forum
non conveniens.
BACKGROUND
This is an action for breach of a franchise agreement, fraudulent inducement, and violations of various state statu...
Views: 2
In this coverage dispute among insurers,
1
defendants Republic Insurance Company and United National Insurance Company move for summary judgment against plaintiff American Home Assurance Company for failure of either the insured or American .Home to provide defendants timely notice following the incident giving rise to the underlying claim.
The motion is granted.
I.
Th...
Views: 0
ORDER Sitting by Designation. This matter is before the court on plaintiffs sentencing memorandum, filed March 5, 1992. Defendant filed her memorandum of authorities regarding ex post facto sentencing issue on March 13, 1992. On March 25, 1992, this court entered an order accepting the United States Sentencing Commission’s amicus curiae brief as amended, filed March 20, 1992. The Sentencing C...
Views: 1
OPINION In this diversity action brought under Puerto Rican law, Plaintiff seeks recovery for damages allegedly caused by Defendant’s breach of a lease agreement and by Defendant’s negligence with regard to Plaintiff’s belongings. Defendant has counterclaimed seeking recovery for breach of contract, damage to the property, attorney’s fees, and slander. Both parties have claimed damages for ment...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMS
These are actions by the United States of America and the State of California against Defendants under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Li*1490ability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq. (1982), as amended by Superfund Amendments And Reauthorization Act of 1986 (“SARA”), Pub.L. No. 99-499, 100 Stat. 161...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4082: Financial Planning Institute, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
Page 4082
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND
Plaintiff Financial Planning Institute (“FPI”) brought suit in Middlesex Superior Court, alleging that defendant American Telegraph and Telephone Co. (“AT & T”) overcharged FPI for its AT & T 800 READYLINE, an interstate telephone service (the “800” service). The complaint alleges common law breach of contract through AT & T’s failure to accur...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM At issue is the fee request of plaintiffs’ two attorneys in this police misconduct action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Massachusetts law. A jury awarded plaintiff Walter Deary $25,000.00 in compensatory damages and $75,000.00 in punitive damages on October 25, 1991 at the conclusion of a nine day trial. 1 The attorneys, Edmund R. Pitts and Edmund M. Pitts, seek $137,005.00 in...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Now before the Court is the defendant’s motion for a new trial or in the alternative for reconsideration of the Court’s denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal. After careful consideration of the motion and the government’s opposition thereto, the Court shall deny the motion for the reasons that follow. FACTS On August 1, 1991 at approximately 9:00 a.m. Officer Pos...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the court is the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint in the above-captioned case. The pro se plaintiff is a former prisoner who has filed numerous complaints in this Court. In this complaint, plaintiff alleges that the District of Columbia Board of Parole and individual members of the Board maliciously deprived plaintiff of his constitutional rig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Elaine Savoy executed four promissory notes to Blue Hill Federal Credit Union (Blue Hill) for over $600,000, secured by mortgages on properties which Savoy owns, and personally guaranteed by Savoy through separate instruments. Various defendants, including Blue Hill’s president, ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff, Stephen Duane Johannsen, brings this action for copyright infringement and unfair competition seeking declaratory, monetary and injunctive relief against defendants, Toni Brown, Les Kip-pel, Richard Wilson, Relix, Inc., Relix Magazine, Inc., and Rockin’ Relix, Inc. The matter before the court is the motion of Brown, Kippel, Wilson, and Relix, Inc. to dismiss (# 12).
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Procedural History of the Case The defendants in this case, Morgan A. Joe, Sr., (“Joe”), Alton L. Skeeter (“Skeeter”) and James E. Baylor, Jr. (“Baylor”), were tried by jury beginning October 30, 1989, and were convicted of numerous counts stemming from their participation in a kickback scheme involving United States Navy contracts on December 20, 1989. 1 Raising nume...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) for a restraining order. The Commission filed this action on February 11,1992 seeking an ex parte restraining order against defendants for alleged violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (“the Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq., and various regulations thereunder. T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a pro se civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In 1978, plaintiff was convicted in Johnson County, Kansas, on charges of aggravated battery, attempted rape, rape, aggravated sodomy, and aggravated kidnapping, and is serving a controlling sentence of life imprisonment. In August 1984, plaintiff was transferred to the Mi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of defendants Earl and Pám Murphy for summary judgment (Doc. 24). In this negligence action, plaintiff seeks to recover for injuries received during a fall while staying at the defendants’ home on July 21, 1988. Plaintiff alleges that he was injured as a result of defendants’ negligence in failing to warn him about the dangerous co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, pled guilty on January 26, 1984, to one count of kidnapping and one count of aggravated robbery. Under a plea agreement, petitioner was sentenced to two consecutive terms of thirteen (13) years t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted on November 20, 1984, of first degree murder. In this action, petitioner challenges his conviction and claims: (1) the trial court erroneously admitted privileged and confide...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In this action, the petitioner alleges his confinement violates his constitutional rights and further alleges (1) the trial court erred in denying his request for a change of venue; (2) the jury was prejudiced by the extensive *516media coverage which surrounded the proc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at El Dorado Correctional Facility, El Dorado, Kansas, was convicted by a Sedgwick County jury, in 1984, of first degree murder and aggravated battery of a law enforcement officer. In this action, petitioner challenges his conviction and cla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate serving a life sentence for murder, is incarcerated at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas. In this action, petitioner challenges his conviction and claims he was denied his constitutionally guaranteed right to effective assista...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The United States of America, plaintiff, has moved for summary judgment. The motion was filed on February 11, 1992, and service was accomplished by forwarding a copy to the defendant John R. Salvatore at the address given by him in the answer to the complaint filed in this case on December 24, 1991. It appears that the defendant is acting pro se, but is in fact an attorney since in fili...
Views: 1
*107
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss Count Two of the Indictment, and the materials submitted by the parties relating thereto. The Court has also had the benefit of oral argument. For reasons detailed below, the Court holds that 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d)
1
is constitutional as applied to a short-barrelled shotgun.
For purposes of thi...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff has brought suit against defendant under a products liability theory. Part of Plaintiff’s claim for relief is for future pain and suffering and permanent loss of earning capacity. Plaintiff has tested positive for infection with the HIV virus and Defendant Ross Operating Valve Company (“Ross”), through a motion to compel, seeks access to Plaintiff’s medical records an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises as a result of an accident which killed Dana Marie Flohr on July 3, 1989 when she and her family were fishing at Otter Creek Recreational Area. Defendants Pennsylvania Power And Light Company, Otter Creek Recreational Campground, and Otter Creek Enterprises, Inc. move to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).
1
Pla...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for injunctive and equitable relief under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
Plaintiffs, twenty-seven (27) former management employees of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (“AT & T”) have filed a five-count complaint against the Defendants, AT & T, the AT & T Employees’ Benefit Committee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This consumer protection case turns on the issue of statutory preemption of common-law claims and whether Pennsylvania’s recently adopted quasi-administrative mechanism for settling insurance disputes displaces plaintiff’s Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury.
Plaintiff, in this diversity action,
Erie-
bound to Pennsylvania, was injured in an car a...
Views: 1
Page 4144
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
The Equity General Insurance Company (“Equity”) originally brought this declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it is not obligated to defend or indemnify the Charter Abstract Insurance Corporation (“Charter”) or William Attardi, Jr. (“Attardi”) under professional liability insurance policy EST00216 (“Policy”). The Pennsylvania Insuran...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises as a result of the adoption by the Bethlehem Area School District of a revised program of high school studies which includes a community service graduation requirement. Plaintiffs, Barbara Steirer and Thomas Steirer, individually and as parents and guardians of Lynn Ann Steirer, and Thomas Moralis and Barbara Moralis, individually and as parents and g...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The core issue presented by the motion is whether and to what extent a collecting or depositary bank will be liable to the drawer or the unintended payee of a check when the drawer’s faithless employee induces the drawer to issue checks, fraudulently indorses them in the name of the specified payee, and absconds with the f...
Views: 0
*318 ORDER Pending before this Court are the petition for writ of habeas corpus, the motion for stay of execution, and the application to proceed in forma pauperis, all filed by petitioner Edward Anthony Ellis (“Ellis”). Also pending before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by respondent James A. Collins (“Collins”). Having considered the applications and motions, the submissions of bo...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR STRIKE
This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss or strike, filed October 16, 1991, and response thereto, filed October 28, 1991.
In his complaint, Plaintiff John Rondoli-no alleges a breach of a business overhead expense policy by Defendant Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company. Defendant issued the business overhead expe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Edward Adler, et al. bring this action for damages pursuant to the Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961
et seq,
and, under the Court's pendent jurisdiction, for common law fraud, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty against Berg Harmon Associates, et al. This matter is presently before the Court on the motion of ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages and injunc-tive relief alleging violations of the federal securities laws and various state law claims grounded in fraud and breach of contract. Plaintiff now moves for a modification of this Court’s prior Opinion and Order dismissing the action. Philip Morris Capital Corp. v. Century Power Corp., 778 F.Supp. 141 (S.D.N.Y.1991). For the reasons set ...
Views: 0
ORDER The Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of December 27, 1991 and petitioner’s objections of January 17, 1992 having been read and considered; the court REFUSES to ADOPT said Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation [# 14-1] in whole. The court adopts all portions of the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation except for the section dealing with petitioner’s first ground for his federal habea...
Views: 0
*551ORDER This cause is before the Court on remand from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. 956 F.2d 245. Defendant filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 alleging that his sentence was unconstitutional because it was imposed in retaliation for his exercise of his right to trial by jury. The Eleventh Circuit quotes the defendant as asserting that during sentencing this Court stated: Mr. ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, the motion is denied. FACTS This case arose from the suicide of Judith Bragado (“Bragado”) in the early morning hours of March 31, .1988 while she was being held in a jail cell at the Zion, Illinois police station. 1 She had been arrested for disorderly conduct the prior evening near the Zion...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before this Court is a motion to remand (Document # 5) filed by plaintiffs Charles N. Wortham and Anna Faye Wort-ham, Individually and d/b/a Electro-Comm System (“the Worthams”). The Court has considered the motion, the submissions of the parties, and the applicable law.
The Worthams originally filed this action on September 6, 1991, in the 189th Judicial District of Ha...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Landgray Associates (“Land-gray”) and Graybar Building Company (“Graybar”) seek an injunction compelling defendants 450 Lexington Venture, L.P. (“450 Lexington”), the Turner Corporation (“Turner”), and the United States Postal Service (the “Postal Service”) to remove water cooling towers from a roof courtyard on the second story of a building located at 450 Lexington Av...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on motion of the plaintiffs, The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette, Craig Klugman, and Janice Karlo-vich, (collectively, “the Journal-Gazette”) for a preliminary injunction, filed March 26, 1992. The issues have been briefed by the Journal-Gazette. The defendants, the Honorable Norman E. Baker, and the Allen Superior Court have not filed responsive documents. On M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case comes before the Court on Defendant Kenneth L. Turner’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees, Other Expenses and Bills of Costs. Turner, a Federal Protective Service police officer at the time of the events in this case, seeks recovery of his fees and costs from the United States pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”).
See
28 U.S.C. § 2412(...
Views: 0
ORDER
On January 14, 1992, following
in camera
inspection, this Court ruled on the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment in the above-captioned case. The Court held that all documents except documents six and seven were properly withheld under Exemptions One and Five of the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552
et seq.
The Court ordered document six r...
Views: 0
Page 4168
OPINION The matters before the court are 1) plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment upon remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (# 101); and 2) defendant’s corrected motion for summary judgment and alternative motions for partial summary judgment upon remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (# 105). BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Interstate ...
Views: 0
Page 4170
OPINION
Appellants Air Line Pilots Association, International (“ALPA”), Charles H. Copeland and Jack N. Mogus appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lifland, C.B.J.), entered August 14, 1990, as amended on September 13, 1990. The order (1) granted appellee Martin R. Shugrue (the “Trustee”), Trustee for the Estate of Eastern Airlin...
Views: 0
789 F.Supp. 1489 (1992)
In re SOFTWARE TOOLWORKS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION.
This document relates to All Actions.
No. C-90-2906 FMS.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
March 30, 1992.
*1490 *1491 *1492 Alan Schulman, William S. Lerach, Milberg Weiss Bershad Specthrie & Lerach, San Diego, Cal., Sherrie R. Savett, Berger & Montague, P.C., San Francisco, Cal., Catherine A. Sull...
Views: 2
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action is before the court on Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against LeRoy W. Collins, Jr., filed on December 16, 1991 and the memorandum of law in opposition to the motion filed on January 2, 1992.
The complaint in this case was filed April 13, 1989 in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (“Pennsylvania action...
Views: 0
OPINION ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1. Introduction. The Kytles are seeking to recover money they expended on medical care that they claim should have been covered by their insurance through the Stewart Benefit Trust. They were not, however, covered for the month when they incurred the expenses. Their statutorily required post-termination coverage had expired, and they did not have a right to conve...
Views: 0
ORDER
By this action, the government seeks forfeiture of $191,910 in United States currency. The government claims that the money is traceable to a criminal transaction for either the purchase or sale of a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). By previous order dated August 5, 1991, this Court denied the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of standing, and granted in pa...
Views: 1
AMENDED OPINION1
Plaintiff-intervenor Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (“Colville”) filed a complaint in intervention seeking injunc-tive relief and a declaration that it is the successor in interest to the Wenatchi, Enti-at, Chelan, Columbia, Palus and the Chief Joseph Band of Nez Perce Indians, and as such, it is entitled to exercise Columbia River off-reservation fishing rights ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In the instant lawsuit, the Freedom Republicans
1
make two principal claims against the Federal Election Commission (FEC). First, the Freedom Republicans claim that the Defendant Federal Election Commission (FEC) has failed to adopt rules and regulations implementing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.,
2
a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court upon plaintiffs Jobete Music Co., Inc.’s and others’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff filed a brief in support of this motion, and the defendant filed the appropriate response. The matter is now ready for a ruling. The court GRANTS the plaintiffs’ motion and contemporan...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1231 (1992)
Sara Jean MARKOVICH, et al.
v.
BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, INC. and Textron, Inc.
Civ. A. No. 90-3828.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
April 6, 1992.
*1232 *1233 Arthur Alan Wolk, James D. Golkow, Richard E. Genter, Wolk, Genter & Harrington, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Brian L. Lincicome, Patrick J. O'Connor, Cozen & O'Connor, Ann T. Field, P...
Views: 0
OEDER On December 16, 1991 this Court referred the above-styled criminal action to United States Magistrate Judge John W. Fisher, II pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636(b)(1)(B) with directions to submit to the Court proposed findings of fact and a recommendation for disposition of pre-trial motions. On January 27, 1992 Magistrate Judge Fisher filed his Proposed Findings of Fact and R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This action is before the court under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) to resolve the questions raised by plaintiff’s motion to quash two subpoenas duces tecum issued by counsel for defendant to two separate experts pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45. The subpoenas were issued after the effective date of the amendments to Rule 45, and they seek the production by the non-party expe...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Linda Fresquez commenced this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq., asserting negligence claims for personal injury. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, the plaintiff has moved for partial summary judgment. Defendant United States has responded by opposing the motion, and cross-moving for partial summary judgment.
The parties h...
Views: 0
OPINION
Currently before the court is the motion of plaintiff Exxon Shipping Company (“Exxon”) for summary judgment to vacate an arbitration award (the “Arbitration Award”) in favor of the Exxon Seamen’s Union (“Union”) which required Morris Foster (“Foster”), an able-bodied seaman and helmsman employed by Exxon, to be reinstated to rather than discharged from employment.
1
Jur...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court upon the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff in Civil Action No. 90-1528, Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association (“BCBS”), a not-for-profit organization, is the owner and licensor of Blue Cross and Blue Shield service marks. Among other things, BCBS provides sup
*1168
port services for seventy-four auton...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 82) Counts I, III, IX and the unnumbered claim of “fraudulent concealment” of plaintiff’s complaint for failure to plead fraud with particularity as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). Plaintiff has responded and opposes the motion. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion to dismiss is denied.
...
Views: 0
*1514
ORDER
The Cabazon and Sycuan Bands of Mission Indians (the “Tribes”) seek a determination that the State of California cannot impose license fees on its on-reservation betting facilities for simulcast horse racing. The Tribes argue that the license fees are a direct tax on them that is barred by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”) and the doctrine of tribal sovereign ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the court on the motion of defendant United States Gypsum Company (U.S. Gypsum) for partial summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b) (Docs. 276 and 283). The motion is granted in part and denied in part.
This is a products liability action in which plaintiffs seek damages from defendants U.S. Gypsum, W.R. Grace & Co. — Conn., National G...
Views: 2
ORDER AND REASONS
Defendant, Eugene Kirk (“Kirk”), filed a motion for relief from judgment and noticed this motion for hearing on March 18, 1992. Having reviewed the memorandum in support, the opposition, and the applicable law, the court finds this motion to be without merit.
BACKGROUND
Allemand Boat Company (“Allemand”) filed this declaratory judgment action on April 25, 1991. In its complaint,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The plaintiff (“Ross”) brings this action alleging that she was discharged from her employment because of her age, gender and national origin in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.,
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
and section 296 of New York’s E...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiff franchisees bring this action against defendant franchisor, Cumberland Farms, Inc. (“Cumberland”), pursuant to the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (“PMPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 2801, et seq. Plaintiffs allege that Cumberland violated § 2802(b)(3)(A) of the PMPA by failing to offer acceptable renewal terms for thei...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff United States of America [the “government”] filed its complaint against defendant Bennie L. Rhodes September 9, 1991, seeking repayment of a certain student loan. Defendant filed his “motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment” February 12,19...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT SHEARSON’S MOTION FOR AN ORDER ALLOWING SHEARSON TO COMMUNICATE WITH CLASS MEMBER-BROKERS In my order of April 9,1991,1 allowed all the limited partners who are current or former Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., (“Shearson”) employees to join the class. Defendant Shearson now moves for an order allowing it to communicate with and interview those absent class membe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on a petition for naturalization filed by Mah-moud Kassas. Also before the Court are the findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendations of the designated naturalization examiner. A hearing was held before the Court at which the petitioner testified. The Immigration and Naturalization Service recommends that the petition for naturalization be ...
Views: 0
RULING ON BATSON CHALLENGE Relying on Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), the defendants in this action have lodged an objection to the government’s use of peremptory challenges at the February 4, 1992 jury selection in this criminal case. Specifically, defendants contend that the government’s alleged use of seven of its nine challenges to strike minorities ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This diversity action arises out of a contractual dispute between plaintiff Comdisco Disaster Recovery Services, Inc. (“CDRS”), an Illinois corporation, and Money Management Systems, Inc. (“Money Management”), a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Massachusetts. Plaintiff alleges that a valid contract...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendant Cooper-Lecky Architects, P.C. (“CLA”). Upon careful consideration of the submissions of the parties, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, the Court shall grant the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, because it finds that there are no material facts in dispute and that CLA is entitl...
Views: 0
ORDER
Invoking 9 U.S.C. § 9, the Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Confirm and Enforce the Arbitrator’s Award in the above-captioned case. The Defendant did not file any written opposition nor did the Defendant appear at the March 23, 1992 oral argument. Upon review of the case precedent, however, it appears that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the above-captioned case. Thu...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before this Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff, who is seeking a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201.
1
Plaintiff, a prisoner currently incarcerated at the Lorton facili
*22
ty, complains of delays and lack of treatment for his dental needs, which has resulted in pain, bleeding of the gums, grinding and chewing problems, b...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the court on the motion (Doc. 278) of defendant W.R. Grace & Co. — Conn. (Grace) for partial summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b). Plaintiffs oppose (Doc. 291) the motion. The motion is denied.
This is a products liability action in which plaintiffs seek damages from defendants Grace, United Gypsum Company, National Gypsum Company, ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment based upon the defendant’s alleged breach of his fiduciary duty by usurping a corporate opportunity. The Court finds that the defendant has raised several questions of fact which must be resolved at trial; therefore, the plaintiff’s motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Larry Fleisher (“Fleisher”) was a...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are two motions of the United States: its Motion to Stay Sale to Enforce Judgment, and its Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment and Dismiss Complaint to Enforce Lien. For the reasons set out below, the Court finds the second motion to be well taken in part, and the first to be moot in light of the action ordered herein to dispose of the second.
I. Facts
Agents o...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court, having already passed upon the contribution issue raised in this case, has stated that, in the event the settlement agreement between the Patriot’s Point Development Authority — (“the Authority”)— and the Plaintiffs is approved, it will enter an order — (“Bar Order”) — barring the Non-Settling Defendants from asserting claims against the Authority for contribution or inde...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint, or in the alternative to compel arbitration. For the following reasons defendants’ motion shall be granted in part and denied in part.
I. BACKGROUND.
On June 18, 1990, the plaintiff, Sandra Bender filed an action in this Court against the defendants (civil action number 90-2347) alleging violations of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs bring suit directly and derivatively alleging violations of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. §'§ 1132(g)(2), 1132(a)(3), 1140, and 1145, and the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 185(a), alleging that they were injured by defendants’ failure to make contributions for them to the Local 272 Welfare Fund and to the Local 272 Pension Fund (“the Funds”) and by the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES WHICH FLOW FROM THE COURT’S DECEMBER 31, 1991 FINDINGS OF FACT
Plaintiff Little Souls, Inc., brings this action against defendants Les Petits, Martha Collins Gray and Robert Gray, alleging copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501
et seq.
and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125. Plaintiff argues that...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION This case raises as its main issue the seldom-litigated topic of the constitutional adequacy of jail visiting times. The County has reduced visitation to two days a week at four of its five jails. The court holds that the new schedule does not violate any prohibition of the Constitution. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs, prisoners in the Orange County...
Views: 0
ORDER
Previously in this criminal case, defendant Louis J. Kahn was convicted and sentenced under 18 U.S.C.A. § 751(a) for escaping from a federal prison camp. Several months after imposition of the sentence, the United States Sentencing Commission amended the provision of the Sentencing Guidelines under which Kahn’s sentence was calculated. The cause is again before the court on a motion...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS
INTRODUCTION
The plaintiffs are three former employees of Bay View Federal Savings
&
Loan Association (“Bay View”) and their spouses. In 1988, Bay View modified its program of retirement benefits. Plaintiffs allege that Bay View’s 1988 changes in its retirement benefits violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967...
Views: 2
RULING ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS TANGIBLE EVIDENCE The indictment in this case, returned by the Grand Jury on September 24, 1991, charges defendant Joseph J. Santopietro (“Defendant”) with two counts of conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371, seven counts of corrupt receipt of payment, 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B), two counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, eight counts of embezzlement of federal funds, 18 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S JULY 26, 1991 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 1991 RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COUNT III
On July 26, 1991, defendant Beacon Hotel Corporation (“Beacon”) filed a motion for summary judgment as to Counts I and IY of the complaint. Plaintiffs filed a response August ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
In this action, plaintiff Marianne Trotta (“Ms. Trotta” or “plaintiff”) claims that Mobil Oil Corporation (“Mobil” or “the company” or “defendant”) subjected her to a hostile work environment because of her sex in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
In support of her claim, plaintiff alleges that Mobil allowed sexually offensive conduct at mandator...
Views: 3
OPINION
Plaintiffs, Reginald Martin (“Martin”) and Sylvester Pennick (“Pennick”), employees of the United States Postal Service, brought an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
et seq.
(“Title VII”), alleging adverse treatment by their supervisors and the Postal Service. Specifically, they allege deprivation of employment opportunities beca...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the court on the following:
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for the Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. 69);
Defendant Beech Aircraft Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss or Stay Case (Doc. 327); and
Defendant Beech Aircraft Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 390).
Plaintiff Sunbird Aircraft Services, Inc. (“Sunb...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the motion to dismiss of defendants City of Harrisburg Bureau of Police and Officer Dave Salada. The motion has been fully briefed, and is now ripe for disposition.
Background
Defendants have moved to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The standard for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is that “a complaint should not be d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Currently before this Court is Citizens Bank of Maryland’s (“Citizen’s Bank”) appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. The issues have been fully briefed, and no hearing is deemed necessary.
The first issue presented to this Court is whether the Bankruptcy Court erred as a matter of law in holding that the Appellant violated the ...
Views: 0
*1556
OPINION AND, ORDER
The United States, on behalf of sellers of a residential property, brings this action against the various defendants for violations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601,
et seq.
The defendants move to dismiss, contending that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) failed to meet the time requirements imposed by 42 U.S.C. § ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before this court is the motion of defendant National Security Fire and Casualty Company for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
1
The interrogatory here is whether
*911
National Security Fire and Casualty Company (hereinafter “National”) may rescind its policy with its insured, the plaintiff, on t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In September, 1991, Daniel Pearson brought suit in state court, alleging that his employer and his employer’s group health insurer had breached their insurance contract by refusing to pay certain claims related to his daughter. In December, 1991, Mr. Pearson amended the complaint to add a claim for the tort of bad faith. In January, 1992, the defendants removed the case to th...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant National Football League Players Association’s (“NFLPA”) motion to dismiss Count IV of plaintiffs’ amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Based on a review of the file, record, and proceedings herein, the court grants defendant’s motion.
BACKGROUND
In Count IV of the amended complaint,
1
...
Views: 2
ORDER Plaintiff has filed a multi-count complaint against defendant, alleging primarily breach of an employment contract and employment discrimination on the basis of plaintiff’s national origin, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Defendant asks the court to abstain from deciding the case in lieu of a pending parallel suit in Ohio state court. The case is now before the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is an appeal from an administrative agency decision before the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the USDA decision to withdraw plaintiff’s status as a “specifically approved stockyard” for a period of five years pursuant to Title
*1482
9, Code of Fe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 33). This is a civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Gary L. Norton, an officer with the Great Bend Police Department, and the City of Great Bend. Plaintiff Moos alleges that after defendant Norton arrested Moos for driving under the influence (DUI), Norton refused to p...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. “Findings of fact and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rule 12 or 56 or any other motion_” Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). While a statement of reasons thus is not required, the Court nonetheless briefly states the basis for its decision on defendant’s motion. Plaintiff asserts claims under Title...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER This is a case on appeal from a final order of the bankruptcy court approving appellee’s Chapter 13 plan. The bankruptcy court found that the security interest held by the creditor did not fit into the exception from modification for a claim “secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence” found in 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2), The bank...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case, which is now before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment, is brought on behalf of a certified class of hundreds of customers of Latin Investment Corporation (“LIC”). Plaintiffs seek damages against certain key promoters of LIC — defendants Fernando Leon-zo, Leonel Salinas, and Jose Cortes — for security frauds perpetrated against plaintiffs, a...
Views: 0
*1010
RULING ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS
The indictment in this case, returned by the Grand Jury on September 24, 1991, charges defendant Joseph J. Santopietro (“Defendant”) with two counts of conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371, seven counts of corrupt receipt of payment, 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B), two counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, eight counts of embezzlement of federal f...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
INTRODUCTION
This is a civil tax refund suit filed by Plaintiff Brian Cooke to contest assessments made against him by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). The assessments were made pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6672 on the theory that Cooke was a “responsible person” of South Pacific Island Airways (“SPIA”) for the last two quarters of 1986 and the...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the renewed motions of Defendants Hoechst Celanese Corporation and William H. Groce, III for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are denied.
I. Factual Summary
Mr. Groce worked at the Hoechst Cela-nese plant near Greer as a chemist for seven yea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs commenced this action in early July, 1991. They contend that the Town of Newfield, through its Supervisor, Town Council, and Code Enforcement Officer violated their procedural and substantive due process rights guaranteed to them by the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, plaintiffs claim that this court has jurisdiction to hear this case p...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion to remand and Defendant’s motion to refer to bankruptcy court. For the reasons set forth below, the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion and grants Defendant’s motion. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff Dunkirk began the instant litigation in the Court of Common Pleas for Cuyahoga County on January 25, 1991. Defendant TJX removed the case to this Court on ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On October 22, 1991 the Court entered an order directing the plaintiff to show cause within twenty (20) days why service of process as required by Rule 4, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, had not been made in the above-styled civil action. The plaintiff was advised that failure to show good cause within the time required would result in the dismissal of this civil action without prejudice....
Views: 0
ORDER On February 27, 1989 the above-named defendant, having been convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and collection of extensions of credit by extortionate means in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 894, was sentenced to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons for a term of eighty-four (84) months to be followed by a term of five (5) years supervised...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This civil forfeiture action is before the court on the United States’ motion for summary judgment. Doc. 6.
The court is familiar with the standards governing the consideration of a motion for summary judgment. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that summary judgment is appropriate when the documentary evidence filed with the motion “show[s] that there is no genuine...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this proceeding based on Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 401
et seq.,
plaintiff Doughty seeks an order reversing the Secretary’s decision to deny disability benefits (Doc. 36). The Secretary moves for summary judgment based on the plaintiff’s alleged failure to meet the time requirements of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act. (Doc. 38).
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND CAME ON TO BE CONSIDERED the Motion to Remand filed by Clyde Veltmann and his wife Diantha Veltmann, individually, Veltmann Corporation, individually, and Veltmann Corporation d/b/a Veltmann Engineering and Veltmann Environmental (hereinafter referred to as Plaintiffs). The Court, after reviewing the motion, the responses, the r...
Views: 0
Page 4698
DECISION AND ORDER On May 21, 1991, a search warrant was issued by this court authorizing the government to search the premises located at 4330 N. 35th Street in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for evidence of violations of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7201 and 7203 by Bee Bus Lines Inc, The government executed the search three days later, on May 24, 1991. Among the items seized was currency in the amount of $111,-739 whic...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (Doc. 144) and defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 147). This matter was set for jury trial on the Kansas City docket to commence Monday, December 9, 1991. After hearing the statements of the plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, and the defendants’ counsel, the court perceived certain pr...
Views: 0
*1166
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant William D. Killion pled guilty to one count of manufacturing 83.8 grams of Phenyl-2-Propanone (P-2-P) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was sentenced on April 5, 1991 to forty-six months imprisonment in accordance with the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. Three months after sentencing, the defendant mailed a letter to the court, claiming th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action under 5 U.S.C. § 702 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Jurisdiction is invoked under the federal question statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Venue is proper in the District of Puerto Rico pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).
Plaintiff alleges that the Department of the Navy (“Navy”) and the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) violated the Competition in C...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (“Aetna”) brings this diversity action to enforce certain guarantees executed by the defendants Namrod Development Corp., Evans Container Corp., Evans Development Corp. of New Jersey, Louis Evangelista, Peter Evangelista, Lucy Evan-gelista and Maria Evangelista. Defendants have answered and asserted a counterclaim for injuries sustained ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant United States of America. For the reasons set forth below, it is denied.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This is a disappointed bidder case. Plaintiff North Shore Strapping Company, Inc. (North Shore) submitted an offer, which was rejected, for zinc coated steel strapping in response to a solicitation by agencies of Defendant U...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant was indicted in this United States District Court as a formerly convicted felon who on January 7, 1992, it was alleged, unlawfully and knowingly received and possessed a firearm, a R.G. Industries .22 caliber revolver, which had been possessed, shipped and transported in and affecting interstate and foreign commerce. The prosecution offered the testimony of police of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On December 17,1991, the Court notified the attorneys for both parties in this action that the Court was converting the defendant John Venteau’s motion to dismiss the complaint, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), to a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. At that time, the parties were given an opportunity to submit affidavits and other documentary...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above referenced action, Jeffrey C. McArthur (“McArthur”), plaintiff pro se and an ex-Suffolk County police officer, brings suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on an alleged conspiracy to deprive him of due process in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments in relation to child support modification proceedings commenced in State Court in 1989 by his ex...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant-Marcus Harvey’s Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(b)(3) motion to suppress the admission of physical evidence and statements made by the defendant. On March 3, 1992, the Court held an evidentiary hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court granted the parties leave to file supplemental memoranda. The government filed its su...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The above-referenced action is before this Court to decide defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint.
*153
I.
Background
The complaint in this action arose out of an audit report (the “Report”) conducted by the Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). The Report refle...
Views: 1
ORDER
On July 3, 1991, Charlotte Juide filed a motion, in which she sought attorneys’ fees as a claimant under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, for “the time spent contesting the Government’s summary seizure of [her] interest without prior notice or hearing, in violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Local Court Rules_” Juide’s Brief at 1. The Government has su...
Views: 0
ORDER Report and Recommendation of Magistrate is approved and adopted by the Court. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS THE FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, Ralph M. Durling (hereinafter, “Durling”), complains that the proceedings by which his state parole and probation were revoked violated his right to due process of law. The fac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Introduction This is a government maritime contract action. Plaintiff, Fednav (USA) Inc. (“Fed-nav”), contracted with the Navy over a three-year period for the ocean transportation of military cargo between ports of the Great Lakes and East Coast of the United States and various European ports, including Bremerhaven, Germany. At issue under these contracts is whether “Kajege...
Views: 0
*407MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Following trial and appeal on plaintiffs suit for a permanent injunction against defendants, and a settlement of damages issues, there remains for decision plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions against defendants and their then trial attorneys. In aid of their claim for sanctions, plaintiffs invoke Rules 8, 11 and 37, Fed.R.Civ.P., and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. I will assume fa...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4758: United States ex rel. Internal Revenue Service v. Quaid (In re Friedman)
Page 4758
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Both the United States and Trustee Dennis Quaid (“Trustee”) for the bankruptcy estate (the “Estate”) of Harold Friedman (“Friedman”) have appealed from the decision of Bankruptcy Judge Eugene Wedoff reported as In re Luster, 134 B.R. 632 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1991).1 For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order, the United States prevails on both appeals. Fact...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 15, 1991 Plaintiff Peter Hurwitz (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action against
*135
Defendant Joan Lear Sher (“Defendant”) in Supreme Court, New York County seeking a declaration that he is the sole beneficiary of his father (the “Deceased”)’s interest in the Algonquin Press, Inc. Employees Profit Sharing Plan (the “Plan”). On May 23, 1991 Defendant rem...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action arises out of the construction of the Marriott Marquis Hotel located at Times Square in New York City. Morse/Diesel, Inc. (“Morse/Diesel”), the general contractor for the Hotel, asserts claims against Mosher Steel Co., the structural steel subcontractor for the Hotel, its surety, Aetna Insurance Co., and Trinity Industries, Inc. (“Trinity”), Mosher Steel C...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF PLAINTIFF FLEET BANK OF MAINE AND COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
This case involves the claims of Plaintiff Fleet Bank of Maine (“Fleet Bank” or “Plaintiff”) for collection of amounts due under two promissory notes that are in default.
1
Defendant Harvey Prawer executed the first promissory note (“First Note”) in ...
Views: 1
FINAL JUDGMENT FOR CLAIMANT INCLUDING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This is a civil action brought by the United States of America for forfeiture of a certain parcel of real estate which includes a single family residence, located at 13430 S.W. 1st Street, Miami, Florida. The Government seeks forfeiture of this property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §§ 881(a)(6) and (7). The case was tried ...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER
1
This matter comes before the Court to consider the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b).
I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an action for money damages and the return of property alleged to have been converted by the Defendants. As originally filed, the Plaintiff sought relief for alleged racial discrimination under severa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts appeals from a determination by the Food Stamps Appeals Board (“Appeals Board”) that Food and Nutrition Services (“Food and Nutrition”), the administrator of the food stamps program,1 properly levied sanctions totalling $1,323,864 for violations from April to September 1982 of the Food Stamp Act of 1964 (“the Act”), 7 U.S.C. *1269§§ 2011-2030...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
After hearing, the Motion of Command Trust Network, Inc., for Leave to Intervene, to Vacate the Protective Order, and to Require Filing of Discovery in Court (# 101) is allowed to the extent that Com*35mand Trust Network, Inc., seeks to intervene for the purpose of moving to vacate the protective order heretofore entered into by the parties, and for the purpose of seeking a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case is before the court on motions for modification of the Consent Decree of *624May 7, 1979 (as modified by the orders of April 11, 1985 and April 22,1985) in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, vacating this court’s order of April 9, 1990, 734 F.Supp. 561, and remanding for application of the standard for consideration of such motions set forth by the Court in Ruf...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The Court grants the Defendant’s motion and ORDERS this action dismissed from the docket of the Court.
Under
Rule
56(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper only:
“[I]f the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with th...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR STAY
Intercontinental Enterprises, Inc. appeals the bankruptcy court’s March 12,1992 final judgment in Adversary Proceeding No. 91-1283 RJB. In this ruling, the bankruptcy court held that all of the individual and joint property of Meyer and Lillian Blinder, Intercontinental and Intercontinental’s subsidiaries was property of the Blinder, Robinson estate, held in custodia legi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The issue in this appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in holding that a debt arising from the debtor’s failure to maintain workmen’s compensation insurance was dischargeable notwithstanding §§ 523(a)(2)(A), 523(a)(4) and 523(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code. These sections mandate the nondischargeability of debts arising from false pretenses, a false repr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This memorandum incorporates the reasoning and constitutional conclusions of the court’s April 3, 1992, Opinion and Order. Ultimately the case turns on my balancing of the equities, to which I now return. I note that the parties have stipulated to the fact that adding even one candidate to the ballot as of April 8, 1992 would require the Pennsylvania primary election to be res...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on numerous motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment against defendant Deloitte Haskins & Sells (“DH & S”) on their professional negligence and third-party contract claims related to the 1985 and 1986 financial statements. DH & S moved for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ common law fraud, breach of contract, professi...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION FOR REFERRAL TO ICC
This is a rate undercharge action pursuant to the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA).
See
49 U.S.C. § 10761(a). The plaintiff, Charles Covey, trustee for the bankruptcy estate of Unzicker Trucking, Inc., seeks from defendant ConAgra, Inc., a shipper, the difference between the negotiated rate ConAgra actually paid ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Edward J. Tenthoff brings this action against defendant McGraw-Hill, Inc. claiming that defendant terminated him because of his age and/or sex in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. 1 Before me is the motion of defendant McGraw-Hill for s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the Defendant City of Richmond’s (the “City”) Motion for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons stated below, this motion is DENIED. On January 16, 1992, this Court denied Defendants Joyce and William Riddell’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Subsequently, on January 29, 1992, the Court granted ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants move for summary judgment contending that there is no dispute of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid their resolution. I hold that plaintiff entered into a valid exculpatory contract that encompasses her three claims for relief. Accordingly, de...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The plaintiffs brought this action against the FDIC in its capacity as receiver of the failed Bank of New England (“BNE”). In their Complaint the plaintiffs allege that BNE was the financier and co-developer of an industrial condominium project in which the plaintiffs bought four units. The plaintiffs funded this purchase with a. promissory note from the BNE in the am...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In 1983 the State of New York brought this case against ten parties for the remediation of two toxic dumps located in upstate New York, pursuant to Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9607, and the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (ECL). These two sites are known as “Novak ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is an appeal from the decision of the Hon. Cornelius Blackshear of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Appellant appeals the final order entered by the bankruptcy court on May 31,1991, confirming an arbitration award rendered by the Pan American World Airways (“Pan Am”) and the Air Line Pilots Association (“ALPA”...
Views: 1
Page 4823
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Appellee, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Committee”), moves for an order dismissing the appeal by appellant, James Orlan (“Orlan”), debtor in bankruptcy, from the November 6, 1990 order of the Honorable Cecelia H. Goetz, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Eastern District of New York. For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff Charles Hansen filed a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) 5 U.S.C. § 552 to compel the release of portions of several unpublished volumes of an internal History of the United States Air Force’s (“Air Force”) history of the early post-war atomic energy program, entitled “A History of the Air Force Atomic E...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
There are before the Court two sets of motions that will be considered jointly. The first set of motions consists of:
1. United States’ Motion for Legal Determination of Issues Raised in the Debtors’ Objection, Motions and/or Counterclaims, filed October 28, 1991 (“U.S. Motion”);
2. Debtors’ Brief in Response to the United States’ Motion for Legal De...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the court is defendant Kenneth McGinnis’ motion to dismiss, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the following reasons, the court denies the motion. FACTS Eddie Gavin (“plaintiff”) is an inmate at the Stateville Correctional Center (“State-ville”) in Joliet, Illinois. He brings this action pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of his civil rights against Jam...
Views: 0
*59APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL MASTER/REFEREE
Plaintiffs claim injuries from their mothers’ exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES) from the 1940s through 1971. Defendants were manufacturers and distributors of DES. Cases pending in the state Supreme Court have been assigned to Justice Ira Gammerman. Cases pending in the federal district court have been assigned to Judge Jack B. Weinstein.
This major lit...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Shaw’s Express, Inc. (“Defendant Shaw”) and Defendant Putnam Transfer & Storage Company (“Defendant Putnam”) move for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants summary judgment in favor of Defendants Shaw and Putnam.
BACKGROUND
On December 8, 1987, Plai...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Carmen Guaus Mendez moves for summary judgment on her claim against the proceeds of certain retirement annuity contracts entered into by her husband Leocadio V. Diaz and Defendants Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association and College Retirement Equities Fund (“TIAA-CREF”). Plaintiff also moves for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1)...
Views: 3
ORDER
The instant matter arises out of a motion for remand that has been filed by the De
*949
fendants/Counterplaintiffs/Third Party Plaintiffs, Douglas Mires and Michael Kus.
I.
Mires and Kus leased automobiles through the Third Party Defendant, the Meade Group (Meade), who subsequently assigned the lease agreements to the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, General Electr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs’ amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons stated below, the Court denies Defendant’s motion.
BACKGROUND
The Medicare program subsidizes the medical costs of persons 65 years of age or older, and those who are disabled. Medicare Part A generally covers in...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the Court is the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count II of Plaintiff’s Complaint (# 52). For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is GRANTED.
JURISDICTION
In Count II of the Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff asserts that the defendant breached an oral employment contract between the parties by terminating Plaintiff’s employment. T...
Views: 5
OPINION AND ORDER
Showtime Networks, Inc. (“Showtime”) has moved for an order under 28 U.S.C. § 157(d) and Bankruptcy Rule 5011(a) withdrawing the reference of the adversary proceeding between Debtor Orion Pictures Corporation (“Orion”) and Showtime from bankruptcy court. For the reasons that follow, Showtime’s motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
On December 11, 1991, Orion filed a vol...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT THE ONE BANCORP’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This case involves Plaintiff Martha A. Muldoon’s (“Plaintiff” or “Muldoon”) claim that, as a former employee of Maine Savings Bank (“MSB”), she is entitled to severance pay under the MSB Financial Security Severance Plan (“Severance Plan” or “Plan”). She alleges that she is entitled to collect severance pay under the Plan fr...
Views: 0
This action was commenced in United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint alleges violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, and pendant state law claims for fraud and breach of contract. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim or, in the alternative, to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C....
Views: 4
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff William S. Flickinger brought this action against defendants Harold C. Brown & Co. (“Brown”) and Bradford Broker Settlement, Inc., n/k/a Fidata Brokerage, Inc. (“BBSI”), for violation of the federal securities laws, fraud, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. After a nonjury trial, I found in favor of defendants on all plaintiff’s claims. 759 F.Sup...
Views: 0
ORDER This appeal is from a final order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois. The Bankruptcy Court found that certain rental purchase agreements were not true leases but were security agreements for installment sales and denied the creditor’s Objection to Confirmation of the Plan and Motion to Lift the Automatic Stay. The Court has jurisdiction of this appe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment by the plaintiff, the defendants, and the inter-venor. Earlier in the proceedings, the Court granted plaintiffs application for a Temporary Restraining Order, set a bond of $185,000 and then vacated the restraining order when a satisfactory bond was not posted....
Views: 1
RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE Kayser McMillian, a state prisoner currently in the custody of the Respondent, has petitioned this Court for federal habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is challenging the validity of his October 25, 1984 conviction for robbery, first degree in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, for which Petitioner received a sentence of life without p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action has been brought by Cameco Industries, Inc., a Louisiana corporation, against Mayatrac, S.A., a Guatemalan corporation. On August 19,1991,1 entered an order authorizing the attachment of a bank account maintained by Mayatrac at the First National Bank of Maryland. Mayat-rac has moved to dissolve the attachment and dismiss the action. Because the motion raises the qu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. Background.
This case arises out of the issuance in October 1990 of a mayoral directive that (1) froze the salaries of New York City employees not subject to collective bargaining contracts (“Managers”) who were earning salaries over $40,000 per year, and (2) cut by five percent the salaries of Managers earning over $70,000 per year (the “Mayoral Directive”). Th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Angela Silveri, who is allegedly suffering from adenocarcinoma, moves for permission to introduce proof to show that Eli Lilly and Co. (“Lilly”) is responsible for the defective design of DES. Sage v. Fairchild-Swearingen Corp., 70 N.Y.2d 579, 528 N.Y.S.2d 418, 517 N.E.2d 1304 (1987). In Sage, an airline employee was injured by a ladder hanger. The hanger was a copy...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
On August 16, 17, and 18, 1989 and on October 23, 1989 this court at the United States Courthouses in Utica, New York and Auburn, New York presided over the non-jury trial in this case. The parties’ post-trial memoranda were filed on April 25, 1990. This Memorandum-Decision constitutes the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
See
Fed.R....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiffs have sued the defendant Bank for damages allegedly caused by the defendant’s breach of an agreement with plaintiffs and others pertaining to a loan to a corporation, repayment of which was guaranteed by one of the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs assert federal jurisdiction under 12 U.S.C. § 632 on the basis that their suit arises out of traditional banking transac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Doe seeks full access to records of the FBI developed during a background investigation into plaintiffs suitability for employment by the Department of Justice. Access to these records is sought by invoking the Privacy Act, the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), and the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. The Department has moved for summary judgment and plaintiff ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, VMG Enterprises, Inc. (“VMG”) filed this case under the provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1127, seeking monetary and equitable relief
1
for defendant’s trademark infringement of plaintiff’s federally registered trademark, BABY’S CHOICE.
VMG claims it is the owner of a concurrent use registration for the trademark BABY’S CHOICE, re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for An Order To Show *180Cause Why Civil Contempt Should Not Issue Against Defendants And Their Attorneys And For Sanctions Including The Entry of Default Judgment. On July 26, 1989, the Court heard testimony from Ms. Marilyn Powell. Because the testimony of Ms. Powell given at the hearing was directly in conflict with ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for a declaratory judgment that Defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company (“National Union”) is liable to Plaintiff for any judgment she obtains against Defendants Byron Major and Byron Major, P.C., for damages pertaining to certain events on December 10, 1985. Defendant National Union cross-moves for a declaratory judgment that it is not...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The above-referenced action is before the Court to decide Benjamin Narvaez’ (“defendant”) motion to dismiss on the ground that the statute of limitations has run. The Court grants defendant’s motion for the reasons stated below. I. Background The complaint in the above action arises out of a fire that occurred on September 15,1988 in an apartment occupied by defendant. Contine...
Views: 0
Page 4942
OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Morton L. Weitzner and Dorothea M. Weitzner, individually and as trustees of the Estate of Henry M. Weitz-ner, (the “Movants”), move for an order: (1) pursuant to § 303 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (“URA”), 42 U.S.C. § 4653, requiring plaintiff National Railway Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) to pay any tax du...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to dismiss the second, third, fourth, and fifth counts of Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under New York law. For the reasons stated below, the Court dismisses the fourth and fifth counts of Plaintiff’s complaint but declines ...
Views: 1
ORDER
On December 16,1991, defendant Ronald Bruce Crosby filed a motion with this Court, styled an Omnibus Motion to Dismiss Counts One, Two and Three of the Indictment and Racketeering Acts 1, 2, 25 and 26 (the “Omnibus Motion”), seeking an order dismissing the counts in which he is alleged to have violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This Kafkaesque case involves a United States Air Force colonel who returned from service in Operation Desert Storm to find that he was suspended without pay at his civilian job because of charges that, to this day, have never been made against him. Rather than defend his innocence against these unknown, and later unmade, charges, Dr. John W. Simmons brought this action against...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Lease-A-Fleet, Inc. (“LAF” or “Debtor”) filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Presently before the court are three appeals of various Orders issued by the bankruptcy court which are all related and therefore addressed collectively in this opinion. Appellant Morse Operations, Inc. d/b/a Lauderhill Leasing (“Morse”) appeals the following two rulings: (1) b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I.
Introduction
On June 14, 1991, plaintiff, Gary Gilbert (“Gilbert”), filed the Complaint in the above-captioned matter against defendants David Feld (“Feld”), Zeev Shenkman (“Shenkman”), Richard Tompkins (“Tompkins”), the Law Firm of Fox, Differ, Callahan, Ulrich & O’Hara, a partnership (“Fox, Differ”), and Edmund Justice (“Justice”). The Complaint alleges causes...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Amy Unterberg a/k/a Amy Unterberg Schaefer, an incompetent by her guardian Susan Unterberg, alleges in this action that she sustained serious injuries as a result of inadequate medical care she received during her incarceration at the Lehigh County Women’s Correctional Facility in July of 1988. Plaintiff’s action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and allege...
Views: 0
ORDER This civil suit for damages and injunctive relief under Bivens v. Six Unknown Name Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1970), is before the court on Defendant Owens’ motion to dismiss filed November 15, 1991. Plaintiffs, who are acting pro se, have filed a brief in opposition; Defendant Owens has filed a reply brief. The sole purpose...
Views: 0
Page 4987
ORDER INTRODUCTION Debtor, Jerry L. Roberson, filed an adversary complaint to determine the dis-chargeability of his student loan obligation under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8)(B), claiming that repayment of the obligation would cause him undue hardship. 1 Defendant, Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC) objected, contending that repayment of the loan would not work an undue hardship on deb...
Views: 1
*774
ORDER
Introduction
Plaintiffs, Robert F. Cortright and Janie Cortright, filed a complaint against defendant, James C. Thompson, alleging that defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (Act), 15 U.S.C. § 1692
et seq.
The complaint alleges that a letter sent by defendant violated the Act by stating differing views of the validity of the debt; na...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Several attorneys’ fees motions concerning the above captioned case are presently pending before this court: plaintiffs’ motion for an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses filed on September 18, 1989, the November 1, 1989 motion to amend same and most recently, plaintiffs’ supplemental motion for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses for legal services re...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of Petroleum Insurance Limited (“P.I.L.”) to modify this court’s July 24, 1990 judgment. The motion is granted in par(, as set forth below.
FACTS
On March 16, 1978, the supertanker Amoco Cadiz went down in heavy Atlantic seas with a full load of crude, dumping its 220,000 tons of oil on the north coast of France. The aftermath spawned litigation that was conso...
Views: 0
*799
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This consolidated action encompasses appeals from five separate orders rendered by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, the Honorable Massie Tillman presiding. The court, having reviewed the briefs of appellant, Heartland Federal Savings and Loan Association (“Heartland”), and appellee, Briscoe Ente...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff, John T. Kent, brings this action pursuant to the provisions of section *542 205(g) of the Social Security Act [the Act], 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final adverse decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services [the Secretary] denying his application for disability and disability insurance benefits. Application for a period of disa...
Views: 0
Page 5004
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, PARKSIDE LUTHERAN HOSPITAL (“PARKSIDE”), filed suit to recover unpaid medical bills that it incurred for the treatment of one of the Defendants’ insureds. Defendant, BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF OHIO (“BLUE CROSS”), has moved to dismiss all three counts of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule o...
Views: 0
Page 5005
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CAME ON TO BE HEARD this day the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, and the court, after considering the said motion and brief in support, the response of the defendants, the affidavits and supplemental affidavits submitted by the plaintiffs, the defendants’ answers to discovery requests submitted by the plainti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On February 11, 1989, Michael Thebner (“petitioner”) was convicted of Manslaughter in the Second Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law § 125.15[1], reckless manslaughter, and was subsequently sentenced to an indeterminate term of incarceration of five to fifteen years. Petitioner now seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on the following grounds: (1) hi...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
By motion fully submitted on December 11,1991, defendant Chilewich International Corp. moves to stay this action pending arbitration in Moscow. Plaintiff Filanto has moved to enjoin arbitration or to order arbitration in this federal district.
This case is a striking example of how a lawsuit involving a relatively straightforward international commercial transactio...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the Court to decide numerous pre-trial motions submitted by the three remaining defendants
1
in the above-captioned prosecution. Counts 1 and 2 of the superseding indictment charge defendants Simon Abcasis, Ralph Abcasis, and Rebecca Abcasis, (collectively, the “Defendants”) with conspiring to and attempting to import heroin into the Uni...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER On March 11, 1992 defendant Ronald Carter moved (1) pursuant to Rule 14 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (“F.R.C.P.”) for a severance; (2) pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the F.R.C.P. and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution to suppress an admission allegedly made to federal law enforcement officers; and (3) pursuant to Rule 7(c)(1) and (2) of t...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON CONSPIRACY ISSUE
I. BACKGROUND FACTS.
Lawrence Shea is the holder of three patents for a resin-based fiberglass type of heating, ventilation and air conditioning (“HVAC”) ductwork. The ductwork produced by Shea’s method is recognized by both plaintiff and defendant as superior for certain indoor environments. In the broader market for HVA...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Petitioner filed this second petition for habeas corpus relief with this court November 15, 1990. The petition was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Marc L. Goldman. On March 24, 1992, the *972magistrate judge issued a report which recommended that the petition be dismissed. Because this court concurs in the result but differ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s objections to the fee application filed by the “security cleared expert” Special Master
1
and the reply of the plaintiff-intervenor
2
to those objections. The original appointment was the subject of an unsuccessful Government petition to the Court of Appeals for a writ of mandamus (or more accurately prohi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is petitioner José E. Panzardi-Alvarez’ third petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking relief from the conviction and sentence imposed. The facts and procedural history of this case have been memorialized in a series of ap*668pellate court opinions, Panzardi-Alvarez v. United States, 930 F.2d 907 (1st Cir.1991) (unpublished opinion); Panzardi-Alvarez v. Uni...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Fratelli Lozza (USA) Inc., is a New York corporation with a principal place of business at Mount Vernon, New York, which is in the business of importing and distributing optical spectacle frames, principally of Italian manufacture. Defendant Lozza SpA is an Italian corporation located in the Province of Belluno, Italy which desi...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S SECOND PETITION . FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT This case arises out of plaintiff Vincent Giolito’s claims of third-party tort liability against defendant Dow Corning Corp. and others for injuries received in a 1983 fire, while he was employed by Gillette Company at Gillette’s Andover plant. Plaintiff now petitions for reconsideration of my decision to deny approva...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION.
This cause comes before the court on motion for summary judgment filed March 15, 1991 (Docket No. 81), by defendants Southeastern Alaska Pilots’ Association, et al. (“SEAPA”); on cross-motion for summary judgment, filed June 21,1991 (Docket No. 90), by plaintiff Michael Spence; on motion to strike cross-motion for summary judgment, filed July 12,...
Views: 0
ORDER In the above-referenced action, plaintiff Keith E. Lonesome, (“plaintiff”), appearing pro se, sues various individuals based on an alleged conspiracy to violate his civil and constitutional rights, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Names as defendants are Diane - A. Lebedeff, Charles A. Kuffner, Louis Sangiorgio, Anthony J. DeMarco, Harry R. Poliak, Lawrence N. Weiss, Bruce G. Behrins, Darryl M....
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE AMENDED COMPLAINT AND GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant’s motion to strike the amended complaint pursuant to
Fed. R.Civ.P.
12(f). In the alternative, Defendant moves the Court to dismiss the amended complaint, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P.
...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on the complaint of the United States of America, which seeks to permanently enjoin Clement (“Clem”) Bailey, Jewelene Bailey, Kristi Shelton, and Kathy Zeeb, individually, and doing business as Clem Bailey & Associates, from preparing federal income tax returns for compensation.
The Court held a preliminary injunction hearing in the spr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), brings this action pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601
et seq.
to recover the costs it has incurred in connection with the response activities related to the Gurley O...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT
This case presents the issue of whether a provision of Iowa’s income tax laws that allows a taxpayer to claim an
*1033
income tax deduction or credit for payment of elementary or secondary school tuition and textbooks violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States C...
Views: 0
Page 5049
ORDER
The Anthems
The National Hockey League (NHL) seeks a declaratory judgment against the National Hockey League Players Association (NHLPA) and a putative defendant class of hockey players. The NHL and its twenty-two Member Clubs (the clubs) seek a declaration that their continued adherence to particular contract terms of the parties’ 1988 Collective Bargaining Agreement
...
Views: 0
789 F.Supp. 296 (1992)
John Frederick DORMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant.
No. 91-1363C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
April 9, 1992.
Daniel J. McMichael, James J. Logan, McMichael & Logan, Chesterfield, Mo., for plaintiff.
Kenneth Heineman, John Kinsella, Coburn, Croft & Putzell, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GUNN, Distr...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Richard Doe, in his capacity as guardian and next friend of John Doe, a minor, (hereafter collectively referred to as “Doe”) brings this diversity action against British Universities North America Club (“BUNAC”), BUNAC Travel Services, Limited (“BTS”), BUNAC U.S.A., Long Rivers Council, Inc. (“LRC”), and the Boy Scouts of America (“BSA”). The action ...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS The Resolution Trust Corporation as Receiver for Oak Tree Savings Bank, S.S.B. filed a motion to dismiss the counterclaim against it. For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED. The issue is whether after a federally insured financial institution has been placed in receivership a district court must dismiss a suit filed against the institution prior to the appointment o...
Views: 0
Pursuant to defendants’ Motion to Establish “Then Date” and plaintiff having filed formal response thereto, and further upon advice of counsel that there is no necessity for the oral hearing scheduled April 1, 1992, the matter was submitted on the briefs. By its motion to establish “then date”, defendants seek judicial determination of the date from which the Hill-Burton recovery amount due and ow...
Views: 1
OPINION and ORDER
Plaintiff brought this civil action for damages against defendant in the Circuit Court for Marathon County, Wisconsin, alleging negligence and breach of warranty in connection with a contract for pulp mill improvements. Defendant removed the action to this court pursuant to a timely notice of removal. The case is before the court on defendant’s motion for partial summary...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This ease concerns a jury determination of negligence and damages. The trial involved the alleged negligence of a railroad company when its train, proceeding caboose-first in the early hours of the morning, allegedly injured the plaintiff, Edwin Fuentes, who was sleeping by the railroad track next to a stack of radiators. Defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ASSESSING COSTS Plaintiffs filed this action in Wayne County Circuit Court on March 29, 1991. Defendants removed to this court on May 15, 1991. All state claims, Counts II — VII, were remanded to state court. The only claim before this court, Count I, is the alleged violations of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U....
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff has filed suit alleging age discrimination in violation of federal (Count I) and state (Count II) law. She also brought state law claims of intentional interference with contractual relationships (Count III) and intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count IV). The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Collings for a recommendation on the defendants’ motion for pa...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This action involves the involuntary commitment of the two individual plaintiffs and, ostensibly, of the members of the would-be class of plaintiffs. Plaintiffs Ru-benstein and Bagatta are individuals who, by different means, arrived, on different dates, at the emergency room of defendant Benedictine Hospital, a private “hospital” as that term is defined in A...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On June 4,1986, the petitioner, Fernando Arbelaez-Osorio, pleaded guilty to a charge that he, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), knowingly and intentionally possessed an unspecified amount of cocaine with intent to distribute. On July 29, 1986, Judge Henry Bramwell sentenced Arbe-laez-Osorio to a fifteen-year term of imprisonment, a twenty-year term of special parole, a fi...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Liability and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to all claims. Plaintiff has also filed a Motion to File a Supplemental Declaration. Defendant has not responded to this Motion and, therefore, it is unopposed and granted. LR 220-l(b)(l).
Plaintiff claims that this is a simple case wher...
Views: 0
ENTRY
This matter comes before the Court on three nearly identical motions filed in three of the cases transferred to this Court for pretrial proceedings by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. These motions were originally filed in the transferor courts and were still pending, at least in part, at the time of transfer. For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and de...
Views: 1
Page 5117
OPINION AND ORDER
These cases are before the Court on appeals by the United States, filed on April 10, 1990, challenging the bankruptcy court’s award of attorneys’ fees to special counsel.
I.FACTS
The debtor in this case, Marvin L. Warner, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on October 22, 1987, following his conviction in Ohio state court for thr...
Views: 3
Plaintiffs bring these actions for declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. Plaintiffs also seek an award of attorneys fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, and costs. Plaintiffs, milk dealers who are licensed to sell milk in New York and whose milk processing plants are located out of state...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION This matter is before the Court following a hearing on April 4, 1992 on plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction and upon the presentation of arguments by counsel. The plaintiffs are the owners of bars in the City of Norwood, Ohio who hold Class “D” permits. See Ohio Rev.Code §§ 4303.-13-183. Such permits issued by the State of Ohio allow the holder to se...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Joint Board of Trustees of the GMP and Employers Pension Fund’s (“Trustees”) motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and Plaintiff’s memorandum in opposition thereto (Docs. 5, 6), as well as upon Defendant Stoner and Associates’ (“Stoner”) motion to dismiss on the same groun...
Views: 0
ORDER The recommendation is accepted and accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is allowed and plaintiff’s cross motion, denied. Judgment may be entered for defendant. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON (1) FEDERAL DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#31) AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (#48) This case concerns plaintiff John M.S. Carreiro’s attempts to obtain employment w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Kyung In Lee filed this diversity action in the aftermath of a series of financial transactions with defendant Pacific Bullion (“Pacific”). Lee alleges that defendant, a commodity brokerage specializing in precious metals and foreign currency, fraudulently induced her to invest money and caused her to sustain losses as a result. Lee also asserts that defenda...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Plaintiff, Robert Martyr, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against three staff members of the Oregon State Hospital. Martyr contends that his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution are violated by the actions of defendants in censoring his outgoing mail. Martyr also brings a pendent s...
Views: 2
OPINION
On May 2, 1990, plaintiff Pauline L. Harrison, then 72 years of age, had a cerebral infarction caused by a blood clot originating in the left atrium of her heart which travelled to the middle cerebral artery, obstructing the blood flow to the portion of the brain supplied by that artery and causing damage to the brain tissue, along with the accompanying neurological symptoms and s...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The defendant, David Kinard, was charged in an indictment with one count of distributing cocaine base, one count of possession of cocaine base with the intent to distribute, and with aiding and abetting the above. The indictment charged two other individuals, Edward Earl Clark and Shea Robert Taylor, with the same violations. All three defendants were convicted of all ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In an indictment filed October 24, 1991, defendant Ralph Ferguson was charged with a number of counts relating to his theft from the State Department mail room of a number of guns. Counts 3 through 11 charge the defendant with receipt and possession of machineguns that had not been registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, a violation of 2...
Views: 0
This court's Memorandum and Order dated December 16, 1991, familiarity with which is assumed, outlined the basic facts of this case. The United States brought this action by verified complaint
in rem
for forfeiture of seven parcels of real property in Brooklyn (including defendant 651 Fountain Avenue), Nassau County, and Suffolk
*539
County; and for forfeiture of the ass...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon cross-motions for summary judgment (documents 36, 37 and 38). Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). The Plaintiffs assert a claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to recover benefits allegedly due to them as participants in an employee welfare benefit plan, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), and for an alleged breach of fiduciary duty, 29 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case presents before the Court the question whether the failure to consider for appointment, or the denial of an appointment, to an individual by the governor of the state to sit as a state judge because of that individual’s partisan political affiliation violates the individual’s rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution; Ar...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff New Line International Releasing, Inc. (“New Line”) brings this diversity action against defendant Ivex Films, S.A. (“Ivex”) for breach of a distribution agreement. Ivex is currently involved in insolvency proceedings in Spain. Ivex has moved for dismissal of the complaint based on the doctrine of international comity, and for an injunction staying New Line from suing Iv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Before the court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988). Petitioner William J. Sears is currently incarcerated in Holli-daysburg, Pennsylvania, having served approximately two months of his eight month sentence after pleading guilty in this district to violating 18 U.S.C. § 1623 (1988) (“False declarations before grand ...
Views: 0
OPINION The matter before the court is the motion to dismiss of the defendant, Michael Lynn Wyncoop. On September 24, 1991, a federal grand jury returned a one-count indictment against Wyncoop. The grand jury charges Wyncoop with the crime of theft from a program which receives governmental funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666. The indictment sets forth a scheme whereby Wyncoop is alleged to have...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The plaintiff the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brings this action for injunctive and monetary relief against the defendants the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Barnsta-ble County Retirement Association (“BCRA”). The plaintiff alleges that Mass. Gen.L. ch. 32, § 90F, which requires all Group 1 employees1 of the Commonwealth over age seventy to take and...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Motion of Plaintiff, file stamped 32 March 1992, to Stay Deposition. On 9 April 1992, Claimant Curtis Leak filed a Response opposing Plaintiff’s Motion.
Plaintiff, on 21 June 1991, instituted this action with the filing of a Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem. Subsequently, Claimant, on 11 July 1991, filed a verified claim to the property at 5709 Hillingdon R...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (“M & R”) entered by Magistrate Judge Paul B. Taylor [hereinafter referred to as “Magistrate”] on January 21, 1992.
Magistrate Taylor entered the above-noted Memorandum and Recommendation in response to Defendant’s motion to suppress after holding an evidentiary hearing on December 19, 1991. The United States of America (h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a diversity action. Defendant Cargill, formerly the sole shareholder of plaintiff Summit, sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of Summit to SNL (formerly Virick Limited II) in 1988. Summit *364brought this action against defendant alleging the breach of a Tax Allocation Agreement that had been entered into by Summit and Cargill on or about July 13, 1983....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s February 21, 1992 Order granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to Counts I and II and dismissing Counts III through VII of the Complaint, 784 F.Supp. 1190. 1 Plaintiffs contend that the Court erred in granting summary judgment before defendants had filed an Answer to the Complaint and prior to the ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action brought by the Township of Wayne (“Wayne”) against defendants Louis Messercola (“Messercola”), Thomas Acquaviva (“Acquaviva”), Paul Ca-valiere, Jr. (“Cavaliere”), Raymond McGro-gan (“McGrogan”), Fair Lawn-McBride Associates (“Fair Lawn-McBride”), McBride Enterprises, Inc. (“McBride Enterprises”), Keljed/McBride, (“McBride”) (Fair Lawn-McBride, McBride Enterprises...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
The Culinary Workers Union, Local No. 226 (Union) seeks summary judgment on the claims made by Robert Sanders (Sanders) that the Union discriminated against him because of his race, breached his employment contract, breached its covenant of good faith and fair dealing, is liable for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, that he was wrongful...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Browning Avenue Realty Corp. (“Browning Avenue”) individually and on behalf of the joint venture Cross Country Square Associates (“Joint Venture”) has moved pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to amend its complaint. Defendants Ira Rubin and his accounting firm, Krasnow, Cohen, Gaft & Rubin (collectively “Rubin”), and Defendants Alfred Wilner and Alfred W...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Back in 1987 this court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Their argument then was that only an insignificant number of American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago *784(ANB) 90-day unsecured commercial loans were made at rates less than ANB’s declared prime rate. Defendants relied upon an analysis of 579 loans of $500,000 or more, only eight of which wer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Came on to be considered the motion of defendant, United States of America, to dismiss. The court, having considered the motion, the response of plaintiff, John R. Delin, III, (“Delin”), the record, and the applicable authority, finds that the motion should be denied. On November 26, 1991, Delin filed his complaint against defendant. He alleges that in October, 1989, G...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the Defendant’s “Motion for Return of Appellate Docketing Fee” (#40). For the reasons set forth below, this motion is denied. BACKGROUND On January 14, 1992, a final judgment was entered in this case reflecting that the Defendant had been convicted on drug and money laundering charges. One week later, on January 21, 1992, the Defendant filed a notice of appeal, and paid a...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of BIC Corporation (“defendant”), pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, for summary judgment. For reasons stated below, the court denies the motion.
FACTS
John Kuri (“John”), on March 4, 1988, was a six year old boy and an Illinois resident. It is not entirely clear how, but it is certain that on that day John discovered and began t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Now before the court is the government’s motion to vacate defendant Martin Feliciano’s (“Feliciano”) plea agreement, pursuant to
United States v. Verrusio,
803
*847
F.2d 885 (7th Cir.1986). On February 3, 1992, the court held an evidentiary hearing at which time the government presented evidence.
1
The court now makes the fol...
Views: 0
*929
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London and Companies In Interest (“Underwriters”), brought this tort action against defendant, The Fidelity and Casualty Insurance Company of New York (“Fidelity”), for wrongful refusal to settle an underlying product liability suit against the mutual insured, Dresser Industries, Inc. (“Dresser”). Fidelity moved...
Views: 1
ORDER OF REMAND
This matter comes before the court
sua sponte.
After an extreme close-up review of the record and excellent authorities, the court enters the following order.
Hurling Chunks
On October 11,1988, while berthed at the facilities of Bradford Marine, Inc. (“Bradford”), a fire spewed from the M/V Prime Time, a boat owned by Prime Time Charters, Inc. (“Pr...
Views: 0
*461
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages alleging breach of contract. Having completed discovery, Plaintiff moves pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment on its first claim. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
1. INTRODUCTION
The key figures in this action are Plaintiff Congr...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Parke-Hayden, Inc. (“Parke-Hayden”) has moved pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56 for an order granting summary judgment in its favor on the First Claim contained in the complaint. Defendant Loews Theatre Management Corp. (“Loews”) has also moved for partial summary judgment in its favor dismissing the Third and Fourth Claims of the complaint as well as Parke-Hayden’s request f...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5237: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Presbyterian Ministries, Inc.
Page 5237
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SUMMARY OF FACTS Plaintiff Jacqueline Brooks worked as a receptionist at Exeter House, a retirement home operated by Presbyterian Ministries, Inc. (PMI), from October 1985 until January 18, 1988 when she resigned. Plaintiff contends that PMI objected to the headcov-ering she began wearing in January 1988 and which she was required t...
Views: 1
Page 5240
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a breach of contract action brought by Walpex Trading Company (“Walpex”), a New York corporation engaged in international exports, against Ya-cimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Bolivianos (“YPFB”), an instrumentality of the Bolivian government which purchases supplies for that country’s national oil program, with jurisdiction founded on section 1605(a)(2) of the For...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, The New York City Employees’ Retirement System (“NYCERS”) moves by order to show cause, and by complaint filed March 10, 1992, for an order granting a preliminary injunction pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure enjoining Defendant Brunswick Corporation (“Brunswick”) from soliciting shareholder proxies for Defendant’s annual stockholders’...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff claims that defendant breached a contract (“the Contract”) to supply a pollution control system. Defendant now moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons set forth .below, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied.
I.
Plaintiff, St. Anne-Nackawic Pulp Company, whose principal place of business is in New Brunsw...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Mutual Export Corp. comes before us with a tale of woe from Downun-der, seeking reformation of a letter of credit that terminated too early as a result of blunder. The parties, agreeing that the facts are for the most part undisputed, have cross moved for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, plaintiff’s motion is granted and defendant’s denied. FACTS 1 ...
Views: 3
Maistros Corporation (“Maistros”) seeks to vacate an arbitration award against it of $932,818.24 on the grounds that the arbitrators exceeded their powers under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 10(d), and that, under the terms of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 21 U.S.T. 2517, T.I.A.S. 6997 (1970) (reprinted as a note following 9 U.S.C. § 201), ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, the State of Ohio (“the State”) seeks review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services Departmental Appeals Board (“the Board”) Decision No. 1202, rendered on
*1398
November 1, 1990, sustaining a penalty disallowance imposed by the Office of Child Support Enforcement (“OCSE”). During a program results audit ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Background
Plaintiff Montcalm Publishing Corporation (“Montcalm”), a magazine publisher, brought suit against defendant John S. Ryan (“Ryan”) and several corporate defendants under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961,
et seq.,
to recover money damages on account of defendants’ allegedly fraudulent...
Views: 3
Page 5257
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this action for breach of contract and copyright infringement, defendant State Street Bank and Trust Co. (“State Street” or the “Bank”) has moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining plaintiff Computer Associates International, Inc. (“Computer Associates”) from terminating maintenance support for Computer Associates’ software products installed on State Street’s comput...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case comes before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss portions of Plaintiff’s complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). Plaintiff, a former employee of Defendant Davis Memorial Goodwill, brought this action against Goodwill and several officers and supervisors at Goodwill. She claims that defendants discriminated against her because of her race and gender duri...
Views: 0
OPINION This case arises out of a dispute concerning a petroleum franchise relationship in Washington, D.C. This court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (PMPA), 15 U.S.C. § 2805(a), and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiff alleges pendent jurisdiction for his state claims. Plaintiff alleges violations of the PMPA and common law breaches of contract. Now ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT
Representatives of the PTL Lifetime Partner Class (“PTL”) move for mandatory or discretionary withdrawal of the reference from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York of jurisdiction over the claims filed by PTL for alleged violations of the debtor, Laventhol & Horwath (“L & H”), of federal securities laws, the Federal Racketeer Influenced an...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the court is the motion on behalf of all defendants to dismiss Count I of the complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and to dismiss Counts II and III of the complaint for failure to make an adequate pre-suit demand or to adequately allege with particularity why demand should be excused as required ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This cause is before this Court on Motion of Timberton Golf, L.P. (hereinafter “Tim-berton”) for Preliminary Injunction, for Consolidation, and for Abstention, and on the Cross-Motion of McCumber Construction, Inc. and McCumber Golf, Inc. (hereinafter “McCumber”) to compel arbitration and dismiss Timberton’s cause of action.
Facts and Proceedings
Timberton is a ...
Views: 0
JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE
On April 3, 1992, this Court heard and considered the dispositive motion filed herein by the United States of America (Government) entitled, “Motion to Strike and for Default Judgment of Forfeiture or Summary Judgment,” and the motion filed by counsel for the claimants entitled, “Motion to Withdraw”; and based upon the documents on file in this action, evidentiary matter pr...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on plaintiffs’ petition to vacate or modify the arbitration award as clarified and for entry of judgment in accordance with their damage calculations and on motions by defendants for confirmation of the arbitrators’ award. Having considered the briefs and submissions of the parties, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the plaintiffs’ motion is...
Views: 0
*1214ORDER
Before the court are defendant’s motion for summary judgment, defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s demand for jury trial, and plaintiff’s motion to reconsider her motion to remand. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order.
PACTS
Plaintiff, Karen Wheelus, has a serious illness that...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon various pending motions, including motions for summary judgment filed by both defendants. The parties have fully briefed the pending motions, and the Court has had the benefit of United States Magistrate Judge Lurana S. Snow’s report and recommendation concerning some of the pending motions. All the pending motions are ripe for disposition.
...
Views: 1
The parties in this case dispute the ownership of a patent. The material facts are not in dispute, and both plaintiff and defendant have moved for summary judgment.
*362
The plaintiff is Chesapeake Fiber Packaging Corporation (hereinafter “Chesapeake”). In its complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, Chesapeake has named as defendant Sebro Packaging Corporation (herein...
Views: 0
*740
OPINION
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65(a), plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction enjoining the implementation of the apportionment plan enacted by defendants for the election districts of the Kent County Board of Commissioners and requiring defendants to implement an apportionment plan including two districts in which minorities comprise effective voting ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Judy Ann Sudtelgte filed this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil
*313
Rights Act of 1964, as amended 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et. seq.,
against her former employer William S. Sessions in his official capacity as the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation alleging sex-based discrimination and hostile environment. This matter i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in this case challenge various sections of Rhode Island election laws as violative of the First Amendment. The challenged sections allow only legislative district committees to file endorsements for candidates to the state legislature with the Board of Canvassers, limit the number of members on legislative district committees, mandate delegate status to cer...
Views: 0
790 F.Supp. 1456 (1992)
Deborah J. KERNS, Plaintiff,
v.
BENEFIT TRUST LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
No. 89-1591-C-5.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
April 22, 1992.
*1457 Fairfax Jones, Casserly, Jones & Brittingham, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
James P. Lemonds, Holtkamp, Liese, Beckemeier & Childress, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant William L. Meyer.
Clar...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The asserted plaintiff class consists of California state prisoners sentenced to death. They challenge the method of their future executions, asserting that death by lethal gas violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) preventing the executions of members of the plaintiff cla...
Views: 0
Page 5328
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
The plaintiff, the Stewart B. McKinney Foundation, Incorporated, has brought this civil rights action claiming the decision of the defendant, Fairfield Town Plan and Zoning Commission, to require the plaintiff to obtain a special exception for its intended use of a two-family residence it owns is discriminatory. The Complaint alleges...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment. The motion will be granted.
FACTS
This is an action for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress
1
by the former St. Paul fire chief against the Minneapolis Star Tribune and two of its reporters arising out of two articles published in October 19...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend portions of the complaint.
See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a).
1
Because this Court finds that the compensatory damage and jury trial provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 apply retroactively to this case, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to incl...
Views: 1
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GARNISHEE NAVIOS CORPORATION’S CROSS MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING ORDERS OF ATTACHMENT AND ISSUANCE OF PROCESS This is a factually complex case arising within the admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts. It involves application of Rule B of the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims of the Federal Rules of Civil Pr...
Views: 1
ORDER Petitioner, who is presently incarcerated at the District of Columbia correctional facility at Lorton, Virginia, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The grounds alleged are failure to provide a timely or adequate revocation hearing, and ineffective assistance of counsel at a preliminary parole hearing. Petitioner was incarcerated pursuant to a sentence imposed by the Sup...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is presently before the court on A.E. Crane and Larry Waddell’s motions to quash service of subpoenas duces tecum on the grounds that the information sought to be discovered is protected by the work product rule and the attorney-client privilege. The court has reviewed in camera the state police report sought to be protected from discovery. For the following reasons...
Views: 1
NUNC PRO TUNC MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for reconsideration. Having reviewed the motion, the court is now prepared to rule.
I. Background
Plaintiff Fidelity Savings Association of Kansas (“Fidelity”) originally filed this action on December 10, 1990, in the District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas. On March 6, 1991, Fidelity filed a motion with th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
John Doe Plaintiffs institute this class action individually and on behalf of the beneficiaries of the United Mine Workers of America 1950 Benefit Plan and Trust (“1950 Trust”) and 1974 Benefit Plan and Trust (“1974 Trust”) (collectively, “the Trusts”). Plaintiff-United Mine Workers of America (“UMW”) is an unincorporated association and labor organization within
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff has filed this action challenging the final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying plaintiffs claim that she is not subject to an increased premium surcharge of 90 percent as a re-enrollee in the supplemental medical insurance program (SMI) under Part B of the Medicare program. The Administrative Law Judge (AU) upheld the assessment of the su...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS This court previously ordered the parties to show cause why Civil Action No. 91-4481 should not be remanded to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. In addition, defendant Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. (“Hyundai”) filed a motion on March 23, 1992, for leave to file a third-party complaint and a motion on March 31, 1992, for leave to file an amended a...
Views: 1
Page 5351
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action comes before the court as an appeal from a judgment rendered by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, the Honorable Massie Tillman presiding. The court, having reviewed the briefs of appellant, Dinkel Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Billings Auto Auction, and appellee, Joseph Colvin, Trustee for Bailey Pontia...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 207
et seq.
Plaintiffs are police officers who are canine handlers for the City of Chicago. Plaintiffs are required to board their dogs at their homes and feed, exercise and groom the dogs during their off-duty hours. Plaintiffs claim that the time spent in these activities ...
Views: 2
809 F. Supp. 437 (1992)
Alfred DEMPSEY
v.
ARCO OIL & GAS CO., et al.
Civ. A. No. 90-3279.
United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.
April 8, 1992.
*438 Marshall J. Hough, Hough and Associates, Metairie, LA, for plaintiff.
Michael M. Christovich, Charles M. Lanier, Jr., Christovich & Kearney, New Orleans, LA, for defendants.
ORDER AND REASONS
MENTZ, District Judge.
Before the Court is...
Views: 0
Page 5406
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County, Inc. (“CEDA”) has moved to dismiss Count II of plaintiff Chrisnol Louis’ complaint. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the motion to dismiss. I. Louis, a black male born in Haiti, was employed by CEDA as the manager of its Furnace Program.1 Despite being highly qualified and receiving posit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this case, defendants Stone, McGuire & Benjamin (“SMB”), Howard L. Stone (“Stone”), a partner of SMB, Michael L. Siegel (“Siegel”), a non-equity partner of SMB, Rosenthal & Schanfield, P.C. (“R & S”), William P. Rosenthal (“Rosenthal”), a senior shareholder of R & S, and Leslie J. Weiss (“Weiss”), an attorney employed by R & S have filed separate motions to...
Views: 1
Page 5421
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On October 23, 1991, the plaintiff, Joan Haley (“Mrs. Haley”), acting in her capacity as administrator of the estate of her husband, John Haley (“Mr. Haley”), filed this action against American International Life Assurance Company of New York (“AI Life”) to recover accidental death benefits Mrs. Haley claims are due under her husband’s employee benefits plan (...
Views: 0
790 F. Supp. 1372 (1992)
Tom KOULOURIS, Plaintiff,
v.
ESTATE OF Hymen P. CHALMERS and Electronics, Missiles & Communications, Inc., Defendants.
No. 89 C 0734.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
March 25, 1992.
*1373 Daniel Francis Webb, Jr., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Howard R. Barron, Ronald L. Marmer, Howard Steven Suskin, Jenner & Block, Chicago, Ill., for defendants....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On January 3, 1992 this Court, in an oral bench ruling, denied what plaintiff Spraying Systems Co. (“Spraying Systems”) had characterized as a Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56 motion for summary judgment.1 In the course of that denial, this Court held that witnesses Robert Mueller and George Wor-thington were not rendered incompetent to testify for then defendant William Smar...
Views: 1
Page 5439
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action, for the collection of assessed withdrawal liability under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1368, as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1461, comes before the court on the motion of defendants Larry A. Hayes and Katrina O. Hayes d/b/a Chicago Heights Le...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Retired Chicago Police Association (“RCPA”) filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 class action against the City of Chicago (“the city”), three of its officers, and four city employee pension funds. RCPA and various proposed intervenors (collectively “plaintiffs”) purport to represent a class of pension plan annuitants who began participating in the city’s Annuitant He...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This suit arises out of the fire that devastated telephone service in the Hinsdale, Illinois area for several months in 1988. The court will assume familiarity with the facts set forth in its earlier opinions issued *1387in this matter, and will repeat only the essential facts here. Briefly, the fire occurred at Illinois Bell’s Hinsdale Central Office (HCO). Arkwright was Illin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On January 15, 1991, plaintiff Clinton P. Moore filed a single-count complaint against Burlington Northern Railroad Company (“BN”), alleging race discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
Presently before the court is Moore’s motion to file a jury demand and amend his complaint to request com...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before this court is Defendant’s motion to compel discovery. At deposition, Defendant wanted to depose Plaintiff Au-gustin A. Vaccaro regarding a conversation he had with Wayne Kabak. Vaccaro failed to answer questions regarding his conversation with Mr. Kabak on the grounds of attorney-client privilege.
Background
In July, 1986, Pace Motor Sports, Inc. (“Pace”) and S...
Views: 1
Page 5452
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Now before the court is plaintiff’s motion to remand this action to state court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). Plaintiff filed its two-count complaint in state court seeking relief based on Illinois law. Defendant removed the action to this court claiming that federal law preempts plaintiff’s state-law claims. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that d...
Views: 0
ORDER Presently before this court is the plaintiff Charlyn Godwin’s (“Godwin”) March 24,1992 motion for appointment of counsel. This court must deny without prejudice Godwin’s motion. Indigent civil litigants have no absolute constitutional or statutory right to be represented by counsel in federal court. McKeever v. Israel, 689 F.2d 1315, 1318 (7th Cir.1982). This court has discretion, however, t...
Views: 0
OPINION
On August 10, 1989, this court entered an opinion and order granting in part and denying in part defendant’s motion to dismiss. Specifically, this court dismissed plaintiff’s claims (1) against the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS), and (2) against Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) concerning plaintiff’s alleged right to repurchase certain farmland which he had o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Multivision Cable TV Corporation (Multivision) and B & E Grenada, Inc. (B & E) operate cable television systems in various areas of Mississippi and elsewhere. Plaintiff Futurevision Cable Systems, Inc.
1
is a cable system overbuild-er, which enters areas already being served by a cable service provider, overbuilds that system and begins t...
Views: 0
*917MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company for summary judgment and the cross-motion of plaintiffs Delores Coomes and Michelle Coomes for partial summary judgment. Each party has responded to the motion of the other and the court has considered the memoranda of authorities together with attachments submi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Laneer Winder, an inmate awaiting trial at the Cook County Department of Corrections (“CCDOC”), brings this civil rights action against James Bulky, Captain of the Residential Treatment Unit (“RTU”) at CCDOC, and Correctional Officers Mario Ledesma, Michael Sanders and Shirley Ashley. Defendants Ledesma and Bulley now move for summary judgment on Cou...
Views: 0
Page 5493
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal by the Internal Revenue Service from a decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois to grant the trustee’s motion for summary judgment. The trustee has filed a cross-appeal. For the reasons set forth below, we will only entertain the Internal Revenue Service’s appeal. In doing so, we reverse the bankruptcy court’s decision.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Erwin Daniel has petitioned the court for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Daniel’s sole basis for relief is that the jury instructions given at trial on murder and voluntary manslaughter violated his due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. FACTS Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Daniel was convicted of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presently pending is defendant Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss. On such a motion, all the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint are assumed to be true and all reasonable inferences from the facts alleged are drawn in favor of plaintiff.
Gomez v. Illinois State Board of Education,
811 F.2d 1030, 1039 (7th Cir.1987). Th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The government filed a complaint on March 7, 1991 requesting the forfeiture,
*1380
seizure, and condemnation of an article of food, in accordance with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“The Act”), 21 U.S.C. 301
et seq.
The article of food referred to was seventy-one 55 gallon drums, more or less, of stuffed green olives in brine.
1
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This court has previously ruled in favor of plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”), in the liability phase of this Title VII pattern and practice race discrimination action. The matter is now back before the court for rulings on the damage phase. After the parties had briefed the damage phase, but before the court had ruled, the Sevent...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Carlos Avila seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondents now move to dismiss Avila’s petition for failure to exhaust available state remedies prior to seeking federal relief as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b). For the reasons as set forth below, respondents’ *198 motion to dismiss is granted without prejudice. I. Following a be...
Views: 0
Page 5551
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants in this action are guarantors of a loan made by plaintiff, Mitsui Taiyo Kobe Bank, Ltd. (MTKB), to finance a construction project in Merrillville, Indiana. MTKB brought this diversity action for payment on the guaranty and now defendants move for a dismissal or stay of plaintiff’s complaint pending resolution of a related foreclosure proceeding in an Indian...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff H.F. Vegter Excavating Co. (“Vegter”) has filed a motion for remand to the Circuit Court for the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, Illinois. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the motion.
I.
Defendant Marino Construction Co. (“Marino”) was the contractor on a construction project known as the “Site ‘B’ Pump Station and Rese...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM and STATEMENT OF REASONS I.Findings of Fact The probation office prepared a presen-tence investigation report (PSI) in this manner. The government has no objections to the report. Paragraph 29 of the report states that the aggregate amount of drugs used to find the appropriate offense level is 50.4 grams of cocaine base. Defendant contends that the aggregate amount of ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Personal Jurisdiction
*557TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.557
II. FACTS.558
A. Background.558
B. Present Actions.559
C. Motions.559
III. NEW YORK SUBSTANTIVE LAW AND RULES AFFECTING SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS. cn C5 o
A. History of New York Products Liability Law and Mass Tort Law Generally. B. New York DES Law. C. Constitutionality of New York DES Law en o* cj* CTi CTi Ü1COO
IV....
Views: 1
OPINION
The court on this motion is again faced with the endemic problem of determining
*862
the extent to which state statutes and rules related to limitations of actions apply in federal diversity cases.
FACTS
Two days before the statute of limitations ran, the plaintiffs, William H. McGee and Company and Carlisle Equipment Company, filed this diversity action to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Before the Court is the issue whether plaintiffs have good cause to bring their second count, asserting violation of section 501(a) of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA), 29 U.S.C. § 401-531. Plaintiffs Kurt Kausler and Thomas Jennings, on behalf of themselves and all other members of United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 655, AFL-CIO, bring this...
Views: 0
RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS Pending are the defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s state law contract claim and plaintiff’s motion to apply the Civil Rights Act of 1991 retroactively to this action. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are denied. I. BACKGROUND On July 28, 1986, the plaintiff, Luminitza Sava, filed a complaint against the defendant, General Electric Company, which was ame...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Corsie Trent brought this action to obtain judicial review of an administrative decision of the Department of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the provisions of the Social Security Act; at issue is the denial his application for Supplemental Security Income. The case is currently before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment.
APPLICABLE LAW
The Sixth...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff H.H. Robertson Company, Cupples Product Division’s (Cupples) motion for creditor’s bill in equity to enforce the judgment in favor of Cupples against defendant V.S. DiCarlo General Contractors, Inc. (Di-Carlo), entered on July 2, 1990, in the amount of $373,039.46 on the breach of contract claim and $25,664.94 on the quantum meruit claim.1 D...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the following motions:
1. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Count II of the amended complaint;
2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Count I and II of the amended complaint;
3. Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on plaintiffs’ damage claims;
4. Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on Coun...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM RULING GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending for determination is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendants, Chevron Corporation Medical Plan and Chevron Corporation Medical Plan Organization. In a letter of April 8, 1992, plaintiff states that they have no response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, except to state that, based upon the evidence submitted with defendant...
Views: 1
ORDER The facts alleged by plaintiff to give rise to claims against defendants Village of Glenview and David J. Kelly are stated in the complaint as follows: 18. On information and belief, Defendants David J. Kelly and the Village of Glenview had prior notice or should have known of the propensities of Defendant Kopera to act out side of his lawful authority, but took no steps to train him,...
Views: 1
RULING ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case requires the Court to determine whether plaintiff is entitled to disability benefits under a policy issued by UNUM Life Insurance Company (UNUM) to Brown and Root USA, Inc. (Brown and Root). For reasons’ which follow, the Court finds that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should be granted.
The facts of this case are undisputed for purp...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE On December 20, 1991, this Court ordered the parties to submit memoranda discussing whether the Court should exercise its discretion to dismiss the suit in accordance with the Fifth Circuit opinion of Torch, Inc. v. LeBlanc.1 After reviewing the briefs submitted by counsel, the Court finds it should dismiss this action without prejudice. On August 31, 1988, J.C...
Views: 0
RULING ON FDIC’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT REGARDING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE, FAILURE TO MITIGATE DAMAGES AND ESTOPPEL
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as receiver for Sun Belt Federal Bank, F.S.B. (“Sun Belt”) has moved for partial summary judgment as to the affirmative defenses of contributory negligence, failure to mitigate damages an...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiff St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, Inc.’s (“St. Paul’s”) motion for discharge and enjoinment (Doc. $ 21). St. Paul filed this action for declaratory relief to determine the policy limits of a professional liability insurance policy. Having reviewed St. Paul’s motion, the court is now prepared to rule.
Factual ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the court is Defendant, Farmers Insurance Company, Inc.’s (“Farmers”), motion for summary judgment filed on January 13, 1992. Plaintiff, Marjorie Prince, filed her response on January 31, 1992, to which Farmers filed its reply on February 14, 1992. A hearing on the motion was held on February 18, 1992, at which time counsel for the parties argue...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s pro se letter filed December 20, 1991, which the court will treat as: (1) a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b); and (2) a motion for appointment of new counsel. *327For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motions will be granted.
Background
On December 3, 1991, this action was...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Carlos Guzman (“Guzman”), individually and on behalf of the members of Local 32B-32J of the Service Employees International Union (“the Union”), filed a verified application for leave to sue under 29 U.S.C. § 501(b) against Gus Bevona, President of the Union (“Bevona”) and other named and unnamed members of the Executive Board of the Union. The Union itself is not named...
Views: 0
ORDER
The
pro se
plaintiffs action arises from a drug raid on an apartment located in the District of Columbia conducted by officers of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) on May 11, 1988. Plaintiff’s complaint, filed on January 3, 1992, asserts in essence that he was inside the apartment when the officers entered unlawfully, beat him, and then arrested him on false charge...
Views: 3
ORDER Plaintiffs brought this action in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia against the District of Columbia, its mayor, its chief of police, Special Agent Dennis Rasmussen of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), and seven unknown named agents of the Joint Fugitive Apprehension Team, for various tortious acts allegedly committed in connection with the apprehension and death ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
Defendant Roland Parson Contracting Corporation is a small masonry firm operated by defendants Roland Parson and his sons Travis and David. Plaintiff John Ken-ney worked for the defendants as a bricklayer from July 1990 until January 1991 building two parking decks in suburban Maryland under Washington Metrorail construction contracts. Both contracts were subject to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The procedural history of the dispute is related in a Memorandum and Order filed May 2, 1991, denying defendant’s motion to dismiss and need not be reconstructed here. An accompanying Order will grant plaintiffs’ motion, deny defen *25 dant’s motion, vacate the determination of the Deputy Administra...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (filed Sept. 12, 1991) of defendants Seymour Freedman, Helene Freedman and S. Freedman Electric, Inc., which was submitted for decision after oral argument on January 29, 1992.
Background
Defendants Seymour Freedman and Helene Freedman are officers and directors of S...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING SECRETARY’S DECISION AND AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES
This case is before this Court on plaintiff’s application for attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff originally applied for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income claiming th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
This is an action to recover benefits allegedly due and to clarify rights to future benefits from a health plan, pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Before the Court are the cross-motions for summary judgment of plaintiff James A. Germany, and defendant Operating Engineers Trust Fund of Washington, D.C. (“the...
Views: 2
ORDER This case was remanded from the Court of Appeals on December 13, 1991, for the reasons set forth in the opinion by Judge Wald, 951 F.2d 1268. In that opinion, the Court of Appeals in its conclusion instructed this Court to determine whether [plaintiff’s] Medical Staff membership and privileges at Greater Southeast [hospital] have in fact been terminated. If so, all of [plaintiff’s] clai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
The 48 plaintiffs in these two actions are former employees of the now defunct Federal Asset Disposition Association (FADA). FADA was a federally chartered savings association whose stock was wholly owned by the former Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and whose sole function was to dispose of the assets of failed FSLIC insured thrift institutions. The ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants Steven Parker, Christopher Lewis and Linwood Lewis have moved to suppress physical evidence seized by members of the Sixth Division of the Vice Squad of the Metropolitan Police Department upon the execution of a search warrant at the premises of 233 51st Street, N.E. in Washington, D.C. The Defendants Steven Parker, Zeb Murray and Linwood Lewis have also mov...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 1, 1988, this Court denied the Secretary’s previous motions to dismiss this class action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and mootness. Griffith v. Bowen, 678 F.Supp. 942 (D.Mass.1988).1 Both parties have now filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment concerning the validity of the screening list, created by the Secretary of Health and Human Services ...
Views: 0
Cecelia Eagleston (“plaintiff”), brings this suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1986 and 1988 against the County of Suffolk, the Suffolk County Police Department, former Suffolk County Police Commissioner Dewitt C. Treder, current Suffolk County Police Commissioner Daniel Guido (“Guido”), Detective Rivera (“Rivera”), and Suffolk County Police Officers Brian K. Bugge (“Bugge”), Edward Kopf (“Ko...
Views: 1
Axel Johnson, Inc. moves under Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) for relief from the dismissal of its securities fraud complaint against Arthur Andersen & Co. Its earlier suit was dismissed as time-barred under the Supreme Court’s decision in
Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson,
— U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 2773, 115 L.Ed.2d 321 (1991).
Lampf
established a new uniform statute ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
This dispute, which is before the Court on dispositive cross-motions, arises out of the prospectively-determined per diem rate system by which the Civilian Health and Military Program of the Uniformed Services (“CHAMPUS”), 10 U.S.C. §§ 1071-1104, reimburses hospitals providing inpatient mental health services to CHAMPUS beneficiaries. In essence, the dispute presents two qu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The parties in this case are currently before the Court on cross motions for summary judgment. This case is an addendum to the actions determined previously by this district court in D’Camera v. District of Columbia, 693 F.Supp. 1208 (D.D.C.1988) (D’Camera I), D’Camera v. District of Columbia, 722 F.Supp. 799 (D.D.C.1989) (D’Camera II), and Wyland v. District of Columbia, 728 F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court are Motions to Dismiss filed by the District of Columbia defendants 1 and the Washington State Defendants 2 in the above-captioned action. The plaintiff brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of his civil rights arising from medical care he received while incarcerated both at a penitentiary in Walla Walla, Washington, and a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on motions to suppress filed by defendants Dan E. Gibson (Doc. # 195), Alex Yung (Doc. # 131 and # 210), Steven J. Hemsley (Doc. # 104) and Edward T. Skinner (Doc. 146). A hearing was held on the motions on December 2, 1991, and defendant Gibson was given additional time to file a supplemental brief on his motion. Having considered the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on cross motions for summary judgment filed by the various parties in these consolidated actions, as well as a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order of June 25, 1991. The material facts are uncontroverted unless otherwise noted. This case requires the court to construe two policies of insurance issued to the City of Pittsburg, Kan...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on appellants Edward Powers, Jr.’s (“Powers’ ”) and Collonade Corporation’s (“Collo-nade’s”) appeal from the February 25, 1991, order of the Bankruptcy Court. In the February 25,1991, order, the Bankruptcy Court held that a transfer of $12,343.77 to the appellants was a preferential transfer under 11 U.S.C. § 547. 124 B.R. 573. For the reason...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Adarand Constructors, Inc. (Adarand), a Colorado corporation, commenced this action to challenge the constitutionality of the federal Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program. Defendants are Samuel K. Skinner, Secretary of the Department of Transportation (DOT); Thomas D. Larson, Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration (FHA); Louis N. Ma...
Views: 3
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
This civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) was commenced by a newspaper editor, John M. Spear (“Spear”), and its publisher, Spear Printing Company (“Spear Printing”) (collectively “the plaintiffs”), against the Town of West Hartford (“the Town”), corporation counsel Marjorie S. Wilder (“Wilder”), police chief and acti...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO VACATE/MODIFY INJUNCTION Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, one of the debtors in the captioned bankruptcy matter, has moved for entry of an order to replace or modify an injunction previously entered in these proceedings. The order, entered after thorough consideration by this court and the court of appeals, 573 F.Supp. 1245 (D.Conn.1983), aff'd in part, vacated in part and remanded, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff United States Fidelity Insurance Company brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment that it is not obligated to pay a claim by defendant Glenn Dean Mayberry under an insurance policy issued by plaintiff on certain premises located in Rossville, Georgia. Plaintiff alleges that defendant caused or procured the explosion and fire that destroyed the structure and ...
Views: 0
789 F.Supp. 302 (1992)
SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO., Plaintiff,
v.
ALLNET COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC., Defendant.
No. 4:92CV-00088SNL.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
April 20, 1992.
*303 Chrisian A. Bourgeacq, Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
David B. Helfrey, Partner, Helfrey and Simon, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
LIMBAUGH, Di...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 549 (1992)
RISTVEDT-JOHNSON, INC. and Cummins-Allison Corp., Plaintiffs,
v.
BRANDT, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 88-C-3834.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
April 2, 1992.
*550 Stephen G. Rudisill, Edward L. Foote, Robert J. Crawford, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs.
Thomas W. Ehrmann, David R. Cross, Milwaukee, Wis., Michael Zaleski, Madison, Wis., for defendant.
MEM...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before us on an appeal from the bankruptcy court’s award of attorneys’ fees to the Appellees. For the reasons that follow, we uphold the bankruptcy court’s award.
Background
On January 17, 1987, Avery Z. Eliscu (“Eliscu”) filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy pursuant to Chapter 7, Title 11 of the United States Code. (Appellan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In February of this year Joseph Cala-brese (“Calabrese”) filed a Complaint against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), attempting to jump onto the RICO merry-go-round and to grab RICO’s brass ring of treble damages and attorneys’ fees. That effort proved unavailing — centrifugal force (in the form of this Court’s brief February 27, 1992 memo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
North American Printing Ink Company (“NAPIC”) appeals from a bankruptcy court’s order of September 17, 1991, denying its claim for an administrative expense. For the reasons stated below, the order is affirmed.
FACTS
NAPIC supplied ink to Regensteiner Printing Company (“Regensteiner”) by shipping large steel containers (“totes”) fully loaded with ink. Brief of...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Susanne Littlefield (“Littlefield”), who is white, sued Malcolm McGuffey, also known as Wally Mack (“Mack”) among other persona, claiming he denied her rental housing and harassed and intimidated her because her boyfriend, the father of her daughter, is black. She sued Mack for violation of the civil rights laws and the Fair Housing Act under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1982, 3604...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Employers Insurance of Wau-sau A Mutual Company (“Wausau”) brings this multi-count action against the United States of America, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), George Bush, in his official capacity as President of the United States, William K. Reilly, individually and as Administrator of the EPA, Valdas V. Adamkus, individu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ralph Monaco brings this action against defendant Fuddruckers, Inc., under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
(ADEA). Before us now is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons below, we grant defendant’s motion.
I. FACTS
1
Monaco was 38 years old when he started working at Fu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court are plaintiff Michael Hill’s (“Hill”) objections to Magistrate Judge Bucklo’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”) regarding defendant Dennis Barbour’s (“Barbour”) motion for summary judgment and defendant Michael Sheahan’s 1 (“Sheahan”) motion to dismiss. Hill brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) against Barbour, a Cook County De...
Views: 0
OPINION
Rafael Oberti is a seven year old boy. He has a disability that distinguishes him, in some ways, from other seven year olds. This lawsuit revolves around the obligation of his home school district in the Borough of Clementon, New Jersey, to provide for his education. Rafael’s parents contend that Clementon’s plan to educate Rafael in a segregated special education class outside of...
Views: 1
Page 5737
OPINION AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL This action involves various challenges to the redistricting or reapportionment1 of *927the voting districts in the State of California which has been approved by the California Supreme Court. Plaintiffs and inter-venors moved in this court for a preliminary injunction to restrain implementation of that redistricting plan, and instead to compel the Secretary of St...
Views: 2
ORDER
This is a pro se action filed by the plaintiff in July 1990 and assigned initially to Judge Michael Boudin, formerly of this Court. By Order of March 4, 1991, Judge Boudin stated that he had reviewed the parties’ pleadings to date in the matter and found that the materials filed by the plaintiff were “comprised largely of generalized and often incomprehensible grievances regarding plaintiff...
Views: 0
ORDER
Upon motion in this case by defendant to suppress evidence related to his arrest on May 29,1991, the Court considered testimony and arguments offered by the parties at a hearing on January 31, 1992. Based on this hearing, the Court granted from the bench the defendant’s suppression motion, noting then that its written findings and conclusions would follow. The Court's reasons for su...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Petitioners move for an order to perpetuate certain testimony and to preserve documentary evidence on the authority of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27. They cite publicly-reported allegations of impropriety in an ongoing Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) proceeding which involves the petitioners. Petitioners acknowledge that when the final SEC decision issues, it would be r...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER Rosita Colón, plaintiff, brought this action pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain a judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) denying her claim for disability insurance benefits. *672 Plaintiff was born on January 29, 1936, in Orocovis, Puerto ...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiff in this action sued various officials of the State of Rhode Island for their alleged wrongful termination of his state employment. Plaintiff claimed his First Amendment right of freedom of association had been violated because he was fired on the basis of his political loyalties. For reasons stated below, the Court rules in favor of the defendants.
I.
Plaintiff is a cousin a...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Taft-Peirce Manufacturing Company (“Taft-Peirce”) constructed a machine of unique specifications for defendant Seagate Technology, Incorporated (“Sea-gate”). This breach of contract action, here in federal court through diversity jurisdiction, centers on two basic issues. The Court must first resolve conflicting contentions as to what constituted the offer and ...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DISPOSING OF OTHER PENDING MOTIONS
THIS MATTER comes before the court on defendants’ motions for summary judg
*1543
ment of dismissal and for sanctions and on plaintiffs motions to strike defendants’ motion for summary judgment, for reconsideration of this court’s November 26, 1991, Order granting Defendants’ Motion t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant in the above-captioned action moves to vacate a default judgment entered on September 12, 1988 pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60. On September 19, 1991, this Court held an evidentiary hearing on defendant’s motion to vacate and found that service of process was proper.
1
See
Order dated September 19, 1991. On November 12, 1991, this Court...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant was found guilty by a jury of conspiring to obstruct commerce by robbery. At the
Fatico
sentencing hearing, he disputed several of the government’s suggested offense level calculations under the federal Sentencing Guidelines. Implicit in the defendant’s argument was the suggestion that the crime was so ineptly planned and executed that the “real o...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before me is Metal-Cote’s (MC) motion for summary judgment. A hearing was held on March 12, 1992, on MC’s motions for a stay and for summary judgment. At that hearing I denied MC’s motion for a stay of the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department’s (DWSD) Cease and Desist Order of August 6, 1991. After careful consideration of all papers filed and of the arguments raised at the Mar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of Flower Aviation of Kansas, Inc. (“movant” or “Flower Aviation”) to unseal affidavits for two search warrants which were placed under seal by Magistrate Judge Ronald C. Newman following execution of the warrants. The search warrants and supporting affidavits relate to an ongoing criminal investigation in which no indictments h...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff instituted the above-styled civil action on June 2, 1988 seeking to recover damages for investment loss allegedly occasioned by violations of federal securities laws and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). Also included in the Complaint were pendent state law claims. Currently pending before the Court are Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification, Plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Multi-M International, Inc. (Multi-M), has filed a four count complaint alleging state law claims against defendants, Paige Medical Supply Co., Inc. (Paige) and Philip Beham (Beham). Plaintiff has attempted to allege this court’s jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Plaintiff has failed in this attempt.
The complaint alleges this c...
Views: 0
OPINION
The arcane mysteries of antitrust standing.
And — like all legal concepts — there is a chameleon quality to this principle.
Antitrust law might be summarized as a great, albeit maddeningly imprecise, panacea of the anticompetitive ailments of free enterprise.
“Antitrust laws in general, and the Sherman Act in particular, are the Magna Carta of free enterprise. They are as important to the...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are the defendants’ motions to dismiss. For reasons that follow, the motions are granted. FACTS This lawsuit stems from plaintiff Anna Mason’s (“Mason”) allegedly unsuccessful efforts to spur the Illinois Department of Public Aid (“IDPA”) and the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office (“State’s Attorney”) to obtain a child support order from Mason’s former husband, Art...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation recommending that RTC’s Motion To Dismiss Counterclaim (Dkt. 22) (interpolated as a motion for summary judgment) and RTC’s Motion For Summary Judgment (Dkt. 43) be GRANTED and that judgment be entered in favor of plaintiff on all claims, including the counterclaims asserted by defendant, exce...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Murrell Maxwell (“Maxwell”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) Louis Sullivan denying Maxwell’s claim for disability insurance benefits under Social Security Act (“Act”) §§ 216(i) and 223 (42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423) and for supplemental security income (“SSI”) benefits under the corresponding provision...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This automobile collision diversity case is before the Court on the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of punitive damages. The motion raises interesting questions of interpretation of the recent revisitation of punitive damages by the Court of Appeals of Maryland in Owens-Illinois v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992) [hereinafter Zenobia]. A mo...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Stoeco Development, Ltd., Stainton-Burrell Development, Ltd., the Shore Memorial Hospital and the Pennington School (“Stoeco”) move for a plenary hearing on the issue of whether the lands they are developing are “wetlands” within the meaning of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251
et seq.,
and 33 C.F.R. § 328.3(b). Defendant Department of the Army, Corps of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Carmichaels Arbors entered into a Housing Assistance Payment contract (“HAP contract”) with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development to construct an apartment complex in Greene County, Pennsylvania, for low-income elderly and handicapped persons. HUD was authorized to enter into HAP contracts under Section 8 of the United States Housing Ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the cross motions of plaintiff Dorey Electric Company (“Dorey”) and defendant Reliance Insurance Company (“Reliance”) for Summary Judgment. The parties have consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). A hearing was held on March 26, 1992, at which Dorey was represented by Pa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the court upon plaintiff Louise Price Parson’s motion for partial summary judgment. The plaintiff filed a brief in support of this motion, and the defendants filed the appropriate response. Oral arguments were heard in this matter, and the court is now ready for a ruling. The court GRANTS the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment and contempo...
Views: 2
ORDER AND OPINION
This case comes before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff, proceeding
pro se,
brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to redress alleged violations of his eighth amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Plaintiff alleges that he received inadequate medical treatment when he was imprisoned at the Chesap...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER On April 3, 1992, the court heard oral argument on several pending matters: (1) plaintiff James H. Busch’s Motion to Dismiss Counts 4, 7, and 8 Without Prejudice; (2) defendant James Doyle’s Motion for Voluntary Dismissal of Counterclaim; (3) plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; (4) defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; (5) plaintiff’s Cross ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This is an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51
et seq.,
for personal injuries that plaintiff Robert J. Maylie, Jr., suffered while in the employ of defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK). After the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $2,567,259.60, defendant moved for a new trial under Rule 59(a) of the...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This action is currently before the Court on the motion of plaintiffs, Kay N. Brown,
et al.,
pursuant to Section 476 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-242, 105 Stat. 2236 (to be codified as Section 27A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-l) to reinstate their claims under Section 10(b) of ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided for ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court held a status conference in the above-captioned case on April 20, 1992. At that time, the Court set a schedule to govern the remainder of this action and denied the defendant’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment.
A court shall grant summary judgment where “there is no genuine issue of material fact ... and the moving pa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant has filed five motions in the alternative: motion to dismiss based upon lack of personal jurisdiction, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2); motion to dismiss based upon improper venue, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3); motion to dismiss due to improper service of process, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5); motion for transfer on grounds of improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); and motion fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, Wallace Roney is a GS-1811, Criminal Investigatory (Deputy U.S. Marshal), Grade 11, Step 7, employed by the United States Marshals Service (“U.S. Marshals”) and assigned to the U.S. Marshal for the District of Columbia, U.S. District Court. Roney is contesting his exemption from coverage under Sec...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW
The procedural history of the litigation in the Federal Court for the Northern District of California and the action filed in this court is important.
Defendant Sickles signed a covenant not to compete (covenant) in New Hampshire when he was first employed by the plaintiff. Having some reservations about the legality of his incorporating Advanced V...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This action is presently before the Court on the motion of plaintiffs, Edward Adler, et ah, pursuant to Section 476 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-242, to be codified as Section 27A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-l, to reinstate their claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act (“Section 2...
Views: 2
ORDER ACCEPTING SPECIAL MASTER’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH MODIFICATIONS This case has been on this court’s docket since 1985. It is an action for declaratory judgment. What has been troublesome throughout is the fact that the regulatory agencies which issued the PRP letters to the alleged contaminating companies (among which are these policyholders) have not brought this action, evidenced...
Views: 1
ORDER ACCEPTING SPECIAL MASTER’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH MODIFICATIONS
The court has reviewed the Special Master’s Report and Recommendation submitted in this case and any objections filed thereto. The Report and Recommendation, with the modifications noted below, is hereby accepted as the findings and conclusions of the court.
Objections
1. In response to defendant W...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy (“DEP”) appeals from the bankruptcy court’s September 27, 1991, Order approving a settlement plan under Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a) in the case of
In re Heldor Industries, Inc.,
Bankr.No. 90-35602 (SAS). DEP also purports to appeal “from the Memorandum Opinion dated September 6, 1991.” Notice of App...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises as a result of the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s enactment of automobile insurance reform legislation in February of 1990.
See
75 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 1791-1799.7 (“Act 6”). Act 6 required insurers,
inter alia,
to reduce private passenger motor vehicle insurance rates by between ten (10) and twenty (20) percent. In reaction to this cha...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Isabella Fitzgerald, brought this action seeking a refund of tax penalties imposed pursuant to section 6672 of the Internal Revenue Code. 26 U.S.C. § 6672. Plaintiff was assessed and paid a penalty tax of $5872.09 plus interest charges amounting to $1,272.11. She was assessed this penalty tax in connection with her job at the North Philadelphia Block Development Corp...
Views: 0
DECISION UNDER FED.R.CIV.P. 52(a)
This is a declaratory judgment action under § 107(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a), to recover EPA oversight costs incurred in substantial part prior to an administrative consent order entered into under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6901
et seq.
1
...
Views: 3
AMENDED OPINION AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiffs Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (“Fireman’s Fund”), United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company (“USF & G”), their affiliates, and plaintiff-in-intervention Association of California Insurance Companies (“ACIC”) challenge the constitutionality of regulations enacted by the California Insurance Commissioner. Those regulations attempt to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The sentencing of defendant Alvarez-Quintero raises two significant legal questions: is the offense of reentry as a deport-able alien a “continuing offense,” and is there an
ex post facto
issue raised by sentencing under a Sentencing Guideline that was amended after the defendant entered the United States? The statute at issue, 8 U.S.C. § 1326, makes it an ...
Views: 3
AMENDED ORDER MODIFYING SENTENCES FOLLOWING RECONSIDERATION Elvis and Manuel Robinson, together with Gregory Bogan, pleaded guilty to armed robbery, and conspiracy to commit armed robbery, of a federally insured cred *434 it union. As will be explained, each defendant’s offense level totalled 23 under the applicable provisions of the United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (199...
Views: 1
782 F. Supp. 423 (1992)
John A. KOLMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 82-C-1557.
United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.
January 9, 1992.
Frederick J. Daley, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Stephen Liccione, Asst. U.S. Atty., Milwaukee, Wis., for defendant.
ORDER
TERENCE T. EVANS, Chief Judge.
This is an action for revie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on oral motions by the plaintiff and all of the defendants for a directed verdict. These motions come at the end of the plaintiff’s ease-in-chief. The court has heard the arguments of counsel, reviewed the applicable documents and law and is ready to rule. The court first will address the defendants’ motion. PROPERTY INTEREST The defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
By stipulation of the parties, this case is to be tried before the undersigned on April 6, 1992. At this juncture, plaintiff has moved to dismiss the tax assessment levied against her as invalid and void
ab initio;
or, in the alternative, to shift the burden of proof at trial to the United States.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, Margaret Curley, ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff
pro se
Miles Williams (“Williams”) has brought these actions against numerous defendants, described in further detail herein, seeking injunctive and monetary relief for alleged deprivations of his Fifth Amendment right to due process and for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c); the Civil Service Reform Act, ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
1
This case involves United States Patent 4,340,479 (the “Pall patent”) covering a process for preparing hydrophilic polyam-ide membrane filtered media and product, which issued on July 20, 1982 to the plaintiff Pall Corporation (“Pall”). Pall is a New York corporation having a principal place of business in Glen Cove, New York, and offices on Route 25A in R...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE THE COURT is the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Ct. Rec. 25), heard with telephonic argument on April 10, 1992. The Plaintiff was represented by Kenneth Joel Haber; the Defendant appeared through Assistant United States Attorney Frank A. Wilson, and general counsel for the Department of Health and Human Services, Denver, Co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-ORDER Before the Court is defendant’s motion to suppress the physical evidence seized in the course of defendant’s arrest on August 28, 1991. Upon consideration of defendant’s motion, the opposition of the United States, testimony of Officer Ralph Nitz, the defendant and Carteo Bost at a hearing of this matter, and the entire record herein, and for reasons set forth below, the motion to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court are cross motions for summary judgment and the oppositions and replies thereto. In addition, this Court has reviewed a classified declaration pursuant to our Order of December 6,1989. For the reasons stated below, we will grant plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and deny defendant's motion for summary judgment.
In these consolidated actions u...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM & OPINION
This action is brought under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347, and the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 500-706, against the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of the Interior. According to their First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, filed May 20, 1991,
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunctive relief. Plaintiffs are David Duke (“Duke”), a Louisiana State Representative 1 seeking the Republican presidential nomination, and three Rhode Island residents who wish to vote for Duke in the Republican primary. They seek an order compelling Secretary of State Kathleen S. Connell (“Con-ne...
Views: 2
Page 5891
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are two related motions: a Motion for Reconsideration of this Court’s January 31, 1992 Memorandum Opinion granting summary judgment for the plaintiffs, filed by Rawl Sales and Processing Co. (Rawl);
1
and a Motion for Amendment of this Court’s January 31, 1992 Order, filed by the Pittston Company,
et al.,
(Pittston). For the reason...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT .This case is one in a series testing the scope of California’s anti-deficiency statutes (Code of Civil Procedure §§ 580a-580d and 726). It presents the novel question whether § 580d, which prohibits a deficiency judgment after non-judicial foreclosure of real property, applies to a guarantor who is also a general partner of a partnership primary debtor if t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO ENHANCE SENTENCE BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff’s Request to Enhance Defendant’s Sentence in the above-entitled matter heard on April 1, 1992. Assistant United States Attorney Thomas 0. Rice appeared for the Plaintiff. The Defendant appeared personally and through his court-appointed attorney Michael D. Kinkley. Having reviewed the record, heard ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
In this ease, brought pursuant to the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, Sara Hass-man claims that over a period of two years, from July 1985 to July 1987, her employer, Defendant Valley Motors, Inc. (“Valley”) paid her male co-workers substantially more than they paid her, for equal work. Defendant states that Plaintiff was employed as an assistant to her two male coworkers, that th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On April 9, 1992, the court heard oral argument on two motions filed by appellees Roger A. Mann, Robert A. Nickerson, Patricia Stoltenberg, Herbert Stoltenberg, Edwin Stoltenberg, Delford Ashley, Sam Hambarian, Alyce Hambarian, Lionel Ascher, Samuel Harmatz, Bernard Hodowski, Chris Waugh, H.E. Moses, and Harmatz & Hodowski, a partnership, (“the electing credi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This civil case is before the Court on defendants’ (Robert Henry Duhamell and Elmer E. Welker) motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co. (hereinafter “Nationwide”) instituted this diversity action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, seeking a declaratory judgment. Specifically, the purpose of this action is to...
Views: 1
*114
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendant’s motion for separate trials on the liability issues in this case and on the questions concerning damages and willful infringement, and for a stay of all discovery on damages and willful infringement. For the reasons that follow defendant’s motion is DENIED to the extent that defendant requests separate trials with separate jur...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the RTC’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED. The Court, however, STAYS the case until the RTC completes its administrative review process.
I.
In July 1982, the plaintiffs bought a mobile home from Trailercity, Inc. The mobile home was manufactured by Winston Homes, In...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Plaintiff, Bertha Paglin Ferman (“Ferman”), as executrix of the estate of Jules J. Paglin, and defendant, the United States of America (the “Government”), filed cross motions for summary judgment and noticed these motions for hearing on April 2, 1992. Having reviewed the memoranda in support, the opposition memoranda, the record, and the applicable law, and having heard ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS These consolidated matters are brought pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq. We granted plaintiffs’ partial motion for summary judgment on most of the liability issues presented in this action on August 29, 1991. 1 Trial on damages and the remaining issues of liability was held between November 4 and 6, 1991. Sub...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. In 1989, the Defendants, Edward and Phyllis Ripper (the Rippers) purchased a farm in the extreme northwest of Albemarle County in an area known as Brown’s Cove. The back portion of the farm abuts the Shenandoah National Park (the Park). Route 629, which intersects with Rt. 624 at the front of the prop...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on cross motions for summary judgment in a breach of contract action brought by Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. (Ryder) against defendants, UTF Carriers, Inc. (UTF) and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (National Union) for their breaches of separate contracts. Also before the Court is a motion to amend the com...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
This suit arises out of a Complaint filed by the United States against Defendant First Interstate Bank, N.A. (Bank), for its failure to honor a Notice of Levy served upon it on June 27,1983. On May 25,1981, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) made an assessment against taxpayer Daniel Bauer for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
The United States of America (“Government”), claims that defendant Red Stripe, Inc. formerly known as Asher Bros., Inc. (“hereinafter referred to as “Red Stripe”)
1
, has to pay federal corporate income taxes for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1979 and seeks to reduce to judgment the corporate income taxes due from R...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action among parties of diverse citizenship. The defendants seek to dismiss all four causes of action under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, the motions of the defendants are granted; the complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
FACTS
Plaintiffs are Jeff Isaac Rare Coins, Inc. (“JIRC”) and Jeff Is...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff William Hancock commenced this diversity action to recover damages against defendants Essential Resources, Inc. (the “Company”), Martin W. Davis, and Jill Davis for breach of contract and a related fraud.
1
Defendants counterclaimed for injunctive relief based on unfair competition and for damages based on: (1) breach of employee fiduciary obligatio...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
Plaintiff is a commercial real estate developer that was financed by the National Bank of Washington (NBW); bank regulators declared NBW insolvent and subject to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation receivership on August 10, 1990. The crux of plaintiff’s complaint is that, after lending plaintiff $10.85 Million beginning in 1987 to build an office building in Old ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND ADDRESSING MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. PROCEDURE
Now pending before the court are a number of dispositive and procedural motions. The federal government filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on September 9, 1991, on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (“FHwA”); Samuel K. Skinner, Secretary of Transportation; the United States Ar...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the court on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and plaintiffs’ cross-motion for partial summary judgment. Oral argument was heard on January 17, 1992. After careful consideration of the parties’ written and oral arguments, documents submitted in support, and the record as a whole, the court finds it appropriate to DENY...
Views: 0
ORDER NO. 453
IN THE MATTER OF DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AGAINST WAUSAU AND AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS
Before the Court are several motions filed by Wausau Underwriters Insurance Co. (Wausau)
1
and American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co. (American)
2
for
*1214
dismissal of direct claims pursued by the PSC, as well as assigned claims of Norman C. Obrow and...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
This is an attorney malpractice case. Plaintiff, Dr. Martin Trepel (Trepel), filed this case in the Wayne County Circuit Court alleging breach of contract and professional negligence against two law firms, defendants Kohn, Milstein, Cohen & Haus-feld (KMCH) and Cohen, Milstein & Haus-feld (CMH),
1
and defendant, Jerry S. Cohen (Cohen). Trepel says h...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS III, IY AND V OF PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
On September 11, 1991, plaintiff filed the instant action alleging, among other things, unfair competition and antitrust violations by defendant Sweetheart Cup Company. Defendant subsequently filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The motion was initia...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. This is an action by plaintiff, Chrysler First Business Credit Corp. (Chrysler), to recover on a promissory note and guaranty executed by defendant, Gary A. Rotenberg (Rotenberg). On July 23, 1991, this Court entered judgment in favor of Chrysler for $160,775.22. To obtain payment of the judgment, Chrysler filed a garnishment on garnishee defendant, John Hancock Mutual Life...
Views: 0
Page 5989
790 F. Supp. 1275 (1992)
Jack KEMP, Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Plaintiff,
v.
COST CONTROL MARKETING AND SALES MANAGEMENT OF VIRGINIA, INC., et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 89-0042-C.
United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Charlottesville Division.
April 22, 1992.
*1276 Margaret S. Hewing, Robert S. Whitman and Mark W. Battem, Trial Atty., Federal Program B...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This suit arises out of an initiated amendment to the Colorado Constitution designating English as Colorado’s official language. Plaintiffs Rita Montero, Delfina Maria Garcia, Franciso Coca and Apolinar Rael, all Spanish-speaking Colorado citizens, seek declaratory and injunctive relief under the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971 et seq. (first claim) and 42 U.S.C....
Views: 1
*531MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in for-ma pauperis on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff complains that he was denied a fair trial and names as defendants the state district court judge and the prosecuting attorney. Plaintiff seeks to have his criminal conviction reversed, and a new trial ordered. He also seeks copies of his trial transcript and appoin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 14, 1988, petitioner, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, pled guilty to one count of indecent liberties with a child and two counts of aggravated sexual battery. Petitioner was sentenced to a three (3) to ten (10) year term on...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff complains of the search of his home on October 21, 1987, by defendants. He claims the search was illegal, that force was used to enter the residence, that property was destroyed in the search, and that valuables were ta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff is a Texas corporation that filed this action originally in Texas state court against R.W. Lange, Fidelity State Bank, and Michael Ramsey. The latter two have been dismissed from the lawsuit. The defendants removed the case to federal court, and the case was transferred to the District of Kansas, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The case is before the court ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a)(1) as amended, the court finds that the parties have rested and that the defendant has been fully heard with respect to its claim that the plaintiff failed to cooperate and comply with the policy provision requiring the production of records. The court rules, as a matter of law, that there is no sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to fin...
Views: 1
ORDER Five motions come before the court for resolution. The first motion is plaintiff’s motion to extend discovery, filed on March 5, 1992 (Doc. 28). The second motion is plaintiff’s motion for a protective order, filed on March 5, 1992 (Doc. 27). The third motion is plaintiff’s motion for a protective order, filed March 9, 1992 (Doc. 32). The fourth motion is plaintiff’s motion to continue the d...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant Hannigan’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility (HCF) in Hutchinson, Kansas, and proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He complains that he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the eighth amendment, wh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in which defendant collaterally attacks his conviction and sentence in this case. Defendant was convicted of one count of distribution of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 845(a). Defendant claims that he was denied his constitutional right to the effective assistan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on cross motions for summary judgment, (Doc. 263, Joint Motion of Plaintiff and defendant P.B. Hoidale Co., Inc.); (Doc. 260, Motion of Employers Mutual), and plaintiffs motion to strike (Doc. 291). This is a declaratory action seeking to determine the liability of a primary insurance carrier, an excess insurance carrier, and their comm...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this shareholders’ derivative action plaintiffs challenge the propriety of actions taken by the board of directors of National Research Foundation (“National Research” *511or “the corporation”), a nonprofit corporation chartered in Kansas. The case is currently before the Court on a motion to dismiss (Doc. # 17) filed by defendants on November 15, 1991, and on a motion to ...
Views: 0
790 F.Supp. 1156 (1992)
Tyrone BROOKS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, et al., Defendants.
No. CV 288-146.
United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Brunswick Division.
April 22, 1992.
*1157 Laughlin McDonald, Kathleen L. Wilde, Neil Bradley, Atlanta, Ga., J. Gerald Hebert, Dept. of Justice, Civ. Rights Div., Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
David Frank Walbert, Walber...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
A number of issues remain to be resolved in this case. Pending before the Court are a Motion to Disqualify the Special Master and a Motion to Lift Stay. Pri- or to ruling on these motions, a number of issues relating to the proper measure of damages need to be resolved. The resolution of these issues at this juncture should ensure a smoother disposition of the case.
...
Views: 0
ORDER Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated the above-styled habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the court which sentenced Petitioner to federal prison. Because Petitioner is currently incarcerated in F.C.I. Morgantown, WV, which is located within the Northern District of West Virginia, the sent...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, investors in a hotel-condominium project called the “Inn at Essex” in Essex Junction, Vermont, brought suit against the developer of the project (H.E.F. Partnership), the parent corporation of one of H.E.F.’s general partners (Hawk Mountain Corporation), the major lender for the project (Dartmouth Banking Company, now
*93
Dartmouth Bank), and th...
Views: 1
ORDER
Currently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint. (Docket #33) This discrimination case was commenced in 1991. Discovery was closed on the 28th of February, 1992. The defendants have moved for summary judgment, filing their final brief approximately one month ago in March 1992. Trial is scheduled to commence on the 5th of May, 1992. Plaintiff’s proposed amendm...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Now before this Court are opposing motions for summary judgment of the plaintiff The Buffalo Evening News, Inc. (“the News”) and defendant United States Border Patrol (“USBP”), pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56.
The News brought suit under the Freedom Of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 552
et seq.,
challenging the USBP’s nondisclosure ...
Views: 0
Lambert Brussels Associates Limited Partnership (“LBA”), a common and junior preferred stockholder in Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, objects to the confirmation of the Second Amended and Restated Joint Plan of Reorganization of the Debtors (“Plan”) because a claimant class, Drexel Burnham Lambert Group Class 6C, that will share in the distributions as a quasi-creditor class was not subordinated ...
Views: 3
790 F.Supp. 972 (1992)
David FIERRO, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
James GOMEZ, et al., Defendants.
No. C-92-1482 MHP.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
April 24, 1992.
Michael Laurence and Matthew A. Coles, American Civ. Liberties Union, Foundation of Northern California, Inc., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs.
Daniel E. Lungren, Atty. Gen. of the State of Cal., George Williamson, Chief...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On October 15, 1991, the court heard defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment. Upon due consideration of the written and oral arguments of the parties, the court now enters its order granting the motion as set forth herein.
In this motion physician-defendants seek summary judgment of plaintiff’s Sherman Act claim. Corporat...
Views: 4
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS On February 4, 1992, the defendants San Diego County Assessment Appeals Board *328 and Ruth Williams filed a motion requesting dismissal of this case. Subsequently, plaintiff Nancy Halus, proceeding in pro-pria persona, filed an opposition, and defendants then filed a reply. At the initial hearing on March 27, 1992, the Court ordered further briefin...
Views: 3
OPINION
This case results from the death of plaintiffs’ fourteen-month old daughter, Lindsey LeSane. While at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the baby’s neck allegedly became trapped between the top and the side rail of a crib distributed by Hill-Rom Company, Inc., a subsidiary of Hillenbrand Industries. The plaintiffs are suing Hill-Rom, Hillenbrand, and the United States for Lindsey’s ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This Court will only address at this time the motion to dismiss filed by Caribbean Cruise Line on November 14, 1991 (docket # 8) and the opposition thereto filed by the plaintiffs on December 18, 1991 (docket #16). This action arises from an incident at the San Juan pier facilities. According to David Gillmor, a passenger of the Sovereign of the Seas, a vessel owned by Royal...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to enjoin and declare unconstitutional an order issued by José A. Sosa-Lloréns — Commissioner of Financial Institutions of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (the “Commissioner”) — mandating that plaintiffs cease and desist from (1) offering and selling of securities without legal registration in violation...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. Plaintiff also prays that the Court use its pendent jurisdiction to entertain her claim based on Puerto Rico law. In the complaint, plaintiff alleges that she was submitted to a pattern and practice of discrimination b...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are the Defendants’ motion to dismiss or for more definite statement, the Defendants’ motion to strike, and the Defendants’ motion for sanctions. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss (# 16-1) is granted, the motion for more definite statement (# 16-2) is moot, the motion to strike (# 28) is moot, and the motion for sanctions ...
Views: 0
790 F. Supp. 838 (1992)
Jay ZAMBRANA, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Respondent.
No. HCR 91-243.
United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division.
April 28, 1992.
*839 Jay Zambrana, pro se.
Andrew B. Baker, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Dyer, Ind., for respondent.
ORDER
MOODY, District Judge.
This matter is before the court for resolution of the pro se, incarcerated defendant's "M...
Views: 1
Page 6089
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff shareholders filed,
inter alia,
derivative claims against General Motors Corporation (“GM”) as a nominal defendant, certain directors of GM, and H. Ross Perot, former director of GM and former chairman of the board of directors of Electronic Data Systems (“EDS”). Plaintiffs challenged the repurchase by GM of stock and related contingent notes...
Views: 0
OPINION
Victor Seff, the plaintiff, commenced this action against the National Organization of Industrial Trade Unions Insurance Trust Fund challenging a denial of health benefits as a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001
et seq.
Both plaintiff and defendant currently move for summary judgment.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Pla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Deborah Wiener, brings this action against Polaroid Corporation for gender discrimination and sexual harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
and state law, Mass.Gen.L. ch. 151B. Specifically, Wiener contends that Polaroid discriminated against her when it refused to hire her for a new environmental pu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on motions for summary judgment by two of the defendants, the American Sail Training Association (“ASTA”) and the Society of Lloyd's (“Lloyd’s”). This Court has previously ruled on motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction by four other defendants, denying all but the motion of defendant Goods Export Ltd.
See McAleer v....
Views: 2
Page 6103
*955
OPINION
The investor plaintiffs seek summary-judgment on Count IY (rescission and restitution) of their first amended and supplemental complaint (now Count I of the second amended and supplemental complaint) on the issue of liability. Defendant, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), seeks summary judgment against Count IV on the issues of liability and damages. Plain...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 7 (1992)
DIRECTOR OF the OFFICE OF THRIFT SUPERVISION, Petitioner,
v.
ERNST & YOUNG, Respondent.
Misc. No. 91-401 (RCL).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
April 16, 1992.
*8 Kenneth J. Guido, Jr., Deputy Chief Counsel, Bryan T. Veis, Donna M. DeSilva, Glynn O'D. Loeb, Office of Thrift Supervision, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.
Kenneth S. Geller, Evan M. Tage...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Charles Miller for summary judgment. This lawsuit grows out of an automobile accident in Drum-mondville, Quebec Province, Canada, in which Charles Emory died. Emory was Miller’s subordinate at Hanson Systems, Inc. (a Massachusetts corporation), and a passenger in a car owned by Hanson Syst...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Davidson’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction Against FDIC/United Bank of Texas, filed on March 30, 1992. Having reviewed and considered the motion, the Court is of the opinion that it should be DENIED.
Plaintiff Davidson’s main argument focuses on the statute of limitations period that is applicable to this particula...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT PHAR-MOR’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This case is before this court on defendant Phar-Mor’s motion to dismiss. This
*1116
action was filed in Circuit Court on November 7, 1991, and removed to this court on the basis of diversity on December 26, 1991. The plaintiffs, Helen Griffin and Richard Griffin, claim that defendants (Phar-Mor and two pharmacists) misfill...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND AND GRANTING MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Before the court is the motion of the plaintiff seeking to remand the above styled and numbered cause to the Circuit Court of Smith County, Mississippi. Plaintiff filed her complaint on or about June 12, 1991, in the aforesaid state court claiming $20,000.00 in actual damages and $25,-000.00 in punitive damages for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion to amend both the complaint and the pretrial order to state a claim for compensatory and punitive damages under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071, (“the Act”) which became law during the pendency of this action. Defendants oppose the motion on the ground that the Act is not ret...
Views: 1
ORDER AFFIRMING REMAND
Before the court is the motion of the defendant, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (USF & G), to set aside the order of remand entered by the Magistrate Judge. USF & G asserts that the plaintiff’s motion for remand was untimely. Moreover, says USF & G, the joinder of Paul Stroud as a party defendant is fraudulent and nothing more than an attempt to defeat co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Marie Banks contends that Indiana’s Medicaid procedures offend the Due Process Clause because they do not allow Medicaid recipients notice and an opportunity to contest denials of reimbursement of claims filed by their health care providers. Several motions in this cause are now before the court. The Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Servic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Imogene Lute moves for application of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (“the 1991 Act”) to this case, and for leave to amend her complaint to request trial by jury and compensatory damages on her Title VII sex discrimination claim. Defendant Consolidated Freightways, Inc. (“Consolidated”) opposes the motion. For the following reasons, the court concludes that Ms. Lute...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action brought pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (“WARN”) Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq. The cause comes before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, Locals 7-515 and 7-838 (collectively, “OCAW”), and defendants American Home Products Corp. and its who...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Marjorie Wright brings this action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 623 & 626 (1988) (the “ADEA”), and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (1988) (“Title VII”). The defendant seeks summary judgment on the ground that the plaintiff’s claims fail to satisfy a necessary jurisdictional prerequisite. Specifically, ...
Views: 1
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM Terry Holloway served as a federal grand juror in 1991. As a grand juror, he was ordered to maintain the secrecy of all grand jury proceedings. Nonetheless, Mr. Holloway discussed an ongoing federal drug investigation in a social setting; he had learned of the investigation through his grand jury service. As it turned out, he discussed the investigation in the presence of a c...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 [of the Indictment], filed April 9,1992. The government responded on April 10, 1992, and defendant replied on the same day. Defendant argues that Counts two through five of the Indictment should be dismissed for improper venue. The Indictment in those five counts charges defendant with perjury under 18 U.S.C. § 1621, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Mildred Nigrelli (“Nigrelli”) brings this Title VII action against the Catholic Bishop of Chicago (“Catholic Bishop”) claiming that she was discharged from her position as a parochial school principal as a result of her refusal to participate in sexual activity with the pastor of the parish to which she was assigned. Nigrelli moves to amend her complaint follo...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes on for consideration of defendant’s Second Ex Parte Motion For Issuance Of Subpoena Duces Tecum filed on January 15, 1992. (Dkt. 65) Defendant seeks production of the pretrial services report and the testimony of the custodian of records for pretrial services pursuant to Rule 17(b), Fed.R.Crim.P. Defendant states that pretrial services records which *178reflect the presence ...
Views: 0
SUPPLEMENTAL REASONS FOR RULING ON MOTION
A jury trial was commenced in this matter on Tuesday, February 18, 1992. At the conclusion of plaintiff’s case, defendant moved for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Fed.Rule Civ.P. 50. The court granted the motion the next morning for reasons orally stated on the record. The court now more fully explains its reasons in writing.
This ac...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTIONS
This matter is before the court on a motion by defendant for summary judgment
1
and to strike plaintiff’s demand for
*645
a jury. Defendant has also filed a motion to strike certain evidence submitted by plaintiff in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has filed multiple briefs in opposition to the motions. There is no need fo...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case involves a tragedy that occurred on August 16,1987 when Northwest Airlines Flight 255 crashed shortly after takeoff from the Detroit Metropolitan Air*1208port and resulted in the death of one hundred fifty-six people and injuries to several other persons.
There are a variety of motions, most of which have been filed by the Third-Party Defendants 1 in this cause, that are currently...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Who will guard the guardians? The complaint that underlies this action alleges a profoundly disturbing abuse of government programs and of government funds by officials and residents of a small municipality. And yet, the undisputed facts material to the disposition of this motion reveal a still more disturbing failure by the federal officials charged with oversight of...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs filed this action for wrongful death against the United States of America pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671,
et seq.
(“FTCA”). The FTCA, a limited waiver of sovereign immunity, conditions judicial action on the presentation of an administrative claim.
United States v. Kubrick,
444 U.S. 111, 117, 100 S.Ct. 352, 356...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the Court is the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the above-captioned action along with supporting and opposing memo-randa. The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, and concludes that it cannot grant to the plaintiff the relief he seeks. In his complaint, the plaintiff, who is incarcerated, seeks information...
Views: 0
Page 6194
MEMORANDUM
This action arises out of the federal Medicaid program and its implementing regulations. Plaintiffs, two nursing facility trade associations whose members participate in the Massachusetts Medicaid program and three nursing facility Medicaid providers, challenge the federal government’s, specifically Louis Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”), approval ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are the cross-motions for summary judgment in the above styled and numbered cause filed by the plaintiffs and defendants pursuant to Rule 56(c)
1
. The precise question presented to this court is whether an administrative regulation which governs the importation of foreign poultry products into the United States promulgated by the F...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs David Green and Jerry Han-kins, two police officers with the Montgomery City Police Department, have brought this class-action lawsuit charging the defendants — Mayor Emory Folmar, Police Chief John Wilson, and the City of Montgomery, Alabama — with violation of rights given and protected under the first and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitu...
Views: 4
ORDER Before the Court are Defendant Rich’s Motion to Suppress Evidence, filed July 22, 1991, and Supplemental Motion to Suppress Evidence, filed April 13,1992. On April 23, 1992, the Court conducted a hearing on these motions. Having reviewed and considered the motions, the testimony, and the oral and written arguments of counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the Motion to Suppress should be...
Views: 2
Page 6222
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the debtor's appeal from the bankruptcy court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his creditor. That court found that a deed of trust executed by the debtor in favor of the creditor was supported by adequate consideration, and that appellees, because they were employee benefit plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On November 19,1991 Defendants Baker and Thompson each pled guilty to the charge of possession with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), approximately one kilogram of a substance containing cocaine base. They came before the court for sentencing on April 21, 1992. After hearing arguments of counsel and the government for several hours the matter was ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs are the operators and nearly 500 occupants of a homeless shelter in Washington, D.C. They bring this action under both 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants violated their rights in conducting an early morning “raid” on the homeless shelter in the process of executing an arrest wa...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this case plaintiff, a victim of advanced breast cancer, seeks a preliminary injunction to enjoin defendant, her group health insurance carrier under an ERISA program, 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.,
from refusing to pay for the only treatment that may abate her cancer and save her life. At issue is an amendment to the insurance plan by the insurer that it claims to have e...
Views: 1
ORDER REGARDING INQUIRY BY SPECIAL COUNSEL INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THIS MATTER comes before the court following special counsel’s filing of his report regarding the potential conflicts of interest of counsel for defendant. Having reviewed the report, together with all relevant documents in the file, the court rules as follows: I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Defendant Allan Gregg Anderso...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(5), this Court held an evidentiary hearing to determine whether to grant or deny the petition to remove filed by various defendants and joined in by the other defendants appearing at the hearing. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(5). Not long ago, the law may have been more inclined in favor of preemption in this case, but recent decisions of the Fifth ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court are motions to dismiss filed by Cleveland Tankers, Inc. (“Cleveland”) and Total Petroleum, Inc. (“Total”). In their motions, Cleveland and Total ask this Court to dismiss the economic damages claims made by several parties (“claimants”) whose business interests were adversely affected by the accident between Cleveland’s vessel the M/V JUPITER and Total’s...
Views: 0
*93OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants LEP Industrial Holdings, Ltd. (“Industrial”) and LEP Group PLC (“Group”) moved to dismiss the Complaint in this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., for lack of personal jurisdiction. By Memorandum Decision dated January 28, 1991, familiarity with which is presumed, this Court referred the motion to Chief Magistrate Judge Nina Gershon, pursuant to 28 U.S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case comes before the Court on Plaintiffs and Defendants’ cross motions for summary judgment and Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, 12(b)(5). Plaintiff, a nurse who has worked for the Department of Veterans Affairs (“Department”) for ten years, challenges the Defendants’ decision to terminate her. This ...
Views: 0
Page 6245
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is an application by the National Labor Relations Board (hereinafter NLRB) to enforce a subpoena duces tecum it issued directing the United States Postal Service to produce the names, addresses, and places of employment of its employees eligible to vote in an election to be conducted by the NLRB under section 9 of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Plaintiff (“the Hospital”), a hospital located in a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio, brings this action against Dr. Louis W. Sullivan, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”), challenging the amount of reimbursement to which it is entitled under Medicare, 42 U.S.C. § 1395
et seq.
Both parties have filed motions for summary judgment. An oral...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a statutory proceeding under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (“EIGA” or “the Act”), 2 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq. (1985), initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § 706, against a Member of Congress to assess civil penalties for the defendant’s alleged knowing and willful failure to file truthful financial disclosure statements with the Cler...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON ORDER REMANDING ACTION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
I.
INTRODUCTION
This action to recover for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff Monica Perez brought against four Japanese corporations raises these issues. First, whether a
*1465
case should be remanded where, although pending for over two (2) years in the state court, the removing defendants ...
Views: 0
OPINION
A number of public housing authorities from around the nation brought suit against the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for his implementation of a new method for calculating their operating subsidies and for doing so retroactively, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory ruling that these changes are invalid, and an injuncti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This written opinion supplements the findings and conclusions made by the Court from the bench in open Court during the sentencing of the defendant, Mr. James Roland Clark. It is, however, confined to only one of the issues dealt with during that sentencing process, to-wit: whether the Court, as suggested by the Government and the U.S. Probation Office, should increase the de...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
Bank One, Columbus, N.A. (“Bank One”) appeals from an order of the United States
*199
Bankruptcy Court denying its request to examine the debtor, James Keith Hammond, pursuant to Bankr.R. 2004 and granting Hammond’s motion to quash the examination. The decision of the bankruptcy court is reported at 131 B.R. 78 (Bankr.S.D. Ohio 1991). The issue presented on ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
We have before us a variety of post-trial motions filed by “Trial I” defendants convicted of serious charges stemming from their involvement in and with the notorious El Rukn street gang. Noah Robinson has filed both a “motion for judgment of acquittal and arrest of judgment pursuant to Rules 29(c) and 34, respectively,” and a “motion for a new trial.”
1...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Dennis P. Dimick stands accused of (1) possessing approximately 800 grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute it, (2) traveling in interstate commerce with intent to distribute methamphetamine, (3) lying about his name to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents who were investigating the case, and (4) possessing approximately sixty ...
Views: 1
On Appeal from the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands BEFORE: STANLEY S. BROTMAN, Acting Chief Judge, District Court of the Virgin Islands, Judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Sitting by Designation; ANNE E. THOMPSON, Judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Sitting by Designation; and IVE A. SWAN, Judge of the Territorial...
Views: 0
This matter is before the court for ruling on several pending motions. An evidentia-ry hearing and oral argument were held on 6 April 1992. Although the court announced its rulings from the bench at the hearing, it will elaborate on its rationale for those rulings in this order.
I.
Facts
The United States Army (“Army”) contracted with defendant Deggeller Attractions, Inc. (“De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
At issue before the court is the constitutionality of certain provisions of an Arlington County, Virginia ordinance governing the display of signs. On January 13, 1992, two political parties, several 1991 candidates for political office in Arlington County, and several citizens of Arlington County (collectively “the Political Parties”) challenged the ordinance by filing...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action is a citizen suit brought by the Arkansas Wildlife Federation, a not-for-profit corporation, on behalf of its members against Bekaert Corporation pursuant to section 505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, hereinafter the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and the imposition of civil penaltie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Jeris Bragan has petitioned this Court for the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging, inter alia, that the State violated the dictates of
Brady v. Maryland,
373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and
Giglio v. United States,
405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972), by failing to disclose a plea agreement between...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Based on the file, record and proceedings herein, defendant’s motion is granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Automate Associates, Inc. (“Automate”) hired defendant Bill’s Trucking Service, Inc. (“Bill’s Trucking”) in October 1990, to transport equipment from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Tempe, Arizona. Upon delivery on October...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION.
This action is before the court on a motion to dismiss or for change of venue and for summary judgment filed on behalf of the defendants, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., d/b/a “Sam’s Wholesale Club” and Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Plaintiff American General Fire & Casualty filed its complaint in this court on October 24, 1991. The complaint alleges that sometime prior to De...
Views: 0
ORDER A.B. Allen, a black resident of Gould, Arkansas, brings this action alleging that defendants violating the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1971 et seq. and plaintiffs right to vote, by allowing white non-residents to vote in the Gould city election. Allen, a candidate for mayor, lost the election by four votes to the white candidate.1 The parties ultimately agreed to settle the matter, and to...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a securities fraud action brought by five securities investors against a clearing brokerage firm. Plaintiffs assert two claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 12 U.S.C. § 78j, and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. In their first claim, plaintiffs allege that Financial Clearing & Services Corporation fraudulently induced plaintiffs to enter ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Geraldo Quirama moves pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that his state court conviction was constitutionally invalid because (1) his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) the trial court’s charge to the jury on the topic of accomplice liability improperly omitted the requirement of shared mental culpability; and (3) his sen...
Views: 1
OPINION Patricia Ostrander was a portfolio manager of several mutual funds, including Fidelity Puritan Fund, all under the umbrella of Fidelity Management and Research Company and Fidelity Management Trust Company. In the penumbral wake of the Milken scandal, she has been indicted on charges that she bought and sold hundreds of millions of dollars worth of “junk bonds” on behalf of Fidelity’s v...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER
After more than a decade of bitter litigation, plaintiff secured a jury verdict based on a finding that although defendant Texaco, Inc. did not discriminate against her on the basis of age, it did willfully retaliate against her for charging discrimination. The jury found damages in the amount of $65,000, which was then doubled to $130,-000 based on the finding o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Rabije Micovic attempted to enter the United States from Yugoslavia by means of a fraudulent “green card.” She is currently being detained by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) pending the completion of exclusion proceedings against her. A hearing date before an Immigration Judge has been scheduled for July 8, 1992, when the Immigration Ju...
Views: 0
ORDER and MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Ben Sheftall Distributing Co., Inc., brought this action arising under Section 1 of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and Section 1 of the Robinson-Patman Act, amending Section 2 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13, seeking treble damages, injunctive relief and attorney's fees under Sections 4, 12 and 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, 15 U.S...
Views: 0
OPINION ON INTERPRETATION OF JOINT VENTURE 1. Introduction. The Resolution Trust Corporation, as receiver for University Savings Association, and Trendmaker are partners in a joint *855venture to develop and sell land. University Savings Association breached the agreement in 1989 when it became insolvent. The RTC asserts that it may compel liquidation of the venture. Trendmaker asserts that it has...
Views: 0
OPINION ON DISMISSAL OF APPEAL
1.
Introduction.
On January 7, 1992, the bankruptcy court denied confirmation of the debtors’ third chapter 11 plan of reorganization. 137 B.R. 219. The debtors and the official committee of unsecured creditors have appealed that order. The appeals have been consolidated. Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company, Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., and...
Views: 2
OPINION ON INTERPLEADER
1.
Introduction.
In March 1988, United Savings Association set up deferred compensation for its top managers, called the executive bonus plan. United created an express trust at Texas Commerce Bank to implement the plan. Texas Commerce Bank is the trustee, and the top two tiers of managers at United are the beneficiaries. Texas Commerce interpleaded th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs filed these three cases seeking judicial review, under 26 U.S.C. § 7429(b), of jeopardy assessments imposed by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The parties consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 686(c) and requested consolidation of the evidentiary hearings. The consolidated evidentiary hearings were held on April 16 and 17,...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal by the United States on behalf of the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) from a final order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). FmHA contends that the bankruptcy court erred in two respects: first, in finding that FmHA discriminated unlawfully against the debtors in violation of 11 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This cause comes before the court on the motions to dismiss of defendants Ben Will-ingham, Jr., Corim AGRI Inc., Corim, Inc., Carl W. Stowe, and G. Rives Neblett pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Two separate motions to dismiss were filed by the defendants in this cause. The first motion was filed on March 27, 1990 and the second on October 25...
Views: 0
Pending is the motion by Billie G. Purdy that the court enter judgment for the plaintiffs on the court’s findings of fact. The defendant’s response is also treated as a motion for dismissal for insufficient evideuce or failure to state a claim. F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). At the conclusion of all the evidence and extended oral arguments, the court from the Bench announced detailed findings of fact
...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Upon review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Barry L. Garber, upon independent review of the record, and upon the observation that the parties have served and filed no written objections to the aforementioned Report and Recommendation, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that said Report and Recommendation is hereby AD...
Views: 1
ORDER Defendant Andrew Lee Johnson has been charged in a two-count indictment with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute it, 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)(1), and conspiracy to commit the same, 21 U.S.C.A. § 846. Immediately before choosing the jury for his trial on the morning of January 21, 1992, Johnson asserted a challenge to the jury selection process, claiming that it violated the requir...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION RE: VACATING STAY AND DISMISSING FEDERAL HABE-AS PETITION INTRODUCTION Respondents’ Motion to Vacate Stay and Dismiss Federal Habeas Petition was scheduled to be heard on February 20, 1992. After a review of the briefs, this court considered it appropriate to submit the motion on the pleadings pursuant to Local Rule 220-1, and now GRANTS the motion. BACKGR...
Views: 1
Page 6320
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it plaintiffs Motion to Remand dated January 30, 1992. For the reasons stated below, the motion is hereby DENIED.
Plaintiff CNA Casualty of Puerto Rico (hereinafter “CNA”), a corporation organized under the laws of Puerto Rico, filed a suit in the Superior Court of Puerto Rico, San Juan Part, against defendant Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York (“Fideli...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The Court has before it plaintiff’s request for production of 8,000 documents which private defendants assert contain privileged information. The Court notes from the outset that where the documents in issue contain hundreds or even thousands of pages, it is unusual for a trial *40 court to take on the burden of an in camera inspection. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Dep’t of Energy,...
Views: 1
792 F. Supp. 72 (1992)
EXXON CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Harold HEINZE, et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. A91-0543.
United States District Court, D. Alaska.
February 24, 1992.
Carl J.D. Bauman (argued), Joseph R.D. Loescher, Hughes, Thorsness, Gantz, Powell *73 & Brundin, Anchorage, Alaska, for plaintiffs.
Wilson Condon, Richard W. Maki (argued), Condon, Partnow & Sharrock, P.C., Ancho...
Views: 0
ORDER (Motion for Disqualification) This case was assigned to Judge Singleton by random draw. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for disqualification. Judge Singleton considered this motion and, on February 24, 1992, an order denying recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455 was entered. As is the practice of this court, the matter was then referred to the undersigned for consideration pursuant to 28 U.S.C...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it defendants’ Amended Motion to Dismiss dated January 16, 1992. For the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.
I. Background
In reviewing the facts of this dispute for purposes of defendants’ motion, the court accepts as true the well-pleaded factual averments contained in plaintiffs’ complaint, while at the ...
Views: 2
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by defendant Puerto Rico Ports Authority dated November 4, 1991, and a Motion Joining Motion to Dismiss filed by defendants José A. Buitrago, América Lameiro de Irizarry and José A. Rodriguez Palés dated November 27, 1991. For the reasons stated below, the Motion t...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment dated October 2, 1991, and Defendant’s Motion Requesting a Finding that Defendant is Entitled to an Award of Attorney’s Fees dated November 8, 1991. .For the reasons set forth below, both motions are hereby DENIED.
Judgment was entered in this case on September 10, 1991, based on an Opinion & Order of the Court ...
Views: 1
ORDER
On February 26, 1992, this Court entered an order (document # 60) requesting that plaintiff and defendant Du Pont (“Du Pont”) file briefs addressing whether we may proceed with plaintiff’s case against Du Pont in light of co-defendant Vitek’s (“Vitek”) pending bankruptcy and the automatic stay. We gave each side the opportunity to file opening and responsive briefs.
Du Pont filed its openin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS WHITEHALL LABORATORIES, INC., AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION AND THE UPJOHN COMPANY
An essential element of each of Plaintiffs’ claims against the three Defendants is that the Defendants’ products (ibuprofen tablets) were in fact a cause of Plaintiff Manual Porter’s injury, an acute renal failure. In their Mot...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This litigation arises out of the distribution of the estate of Hiriam “Hank” Williams, Sr., who died intestate in 1953. The original state-court proceedings to distribute the estate concluded in 1975, at which time plaintiff Randall “Hank” Williams, Jr., was declared the sole heir to his father’s estate. Since that time, however, defendant Cathy Louise Deupree Ad-kinso...
Views: 1
Page 6345
ORDER ON APPEAL This cause is before the Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida. In the proceedings below, Bankruptcy Judge George L. Proctor sustained the objection of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). See In re Pruner, 122 B.R. 459 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla.1990). The Debtor, HAROLD PRUNER, appeals. I. Background From January...
Views: 1
ORDER
This federal lawsuit arises out of plaintiff Catherine Yvonne Stone’s efforts to enforce a 1989 state-court judgment that entitled her to share in the estate of her natural father, Hiriam “Hank” Williams, Sr. After finding in Stone’s favor, the Alabama Supreme Court remanded her state lawsuit to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County for execution of the judgment. The circuit court ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 825 (1992)
D & F CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation; Jay/Enn Corporation, a Michigan corporation; Models & Tools, Inc., a Michigan corporation; Troy Pattern & Model, Inc., a Michigan corporation; Aero Detroit, Inc., a Michigan corporation; Eifel Pattern & Model Co., a Michigan corporation; Pattern Guild & Products, Inc., a Michigan corporation; Stempin Prototype,...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours (“DuPont”) filed its motion for full summary judgment on December 10, 1991 (document #28).
1
Plaintiff's opposition (document #35) and Defendant’s reply (document # 38) have also been filed and considered. The court heard oral arguments on the motion on April 13, 1992. The motion is now ripe for the court’s decision.
BACKGROUND
A...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiff’s Request for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, to which Defendant Steeves’ Objection was filed on March 3, 1992, and to which Plaintiff responded on March 16, 1992. Plaintiff seeks reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and expenses in the total amount of $25,603...
Views: 0
Page 6359
MEMORANDUM OPINION In April of 1991, after several stages of administrative review had been completed, plaintiff brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment stating that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) was required to rule on the procedural validity of the layering rule, 10 C.F.R. § 212.-186. The defendants opposed remanding the case to FERC and instead sought to have thi...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and the plaintiff’s opposition thereto. This is an action alleging age discrimination filed by a group of former employees of the now defunct El Mundo newspaper. The defendant asserts that the Complaint should be dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to file a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (...
Views: 0
ORDER This action arises from events surrounding the death of Raymond Russell Wringer at Lynx Lake, which is in the Prescott National Forest near Prescott, Arizona. The Plaintiffs contend that representatives of the United States government failed to protect Raymond Wringer from thin ice on the lake because they failed to post signs warning visitors of the thin ice and failed to close the lake....
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
After full consideration of the written submissions on Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment in the above-entitled matter,
1
it is hereby ORDERED that said motion be DENIED as to Counts III, V, and VI of the Complaint, the Court
*15
FINDING that a genuine issue of m...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This action was brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) under the authority of Section 21(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d), and seeks an injunction and other ancillary relief, including disgorgement of profits and civil penalties under the Insider Trading Sanctions Act of 1984 (“ITSA”), 15 U.S.C. § 78u-l, agains...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs here seek recovery for losses they suffered after buying a condominium sold to them by Defendant Kearns and financed by Defendant First NH Banks. Plaintiffs have alleged violations of both federal and state securities laws, 15 U.S.C. § 77l (1) and (2); 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b); 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5; 32 M.R.S.A. § 10101
et seq.;
N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 421-B:...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS ZOLLINGERS’ MOTION FOR SEVERANCE OF COUNT IX
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b),1 the Zollinger Defendants seek to sever the claims against them under Count IX2 of Plaintiff Fleet Bank’s Complaint, pending a determination of the liability and damages against the dissolved corporation in the underlying suit. See Memorandum in Support of Zollinger Defendants’...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
This action arises out of an internal revenue dispute between
pro se
Plaintiff Gilbert T. Gonsalves and the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). On January 15, 1992, Plaintiff filed his Complaint for monetary damages under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FDIC’S MOTION TO DISMISS
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), as Receiver of New Hampshire Savings Bank (“NHSB”), has moved to dismiss Plaintiff Keith A. Perkins’ Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant Defendant’s M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FDIC’S MOTION TO DISMISS
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), as Receiver of Dartmouth Bank, has moved to dismiss Defendants The Satter Companies’ (“Defendants” or “Satter”) Counterclaim? for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). For the reasons that follow, the Court will gran...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs move for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendants from proceeding against them in a criminal action, and for the return or review
in camera
of documents seized during a search of plaintiffs’ and plaintiffs’ counsel’s offices. Plaintiffs are the targets of an investigation into criminal violations of the Clean Water Act arising from activities conducted o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on the Defendants, U.S. Department of the Navy’s (“Navy”), Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment. Because this Court finds that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the Defendants are entitled to judgment as a
*8
matter of law, the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is g...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Greenberg and Lord bring this class action against Howtek and two of its officers. The first count is against all defendants for violation of § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). The second count is against the individual defendants for violation of § 20(a) of the Exchange Act. 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78t(a)...
Views: 1
ORDER
Violent crime cases are the exception in federal courts. The instant case is arguably the most violent case ever tried in a federal court: the indictment charges the sixteen defendants on trial with 14 murders
1
by means such as beheading, stabbing, occasionally by pistol shots, plus severing of body parts such as ears to prove the worthiness of the killer. Plus, they are...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied. Background On November 1, 1990, plaintiff was issued a Notice of Right to Sue by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). Thereafter, on January 28, 1991, plaintiff filed a pro se complaint to initiate the instant action. On January 31, 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In its motion for summary judgment, defendant Allstate Insurance Company seeks a determination that the homeowner insurance policies it issued did not provide coverage for damages resulting from the insured’s alleged sexual molestation of a child. The estate of the insured, J.M. Neal, and the plaintiff contend that coverage exists under the insurance policies for unin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the motion of Scott McIntosh, a minor, and his father, Steven McIntosh, for summary judgment against the defendant, Scottsdale Insurance Company (Scottsdale), and on the cross-motion of Scottsdale for summary judgment against plaintiffs Scott and Steven McIntosh. Plaintiffs contend Scottsdale is liable under its insurance policy for a jud...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. Plaintiff has responded to the Motion. The Court, having considered the Motion and response, along with memoranda of authorities and attachments thereto, is of the opinion that Defen
*46
dants’ Motion is well taken and should be granted.
...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court are the following post-trial motions filed filed with the Court in the captioned proceedings:
1. The Government’s Motion to Dismiss Defendant’s Motion for New Trial.1
2. Defendant’s Motion for New Trial.2
3. The Government’s Motion to Impose Costs.3
In keeping with the policy of this section of court that oral argument on motions is restricted to the briefs, the...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Peggy J. Lee (“Lee”) brought the instant suit for damages and at equity for the alleged violation of her rights to employee benefit information pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1132,
et seq.
(“ERISA”). This cause came on for a one day trial to the Court on April 28, 1992. The Court has considered the parties...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PETITION FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS FROM RESTRAINT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A PRETRIAL HEARING
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Petitioner Intergroup Investment Corporation’s Petition for Release of Funds from Restraint or in the Alternative for a Pretrial Hearing, filed February 13, 1992.
1. Background
On November 22, 1991, an indictment issued against the above-referenced defendants...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This dispute between a scholarly English professor and a glitzy popular author in essence turns upon the richness and variety of the English'language and the incredible heterogeneity of those who read and speak it. The English professor, Julia Penelope (“Penelope”), brought this copyright infringement action against three defendants: Rita Mae Brown (“Brown”), author...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a medical malpractice case filed by Dr. Nancy Alejo Jiménez, a dentist born in the Dominican Republic against Dr. Eduardo Heyliger, a gynecologist. Plaintiff claims that defendant was negligent when he performed on her a hysterectomy. She alleges that due to defendant’s negligence a vesicovaginal fistula was formed which caused her to discharge urine through the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff is seeking review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’s decision denying his application for disability benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Administrative Law Judge (hereafter AU) held a hearing, and thereafter affirmed the Social Security Administration’s denial of plaintiff's claim. The Appeals Council denied plaintiff’s ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff/insured, Nicholas A. Clemente, Esq., and his law firm, Nicholas A. Clem-ente, P.C., seek in this action to recover $318,909.71 pursuant to a professional liability insurance policy written by defendant/insurer, The Home Insurance Company (“the Company”). Mr. Clemente in
*119
curred the $318,909.71 in costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the defense a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs invested in forward contracts through First Western Government Securities (First Western). As part of the promotional materials received from First Western, they received tax opinion letters drafted by Arvey, Hodes, Costello & Bur-man (Arvey Hodes or Arvey). When they did not receive the favorable tax consequences they expected, pl...
Views: 1
792 F. Supp. 380 (1992)
Joe J. JORDAN, et al.
v.
Arnold T. BERMAN, et al.
No. 89-CV-8172.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
May 1, 1992.
*381 Sharon K. Wallis, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Theresa E. Loscalzo, Jacob C. Cohn, Steven R. Waxman, Kathy J. Langley, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants.
*382 MEMORANDUM
WALDMAN, District Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs brought this ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This case is before the court on appeal from a ruling of the bankruptcy court dismissing appellant's complaint objecting to discharge. The court below dismissed the complaint under the rationale of In re Padilla, 84 B.R. 194 (Bankr.D.Colo.1987). Padilla held that in a no-asset case even non-scheduled debts are discharged, unless the creditor can show fraud, mal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A., appeals the bankruptcy court’s February 14, 1991 order holding that its motion for relief from stay would not be deemed an informal proof of claim and sustaining the trustee’s objection to its formal proof of claim as untimely. The bankruptcy court reasoned that the bank’s motion for relief from stay did not make demand on the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
This matter is before the court on cross-appeals from the bankruptcy court. 122 B.R. 422. After a trial on October 23, 1990, the debtors’ discharge was denied because they had fraudulently concealed and transferred several horses and other personal property while retaining the use and benefit of them. In so finding, the bankruptcy court applied the doctrine o...
Views: 0
DECISION ON APPEAL I. Introduction Debtors appeal an order of the bankruptcy court denying confirmation of their chapter 13 plan and granting Richard Kramer’s (“creditor”) objections to the confirmation. The bankruptcy court also enjoined the debtors from refiling another bankruptcy petition for a year after final judgment, including any appeal. On appeal they assert the creditor had no sta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Meyer Blinder, Lillian Blinder, American Rare Coin Exchange, Ltd., Intercontinental
*792
Enterprises, Inc. and Redmey Management Company (collectively, the Appellants) appeal the bankruptcy court’s October 12, 1990 judgment ordering them to turn over property, including legal files, to Glen E. Keller, Jr., Trustee of Blinder, Robinson & Co., Inc.’...
Views: 3
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY FEES
On March 5, 1992, I granted summary judgment in favor of the Trustees of the Colorado Laborers Health and Welfare Trust Fund, awarding them attorney fees for the prosecution of this action. On March 16, 1992, counsel for the Trustees filed an affidavit of attorney fees and costs, claiming fees and expenses of $17,-994.40. On March 24, 1992, defendants John Bowman, Inc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is currently before the court on three motions filed by the parties. Cross-defendant Kelvin Jefferson (Jefferson) asks the court to dismiss the cross-claim asserted by defendant and cross-claimant Union Pacific Railroad (Union Pacific) (doc. # 60), and plaintiff Billie Joe Reeve (Reeve) has filed a motion for an order to endorse an expert witness (doc. # 89)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
At issue in these cases is the scope of the regulatory authority of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over medical articles. This dispute arose when Clinical Reference Laboratory, Inc. (CRL), a Kansas corporation that performs in-house laboratory testing for insurance risk assessment purposes, began using a risk assessment protocol for the Human Imm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff PaineWebber, Inc. (Paine-Webber) filed this action seeking an order from the Court consolidating two ongoing arbitration proceedings involving similar issues and parties. Defendant Marlene Fowler (Fowler), the other principal party to the arbitration proceedings, opposes such an order. Currently before the Court are PaineWebber’s motion to consolidate the ar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action has been brought by T & G Construction Co., Inc. (“T & G”) against Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, Local 100 (“the Union”), seeking an injunction against the arbitration of a dispute between the parties.
1
The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
I.
T & G is a construction contractor headquartered in Suitland, M...
Views: 0
OPINION
Robert Adelson retired from GTE Corporation in 1983. He, his wife Mildred and their daughter Margaret have brought this ERISA action against GTE, GTE Service Corporation and The Travelers Insurance Company to recover benefits under GTE's group health plan.
1
The Plan is self-insured by GTE. The Plan Administrator is the employee benefits committee of GTE Service Corpora...
Views: 2
Page 6513
MEMORANDUM
In this action Scottsdale Insurance Company (“Scottsdale”) seeks indemnification
*1081
or contribution from American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company (“American Empire”) for a settlement which Scottsdale paid and defense costs which it incurred in connection with a lead paint exposure suit filed against their mutual insured, Richard A. Shepherd, t/a Shepherd’...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff in this case is the Synalloy Corporation (“Synalloy”). Defendants are Richard E. Gray, Chariot Holdings, Ltd., Chariot Plastics, Inc., and the Chariot Group, Inc. (“defendants”). The Chariot Group, Inc., (“Chariot Group”) is also a counterclaimant against counterclaim de*267fendants Synalloy Corporation, James G. Lane, Jr., Richard E. Ingram, C.D. Vinson, Sibyl N. Fishburn and G...
Views: 1
OPINION This action was commenced on March 25, 1991 by James L. Farmer (“Farmer”) alleging violations of Title VII by the defendant E.I. duPont de Nemours (“duPont”). The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Prior to filing the instant action, Farmer, on February 9, 1990, had filed charges of employment discrimination with the Dela...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Richard A. Kroschinsky, Jr. has brought this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et. seq. (“ERISA”), against the Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore/International Longshoremen’s Association Pension Trust Fund (the “Pension Fund”) and the Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore/International Longshoremen’s Association Benefits Trust ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff filed this action against TRW, Inc. (“TRW”) in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, asserting claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681
et seq.
(“FCRA”), the Maryland Fair Credit Reporting Act, Md.Com.Law II Code Ann. § 14-1207(e) and for common law defamation. As to each claim, Plaintiff seeks actual damages in the amount of $1, punit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The United States of America and Lewis L. Kubiet, a revenue officer with the Internal Revenue Service, (referred to collectively as “the government”), have filed a petition pursuant to §§ 7402 and 7604 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) for enforcement of an IRS summons issued to Francis E. Streett, Jr. of Parkton, Maryland. Streett has moved to quash the summons. The go...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Sting Security, Inc. (“Sting”), Patrol Command Systems, a division of Sting and Robert D. Arscott, Jr., president of Sting (collectively “Sting”) have brought this action seeking a declaration that their insurer, First Mercury Syndicate, Inc. (“First Mercury”), has a duty both to defend and indemnify them in connection with a lawsuit currently pending in the Circuit Court for P...
Views: 0
*694 MEMORANDUM OPINION Presently before this court is a Motion to Quash Grand Jury Subpoena Dated May 22, 1991. The issues have been fully briefed. No hearing is deemed necessary. Local Rule 105 (D.Md.). Attorney R.S. (“R.S.”) was properly served on June 26, 1991, with a Federal Grand Jury subpoena requesting the following information: Any and all documents pertaining to the date and amo...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A bench trial in this Jones Act case was held on March 4-7,1991. On July 30, 1991, this court ruled that defendant United Arab Shipping Company was negligent in failing to ensure that the accommodation ladder attached to the M/V Al Wattyah was reasonably safe for plaintiff pilot William W. Evans’ egress from the ship on September 10, 1989.
Eva...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Timothy and Katherine Franz and their two-year old child, Ashley Franz bring this § 1983 suit against Defendants Richard Lytle and Jeanette Schlabach, police officers for the city of Haysville, Kansas in connection with a child neglect or sexual abuse investigation. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants, by engaging in unconsented inspections of Ashley’s v...
Views: 0
EVIDENTIARY MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter arises from a narcotics prosecution, based on 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), against Defendant Davis. Presently before the court is the defendant’s objection to the admission of information relating to his income, including tax returns, for the period of 1984 through 1989. The government seeks to show that the defendant failed to file tax returns for the tax...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Shawn Pride brings this § 1983 action, alleging the use of excessive force by Defendant Jan Lamb. Plaintiff also brings a state battery claim against Officer Lamb. Officer Lamb presents before the court a motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity from the § 1983 suit. STATEMENT OF UNCONTROVERTED FACTS On the evening of September 9, 1988, Pla...
Views: 0
790 F. Supp. 1069 (1992)
Kenneth Daniel RUPP II, Plaintiff,
v.
PUROLATOR COURIER CORP., Emery Air Freight Corp., Mark Fitzgerald, and Jerry Meyer, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 90-1192-T.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
April 28, 1992.
*1070 Jack Focht, Focht, Hughey, Hund and Calvert, Wichita, Kan., for plaintiff.
Stephen M. Joseph, Joseph, Robison & Anderson, P.A., Wichita, Kan., John J....
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER A number of motions are pending in this matter. The court held an evidentiary hearing on April 10, 1992. I. Motion to Suppress — Doc. 22 The defendant moves to suppress all evidence seized, all statements of the defendant, and all observations of law enforcement officers obtained during the search of certain real property owned by Dr. Ralph N. Sumner, M.D. (the defendan...
Views: 1
Page 6531
*330OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs’ application for attorney fees and expenses. Doc. 671. The court held an evi-dentiary hearing, has considered the voluminous filings, and is prepared to rule.
Plaintiffs seek an award of attorneys fees in the amount of $3,558,068.50 and expenses in the amount of $238,173.25. See Hearing Exhibit 3. Plaintiffs base their request on...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING RULE 59(E) MOTION On February 3, 1992,1 entered judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, reversing and remanding this case to the Secretary for further proceedings to include a full vocational assessment of the Plaintiff. On February 25, 1992, counsel for the Plaintiff filed a petition for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). The Secretary ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, contending that plaintiff has not complied with the administrative claim requirement of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a). The motion was heard on April 24, 1992. Because this action is now subject to all the limitations of the FTCA, the motion to dismiss is granted. Plaintif...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs bring this action against defendant Philadelphia Electric Co. (“PECO”), Ronald Price’s employer since 1977. The complaint alleges violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq.,
and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”), 43 Pa.Stat. Ann. § 951,
et seq.
Plaintiffs aver that Mr. Price...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This action is a consolidation of three cases which were filed by various shareholders, as shareholder derivative and class actions, against Sears, Roebuck & Company (“Sears”).
1
Plaintiffs alleged violations of to § 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78n(a), and Rule 14(a)-9 promulgated thereunder; § 404 of the Employee Retirement Income Secur...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants unconstitutionally deprived them of property without due process of law. Defendant is a law firm (“Fox, Rothschild”) which was retained to obtain and execute a confessed judgment against plaintiff Jordan, Mitchell, Inc. pursuant to a cognovit clause in its lease. Defendants entered j...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This action involves the remaining counterclaims and third-party claims asserted by Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) against the United States. SEPTA seeks contribution and indemnification from the government for the response costs incurred in the clean-up of the Paoli Rail Yard from polychlorinated biphenyl (“PCB”) contamination under section 107 of the C...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1729 (the “non-discrimination” act) to recover the cost of care and services furnished to eleven veterans at a Veterans Administration Medical Center, Martins-burg, West Virginia. The eleven veterans are “Medicare eligible” and covered by Medicare Supplemental Insurance Policies provided by Defendant Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Mary...
Views: 0
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR PREJUDGMENT REMEDY Plaintiff has filed an Application pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 64 seeking a prejudgment remedy against the Defendants. On December 12, 1991, after two days of hearings, Magistrate Judge Arthur H. Latimer recommended the imposition of a preliminary injunction, which this court will now review de novo. Motion papers and the record from the hearin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the early morning hours of May 15, 1980, Steven Zweikert was returning home from a high school prom. As he emerged from the subway in Queens at about 4:00 a.m., he was followed and accosted by four youths. Among them was the petitioner, Angel Claudio, who brandished a gun. When one of the boys demanded money, Steven tried to wrest the gun from Claudio and in the st...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The genesis of this action is the sale and purchase of a corporation. The purchaser repents of its bargain, and seeks to undo it and recover compensatory and punitive damages. Subject matter jurisdiction in this Court is founded upon claims under the federal securities laws and the civil RICO statute, to, which state and common law claims are appended. Followi...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
James Meehan (“plaintiff”), Administrator of the estate of Michael J. Meehan (“Meehan”), brings this action under the *19Federal Group Life Insurance Act (“FEG-LI”), 5 U.S.C. § 8501 et seq., against the United States Postal Service, the United States of America and the United States Office of Personnel Management.1 Plaintiff alleges that his son, Meehan, was wrongfully denied...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross appeals from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri.1 For the following reasons, the judgment of the bankruptcy court is affirmed.
Procedural Background
Missouri OHM, Inc. filed its Chapter 11 petition on January 25, 1989. At that time, The Merchants Bank (“Merchants”) held a secured claim in the amount of $3,956,-4...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I.
Before the Court is the plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration. This is the third time that this Court has reviewed the merits of the defendant’s request for summary judgment in this wrongful discharge case that is based on
Toussaint v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan,
408 Mich. 579, 292 N.W.2d 880 (1980). The plaintiff was terminated a...
Views: 0
*151
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE
This is a diversity action for breach of contract and violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. §§ 42-110a
et seq.
(“CUTPA”) and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. §§ 17.41
et seq.
brought by Clisham Management, Inc. and Bristol Self Storage ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On November 3, 1983, William Stumpp was murdered in the course of a robbery of his pawnshop in Texarkana, Arkansas. On November 1, 1984, Richard Wayne Snell was charged with capital murder in the death of William Stumpp. The trial was conducted before the Honorable Philip Pur-ifoy, Miller County Circuit Court at Texar-kana, Arkansas between August 13 and August 15, 19...
Views: 177
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter involves an alleged “daisy chain” conspiracy designed to avoid federal excise tax on gasoline and the attempts by the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice to secure the tax allegedly so avoided. Two members of this alleged conspiracy, Oil Co. Inc. (“Oil Co.”) and Kapco Petroleum Corporation (“Kap-co”), have each filed for bankrupt...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the plaintiff’s Motion in Limine which seeks to prevent “the defendant from utilizing or even making reference to plaintiff’s counsel’s deposition in any manner in front of the jury.” Brief in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine, at 3-4. For the reasons which follow, the motion is GRANTED.
I.
In October, 1989, the plaintiff’s uncle, Randall Esc...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's motion for Summary Judgment. The parties to the action are Plaintiff Liberty Heating and Cooling, a Detroit based contractor of heating and cooling equip
*1441
ment, and Defendant Builders Square, Inc., a national retailer of building supplies.
In 1989, Liberty app...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case requires us to rule on the issue of whether the liquidation proceedings of an insurance company initiated in the Superior Court of Puerto Rico by the Insurance Commissioner in his official capacity, qualifies as “business of insurance” as defined under the McCarran-Ferguson Act.
1
We also need to decide if under the McCarran-Ferguson Act, the Puerto ...
Views: 1
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS On January 27, 1992, defendant Padrón filed a Motion to Change Venue of Count Two of the Indictment to the Central District of California (document # 62a). Defendants Benavidez (document # 54) and Carrillo (document # 61) joined in the motion. Plaintiff filed an opposition (document #70) on February 7, 1992. IT IS, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED that the motion (document #s 62a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court, having considered the Motions and responses, along with memoranda of authorities and attachments thereto, is of the opinion that Defendant’s Motion is well taken and should be granted.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This case arises ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, and Plaintiffs Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. On June 5, 1990, the United States Magistrate Judge consolidated the present action, for discovery purposes only, with
George A. George v. Holladay, et al.,
Civil Action No. J8...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOLITERNO’S MOTION TO CONFIRM AND ASSOCIATED’S APPLICATION TO VACATE ARBITRATION AWARD
Pursuant to 9 United States Code section 10(d), the Associated Construction Company (“Associated”) has applied to the Court for an order vacating an arbitration award rendered in favor of Moliterno Stones Sales Inc. (“Moliterno”). In response, Moliterno has moved to confirm the arbitration awa...
Views: 0
OPINION
An evidentiary hearing was held on March 31, 1992 and April 10, 1992 in this Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) summons enforcement matter. Petitioners, the United States and Joseph West, Revenue Agent of the IRS are investigating whether respondent, Frank Wheaton, Jr. (“Wheaton”) has any federal income tax liabilities for the years 1981 through 1986 arising from his alleged control...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
One count of plaintiff's complaint in this action is a copyright action under Title 17 of the United States Code. Plaintiff has made a jury demand and, pursuant to an order of the court, the trial has been divided into phases. The parties have made their respective proffers to the court of their evidence with respect to phase I, which concerns only issues relating to ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendants, three major financial institutions, served as underwriters for a set of Bank of New England bonds in September, 1989. Each defendant underwrote approximately one third of the $250 million dollar principal amount of the bonds, which were then sold on a public offering. On January 7,1991, the Bank of New England (“BNE”) filed...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff First National Bank (“FNB”) has brought this action alleging that defendants participated to various degrees in a scheme to defraud involving the sale of financial guaranty insurance to FNB. The case is before the court presently on FNB’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on certain of its state law claims; and on the Motion for Partial Judgment on the Plead...
Views: 2
OPINION
Presently before this Court is a petition to vacate an arbitrator's award filed by petitioner Donald M. Bouton ("Bouton") and a motion to dismiss all of the said petitioner's quests for relief in this case, filed by respondent Government of the Virgin Islands ("Government"). Oral argument was heard by this Court during the March 25,1991 Motion Day.
1
The Court has consid...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs in this case are minority shareholders of a close corporation who sued the officers, directors, and controlling shareholders of the corporation in state court for alleged violations of state corporate laws establishing fiduciary duties directors, officers, and majority shareholders of close corporations owe minority shareholders and the corp...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants and cross-claimants Colorado National Bankshares, Inc., John F. and Elizabeth R. Malo, Boettcher & Co., Inc., Davis, Graham & Stubbs, Larson Land Co., Inc., and Carpenter and Klaskin, P.C, move for partial summary judgment against defendants and cross-defendants Theodore Zi-gan, Ronald K. Blatchley, William M. Blatchley, Arthur D. McFall, M
&
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Swank Corporation’s and Donald W. Swank’s Motion to Disqualify the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. An evidentiary hearing on this motion was held on April 28, 1992. For the reasons stated below, this motion is DENIED.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
At the evidentiary hearing on this matter, the fo...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS This matter came on for hearing on May 1st, 1992, on defendant’s, Theodore Hathe-way’s (“Hatheway”) Motions to Dismiss the Government’s Superseding Indictment and to Suppress Evidence, and the Government’s Motion to Amend Count Five of the Superseding Indictment to Correct Typographical Error. The above captioned matter is set for trial on Thursday, May 7th, 1992. Hatheway’s Moti...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the “Motion to Dismiss”, 1 filed on February 27, 1992, by defendants the Grant County Council, and the members of the Grant County Council, Earl Gottchalk, John Comer, Earl Greene, Elizabeth Wright, Mac E. Love, Quentin Pettiford, and Jerry Shaw 2 . Contemporaneously with this motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be gr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs sued the Boeing Company, the B.F. Goodrich Company, the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Delta Airlines, Inc., and Parker Hannifin Corporation in state court for wrongful death and personal injuries arising from the March 31, 1986, crash of Mexicana Flight 940 near Mexico City. Defendants removed on the basis of diversity of citizenship. Plaintiffs now move to rem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
ERISA (29 U.S.C. § 1102(b)) requires that every employee benefit plan “provide
*615
a procedure for amending such plan, and for identifying the persons who have authority to amend the plan
...”
This case involves an employee pension plan in which a committee of officers of the employer was designated as the fiduciary administrator of the p...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant Kathy Faer Moskovitz’s motion for reconsideration of this court’s order granting plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment; and plaintiffs Moderncare, Inc. and Corsair Asset Management, Inc.’s motion to tax costs and fees.
I. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Defendant Kathy Faer Moskovitz seeks the court’s reconsideration of its order dated August 8, 199...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 248 (1992)
Mary B. CORTES, Dennis Cortes, Marcus J. Perkerson, William B. Barton, Rosemary L. Barton, James W. Reindl, Margaret S. Reindl, George E. Martino, Howard S. Rosen, Evelyn F. Rosen, G. Thomas Seeley, Judy A. Seeley, Jon David Steinmetz, William M. Guild and Patrick J. Martino, Plaintiffs,
v.
Ronald GRATKOWSKI and Patrick A. Parisi, Defendants.
Patrick A. PARISI, Third-Party...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS FOR VIOLATION OF FED.R.CIV.P. RULE 11 (# 32)
Plaintiff’s counsel, Joseph M. Orlando, Esquire of the law firm of Orlando and Associates, seeks the imposition of sanctions pursuant to Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ.P., upon Clifford B. Thompson, Esquire of the law firm of Clinton & Muzyka, counsel for the defendant, on account of statements made in...
Views: 1
ORDER Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), the Plaintiffs request this Court to alter and amend its Opinion and Order in the above-captioned case, 780 F.Supp. 46. 1 Although the Court awarded the Plaintiffs attorney’s fees and expenses, the Court denied the Plaintiffs' request for reimbursement for expert witness fees pursuant to West Virginia Hospitals, Inc. v. Casey, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1138, ...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on motions to dismiss by the Justices of the Supreme Court of Georgia, Superior Court Judges Richard Winegarden and James
Henderson
1
,
the State Bar of Georgia, and William P. Smith, III, General Counsel of the State Bar of Georgia.
I. FACTS
Plaintiff brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the First, Fif...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Ira Ritter filed this action in the Court of Common Pleas for Snyder County, Pennsylvania, alleging breach of contract and defamation. Ritter claims that the circumstances surrounding his resignation from defendant Pepsi Cola Operating Company of Chesapeake and Indianapolis (“Pepsi”) violated certain parts of an employee handbook which had been circula...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) has brought this motion to compel documents that the plaintiff, Remington Arms Company (“Remington”), claims are not subject to discovery because of the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. The documents purportedly relate to underlying claims against Remington for environmental dam...
Views: 0
ORDER
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This action was brought by the Plaintiff, Michelle Ann Stockett, against her former employers, Frank Tolin (“Tolin”) and three closely-held Florida corporations, Limelite Studios, Inc. (“Limelite Studios”), Directors Production Company (“DPC”) and Limelite Video, Inc. (“Limelite Video”), which Plaintiff claims Tolin controls. Plaintiff se...
Views: 9
Page 6696
OPINION ON APPEAL 1. Introduction. The IRS has appealed from the bankruptcy court’s order granting the debtor, David Nece, a setoff of $82,105.44 to his tax liability. Nece owed the taxes under a federal statute assessing penalties against a principal when the corporate taxpayer fails to pay to the government taxes withheld from employees. The bankruptcy court held that the IRS abused its discreti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
National Wrecking Company (“National”) has sued International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local No. 731 (“Union”) seeking to vacate an arbitration award (the “Award”), and Union has in turn counterclaimed for enforcement of the Award plus some related additional relief. National now moves under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56 for summary judgment on its claim, while Un...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant E. Lewis Hansen and defendant Hurt, Richardson, Garner, Todd and Cadenhead’s motion for summary judgment and motion for leave to file an affidavit in support of their reply brief. This order follows oral argument and supplemental briefing. The court orally granted in part and denied in part the motion for leave a to file supplemental affi...
Views: 0
On November 26, 1991, this Court held an evidentiary hearing to determine whether defendant Fredel Williamson waived his Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser by procuring the silence of his co-defendant Reginald Harris. BACKGROUND In 1989 Fredel Williamson and Reginald Harris were indicted on three counts of drug related charges. They were tried separately. The government subpoenaed ...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION This is a civil action brought by Plaintiff Fargo Weite Reisen GMBH (“Fargo”), a private German corporation, against Defendant Jamaica Vacations Limited, Inc. (“JAMVAC”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Government of Jamaica, to recover sums allegedly due and owing on a contract for services. A non-jury trial was commenced by...
Views: 0
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
This suit was originally filed in state court as an “admiralty or general maritime claim under federal law”
1
by Eugene E. Pittman.
2
Plaintiff contended in the state court petition that he was injured while working aboard a barge floating in navigable waters.
The defendants timely removed this suit to federal court. Defend...
Views: 0
*696 MEMORANDUM OPINION I. BACKGROUND Ronald Anderson, head baseball coach at West Orange-Stark High School, brought this action against Marcus Blankenship, head baseball coach at Westbrook High School, Beaumont Independent School District (BISD), The Port Arthur News and Will Wright, a sports columnist for the newspaper, asserting state tort claims, including defamation, slander, and int...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Bonita H. Regan (“plaintiff” or “Regan”), a former Deputy Tax Receiver for the Town of Islip, brings the above-referenced action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Town of Islip (the “Town” or “Islip”); the Islip Tax Receiver, Edwin Boogertman (“Boogertman”); and *58 Virginia Allen, who replaced Regan as Deputy Tax Receiver (collectively “defendants”). 1...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on the defendants’ (“the government”) motion to dismiss. The Court held an oral hearing on this motion on March 16, 1992. Upon careful consideration of the oral argument and the written briefs filed in this matter, for the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant the government’s motion. Background The plaintiffs in this suit are ei...
Views: 1
Page 6718
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs, Atlanta College of Medical and Dental Careers, Inc. (Atlanta College) and Louisville College of Medical and Dental Careers, Inc. (Louisville College), have participated for more than eight years in the Guaranteed Student Loan (student loan) programs authorized by Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965, 20 U.S.C. § 1070
et seq.
Pursuant to § 43...
Views: 0
ORDER UPON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
I.
This matter appears once again before the court on defendant’s motion for reconsideration. The Secretary seeks to revisit the court’s order of January 28, 1992, itself prompted by a prior motion by the Secretary to reconsider the court’s award of EAJA attorney fees in this matter. In the January 28 order, reported at 783 F.Supp. 474, the court...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Petitioners are five classes of private plaintiffs who, along with the State of Alaska, have sued Exxon Corporation and Alyeska Pipeline Service Company (“Alyes-ka”) 1 in parallel federal and state court actions in Alaska. Here they move for an order enforcing a non-party subpoena, issued on the authority of this court, which sought production of documents in the possession of the Ameri...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court is defendants’ motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, the Court finds that the record, taken as a whole, demonstrates that a rational trier of fact would not find for plaintiff,
Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.,
475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 1356, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986), and, therefore, there is ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff John W. Flanagan filed this
Bivens
1
type civil rights action against twenty-three persons, all of whom are employed by the United States Bureau of Prisons, in various capacities, and in various locations across the country.
2
Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to strike the supplemental answers and defenses submitted by defendants Robert Church and Richard Rose in response to plaintiff’s amended complaint. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court hereby issues the following order. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On April 15, 1991, Shirley C...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This, cause comes to be heard on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed February 19, 1992 by defendants Regional Medical Center Board, Regional Health Services, Inc. and Northeast Alabama Regional Medical Center (“Hospital defendants”). The Hospital defendants move for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and her pendent tort claims un...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant Russell Donald Mayo has been charged with possessing handguns in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1). This cause is currently before the court on his motion to suppress. Based on the evidence presented at two hearings, the court con-, eludes that the motion should be denied.
I. FACTS
On the evening of 'May 13, 1991, the Police Department in Enterprise, Alabama, ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a declaratory judgment and damages alleging violations of Plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Defendants move jointly pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Timothy P. Millard brought this action in state court against Electronic Cable Specialists and Electrical Conservation Systems, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation (ECS), claiming wrongful discharge, breach of an employment agreement, conversion, negligence, and seeking a declaratory judgment that a covenant not to compete was invalid. ECS removed to this court, all...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This class action was originally brought before Judge Lasker by applicants for and recipients of benefits based on disability under the federal Supplemental Security Income and Old Age Survivor’s and Disability Insurance (“OASDI”) programs, administered by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary” or “Defendant”) pursuant to the Social Security Act, 42 ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action challenges the constitutionality of certain guidelines applicable to Centers for Disease Control (the “CDC”) grants for educational materials related to Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (“AIDS”). Plaintiffs and defendants are presently before the Court for the second time on motions to dismiss and cross-motions for summary judgment, following def...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Maxwell Macmillan Professional and Business Reference Division of Macmillan Information Co., Inc. (“Macmillan”) moves for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Defendant District 65, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers, AFL-CIO (“District 65”) opposes the motion and cross-moves for summary judgment. For the reasons stated bel...
Views: 0
OPINION
CIS Corporation and related companies are involved in Chapter 11 proceedings. Plaintiff James P. Hassett is the Chapter 11 Trustee. There is a dispute between CIS and Capitol Bank & Trust Company about whether the bank does or does not have a security interest in certain equipment. The FDIC has been appointed receiver of the Bank. Plaintiff Hassett has sued the FDIC in the Bankrup...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION This is an appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court entered in Bankruptcy Case Nos. 490-00621 and 490-00622, 120 B.R. 421. After an examination of the briefs and record, or appendix to the brief, this Court determines that oral argument is not needed. Bankr.Rule 8012, 11 U.S.C. Although numerous substantive issues have been raised in this appeal from an order dated O...
Views: 0
Page 6750
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff invokes this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 15 and
*959
26, to recover treble damages for and obtain injunctive relief from defendants’ alleged violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2, and the costs of this suit inclu...
Views: 0
ORDER This is an action alleging age and race discrimination in employment. Plaintiff alleges that the Department of Veterans Affairs did not hire him to fill five positions in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e, et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 621, et seq. Plaintiff also alleges that defendant refused to release records ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court are the parties’ many contentions, given on the Court’s request, to show cause: (1) why the Court’s March 26, 1991 Order temporarily prohibiting anyone from destroying, transferring or disposing of originals or copies of certain materials seized from plaintiff’s residence should not be made permanent, 1 and (2) why the parties and all others with actual noti...
Views: 3
ORDER Before the court is plaintiffs motion to reconsider the court’s order of February 7, 1992. In that order, plaintiff was denied leave to amend her complaint to add a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(2) and to add an additional party plaintiff. In a status conference held March 6, 1992, the court orally denied plaintiff's motion to reconsider. A transcript of that conference has been filed and ...
Views: 2
ORDER
At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a Monroe County ordinance that regulates the transport of out-of-county waste into Monroe County. The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss and seek summary judgment on some of plaintiff’s claims. Plaintiff has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of the ordinance until this case is decided upon t...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff A.V. Patrick has brought this lawsuit charging that the four individual
*302
defendants, members of the City Council of the City of Florala, have conspired to deprive him of his civil rights and have discriminated against him because of his race, all in violation of 42 U.S.C.A. § 1985; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e...
Views: 0
Page 6768
MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiff Dillard Department Stores Inc. (“Dillard”), an owner and operator of department stores in the United States, brought this action for a declaratory judgment of patent invalidity, unenforceability and non-infringement with respect to United States’ Patent Number 4,021,891 (the “891 Patent”) against Application Art Laboratories Company (“Application Art”) and Randolph-Rand ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs came to this court on January 16, 1992 seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. The court set a hearing for January 18, 1992.
1
All defendants were sued in their official capacities.
Following the hearing, and after carefully considering all arguments before the court, the court finds that the movants in this action have not “cle...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff Morton Mills’ application for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Defendant opposes the application on the grounds that plaintiff is not a prevailing party. Defendant does not address whether his position was substantially justified. Based upon the following discussion, the Court grants plaintiff’s application for EAJA f...
Views: 0
This matter was before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge on October 7, 1991 on a motion to compel discovery from Tonka Corporation. Tonka Corporation was represented by John Gilmore, Esq. Travelers Ins. Co. was represented by Paul Neimann, Esq. Fireman’s Fund was represented by Gay Urness, Esq. Northriver Ins. Co. was represented by Leon Erstad, Esq.
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This is a...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants Barry Lang, Stuart Lichter and Gerald Wendel’s (“individual defendants”) motion for summary judgment and on the plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC”) motion to dismiss the counterclaim of defendants Wayne Coliseum Limited Partnership (“Wayne Coliseum”) and Rochelle Realty Corporation (“Rochelle Realty”) (together “the defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is before the Court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas. Both the United States and the Debtors, Steven and Sharia Block, appeal an order from the Bankruptcy Court holding them jointly and severally liable to J. Gregg Pritchard, the trustee appointed in the Block’s bankruptcy case (“Trustee”), for a tax refu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I.
Overview
After nearly thirty years in the employ of the defendant, Jerry L. Morton was fired. Morton has now turned to the courts for vindication and for compensation. Morton, however, has not brought a solitary lawsuit. Rather, Morton claims in state court that he was fired and is unsuitable for employment due to...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On April 16, 1992, the plaintiff, Nalco Chemical Co., commenced this action against the defendants Hydro Technologies, Inc., Daniel Girmscheid, and Thomas Broge. Nalco Chemical is a Delaware corporation engaged in, among other things, the business of water treatment. Hydro Technologies, a Wisconsin corporation, is also engaged in the business of water treatment. Defendants Da...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER Travis E. Blanks, currently incarcerated in Waupun Correctional Institution, seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of his constitutional rights when prison officials searched his cell and his person almost daily during a two-week “general shakedown” period. Mr. Blanks has filed a petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The petition will be granted....
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
On March 11, 1992, the court issued a decision and order denying the plaintiffs, Patrick Burke and two of his minor children, leave to proceed with this civil rights action in forma pauperis. Accordingly, the defendants have not been served with the summons and complaint and have never entered an appearance in the action.
On March 30, 1992, the court received a let...
Views: 0
■FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Background
In. 1973, pro se plaintiff James E. Rodgers (“Rodgers”), a forty-six-year-old black man, began working as a life insurance agent in defendant Western-Southern Life Insurance Company’s (“Western-Southern”) Milwaukee, Wisconsin office. In 1980, Rodgers was promoted to an associate sales manager position; on May 20, 1985, he resign...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before this court is plaintiff Krider Pharmacy & Gifts, Inc.’s July 18, 1991 motion to remand this action to state court. For the reasons below, this court grants the motion.
Background
On May 15, 1991, plaintiff Krider Pharmacy & Gifts (“Krider”) commenced this action against defendants Medi-Care Data Systems (“MDS”) and ABC Insurance Company in...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER The M/V THOMAS K sank in international waters on February 1, 1984, killing the captain and eight crew members and seriously injuring seven additional crew members. Plaintiffs, the surviving crew members and survivors of the deceased crew members, brought personal injury and wrongful death actions against the vessel’s owner, Eagle Transport Limited, Inc., its manager and operato...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM On June 20, 1991, the defendant Robert Lee Poole was charged in a sixteen-count indictment growing out of the events of May 29, and May 30, 1991, wherein he and a co-defendant, Matthew Burton, conspired to and did rob the Super 8 Motel in Beaumont, Texas, on the 29th, and Bank One Texas, N.A., Beaumont, Texas, on the 30th, by force, violence, and intimidation. After he and his attorney ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Petitioner United States of America’s motion, filed on November 4, 1991, entitled Motion for an Order of Interlocutory Sale And For Substitution of the Res. This motion concerns specifically the Respondent 1984 Kawasaki Ninja Motorcycle, Lie. No. 471D3F; 1982 Chevrolet Corvette, VIN: 1G1AY8784C5107267; 1986 4 Winns 170 Horizon Boat, I.D. No. 4WNTE128A686; (hereinafter “R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is rooted in a class action suit brought against Lomas Mortgage USA, Inc. (counterplaintiffs here), a mortgage service company. Plaintiffs (eounterdefendants here) hold mortgages that are owned or serviced by Lomas.
1
The mortgages require class members to deposit V12 of annual taxes and insurance in a non-interest bearing escrow account ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This reverse-discrimination action arises out of plaintiff Dr. Charles E. Keenan’s termination from employment as principal of Jane A. Neil School (“Neil School”). Keenan brings this multi-count action against nine members of the Neil Local School Council in both their individual and official capacities, 1 the Neil Local School Council, 2 the current principal o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Marilyn Cuevas is now before this court seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Presently, Cuevas raises the following claims: (1) that she was denied due process of law because the instructions given to the jury at trial allowed the jury to return a verdict of murder despite findings that should have resulted in a verdict of voluntary...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Ullman-Briggs, Inc. is a claimant of the debtor, Sevko, Inc., in Sevko’s Chapter 11 proceeding in the bankruptcy court of this district. Ullman-Briggs is also the plaintiff in an action before Judge Plunkett of this district which encompasses many of the same issues and facts as are alleged in Ullman-Briggs’ claim in bankruptcy. Ull-man...
Views: 3
ORDER
On February 10, 1992, this Court referred to Magistrate Judge William T. Prince these consolidated matters for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The Magistrate Judge has prepared and filed his Report and Recommendation and each party has had an opportunity to respond by filing objections to the Report with supporting memorandum, and by memorandum in s...
Views: 0
ORDER On November 12, 1991 a five-count Indictment was returned by the Grand Jury charging the above-named individual with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute marijuana (Count 1); two counts involving the use of a telephone to facilitate the distribution of marijuana (Counts 2 and 4); and, two counts of distribution of marijuana (Counts 3 and 5). The conspiracy is all...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on simultaneous motions by the plaintiffs to voluntarily dismiss the case with prejudice and supplement the record for appeal. For the reasons stated below, the Court denies plaintiffs’ motion to supplement the record on appeal and grants the motion to dismiss with prejudice.
*115
Facts
By Order dated August 3, 1990, this Court ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (hereinafter “Recommendation”), in which the magistrate judge denied plaintiff’s motion to conduct discovery and recommended that this court grant defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiff also moves the court to amend the complaint.
I. Background
In J...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant to suppress evidence. The court held a hearing in the matter on March 23, 1992, has considered the memo-randa of the parties, and is now prepared to rule.
I.
Background
At approximately 5:45 p.m. on January 31, 1992, Detectives Beverly Brimer and James Wittridge — two members of the Wichita d...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of all defendants for summary judgment. The violations alleged by plaintiff arise out of the forced entry into plaintiffs home on May 16, 1989 by a bail bondsman and two Wichita police officers. Believing plaintiff to be a fugitive who had skipped bond, the bondsman and police officers entered plaintiffs home and detained ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of plaintiff to drop parties pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 21. (Doc. 9).
Plaintiff (“Hyplains”) filed this action in state court on January 30, 1992, naming defendant (“Ee Operating”) as the sole defendant. Ee Operating removed the action to this court on February 10, 1992, alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction arising under the ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Secretary of Labor filed this suit on behalf of a former employee of the defendant alleging the employee was discharged in retaliation for complaining about the health and sanitation conditions in the defendant’s workplace. The matter comes before the court on the government’s motion to strike defendant’s demand for a jury trial.
The suit is brought pursuant ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of plaintiff for a protective order, and to quash trial subpoena; and plaintiff’s first motion in limine. The court has previously set forth the facts of this case. See 782 F.Supp. 564; Order of April 1, 1992, 789 F.Supp. 1117. This declaratory action involves the efforts of an excess insurance carrier (“Pacific”) and its insured ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND
This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (DE 2), following a Notice of Removal (DE 1).
Background
On January 31, 1992, Plaintiff, PATRICIA WOOLARD (“WOOLARD”), filed a Complaint in the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit against nineteen corporate Defendants, alleging various causes of action for damages suff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Daniel Reyes Carrasco has just tendered a self-prepared Complaint naming as defendant the “U.S. Govt. Justice Dept. Strike Force.” That Complaint is accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion for appointment of counsel. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied ...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING CROSS-MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before this Court for consideration of cross-motions for partial summary judgment (doc. 2, doc. 4 and doc. 13). Appropriate responses and replies have been filed (doc. 14 and doc. 15). This Court heard oral arguments on December 6, 1991. For the reasons set forth below, we hereby grant plaintiff’s motion for partial summa...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Teamsters Union Local # 507 (union) and a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Handleman Company (Handleman). For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied. Plaintiff Marna Terlecky (Terlecky) was employed by Defendant Handleman. In June 1990, Terlecky was laid off. In October 1990, she was recalled. In addition,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
There have now been nine actions filed in this court by the various plaintiffs alleging violations of law concerning Crazy Eddie, Inc., a now bankrupt electronics retailer.
The court has before it motions to dismiss all or some part of the complaints brought under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act), 15 U.S.C. § 77a et seq., the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (th...
Views: 0
OPINION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
In this antitrust action instituted on October 4,1991, Corsearch, Inc. (“Corsearch”) seeks an injunction requiring Defendant Thomson & Thomson, Inc. (“T & T”) to permit Dialog Information Services, Inc. (“Dialog”) to continue to provide T & T’s on-line state trademark computer information services to Corsearch, who utilizes these services to...
Views: 2
ORDER AND OPINION Petitioner Refik Loncarevic (“Loncarevic”) moved this Court by Order to Show Cause for a writ of habeas corpus directing respondent Edward J. McElroy (“McEl-roy”), Assistant District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”), to release Loncarevic on parole. For the reasons stated at oral argument and below, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied....
Views: 0
*572
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs, Milan Express Co. and twenty-eight other motor carriers that transport goods by truck in interstate commerce, filed this action seeking a declaratory judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 against defendant insurers who have issued bonds to various property brokers. “Property brokers” are intermediaries who hire motor carriers to ship goods in interstate comm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On December 8, 1981, Danny J. Cooley, Jackie O. Tate, Charles R. Myers, Darrell Glen Rollins, Gaylon L. Parson, and Har
*1298
vey J. Nolan, Jr. accidentally died in a methane gas explosion while working in an underground coal mine operated by their employer, the Grundy Mining Company, in Marion County near Whitwell, Tennessee. Plaintiffs are the widows and duly app...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Wilma Gordon (Gordon), underwent oral surgery for treatment of periodontal disease in July and August of 1989. As part of her post-operative treatment, her periodontist prescribed Peridex, a dental rinse manufactured and distributed by the defendant, The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Company (P & G). Plaintiff complains that after using one bottle of Peri-dex, she su...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action is submitted to the Court on cross motions for summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons set forth below, the defendant’s motion will be granted, and the plaintiff’s motion will be denied.
Plaintiff is a provider of hospital services as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 1395x(e) & (u). The defendant, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, is a feder...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
1
NATURE AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs Daniel P. Bierle and Karen J. Bierle brought an action against defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company alleging a claim of “bad faith” arising out of Liberty Mutual’s handling of a personal injury claim of plaintiffs. Liberty Mutual was the underinsurance motorist carrier und...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
NATURE AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This matter comes before the Court on a complaint for preliminary injunction, expedited trial, and declaratory judgment. The complaint was filed March 13, 1992. Plaintiffs Clifford Jearold Nesseim and Mary Lou Nesseim are insureds under a health benefits plan issued by defendant Mail Handlers Benefit Plan (MHBP), a plan authorized by t...
Views: 1
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case arises out of protests on June 17 and June 26, 1989 at the Summit Women’s Center (“Center”) in West Hartford. Plaintiff, the Center, and defendants, who include Operation Rescue and several of its supporters (“Operation Rescue”), each move for summary judgment.
Background
The following facts are undisputed for purposes of...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. The defendant’s motion is for summary final judgment; plaintiffs’ motion is for judgment as to liability only. The instant issue is whether Martin County is violating provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); specifically, whether the County is entitled to the overtime exemption found in ...
Views: 1
ORDER
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the defendant James Seidel’s motion to suppress evidence and statements. The Court heard oral argument on this motion on February 21, 1992.
Facts
Defendant James Seidel operates a plant nursery in semi-rural Broward County. The area contains single family dwellings as well as mixed use and commercial properties on larger than a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above-referenced case, Garrett R. Lacara (“plaintiff”) brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Town of Islip (“the Town”), Frank Jones (“Jones”), both in his individual capacity and as Supervisor of the Town of Islip, and Officer Gregory Clifton (“Clifton”) (collectively “defendants”) for alleged violations of plaintiffs rights under the Fourth, Fifth and Fourtee...
Views: 0
Page 6927
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Marshall Independent School District (MISD) filed its original petition in this action in the District Court of Harrison County, 71st Judicial District of Texas, on December 18, 1989. Plaintiff, a public school district, alleged that the several defendants named in its petition had manufactured and sold to MISD acoustical spray-on ceiling materials con...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING AND ELABORATING ON MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This case was originally filed in Mobile Circuit Court and removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction to this court on November 1, 1991. The plaintiffs, all citizens of Alabama, have filed a motion to remand on the basis that complete diversity is lacking because they contend that defendant George Barrett i...
Views: 1
OPINION
Edith L. Karl, the widow of Norman J. Karl, has instituted this action under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1022 et seq., seeking to recover benefits under an insurance policy on the life of Dr. Karl. Defendants are Metropolitan Psychiatric Group (“Metropolitan”), which had employed Dr. Karl and The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America (“Guardian”), which had issued a group life insuran...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is a motion for temporary restraining order filed by the plaintiffs, J.W. Gant & Associates, Inc. (“Gant”) and Frank Louis Palumbo (“Palumbo”), against defendant, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”). (Docket item, “D.I.”, 1) Plaintiffs seek to enjoin the imposition of sanctions which may follow an adverse deci...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
By this order the court
sua sponte
withdraws its order (Doc. 67), dated March 6, 1992, dismissing this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and its order (Doc. 81), dated March 25, 1992, denying plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the order of dismissal.
Subject matter jurisdiction in this case was predicated upon diversity of citizenship...
Views: 0
ORDER Petitioner proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241. In this action, petitioner complains of actions taken by the United States Parole Commission (USPC). Petitioner claims USPC wrongfully denied petitioner credit on his sentence following his arrest on a parole violator warrant, denied petitioner a timely parole revocation hearing, and d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner is before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner is currently incarcerated in the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth', Kansas. Petitioner seeks his release based on his allegations that the United States Parole Commission (USPC) violated petitioner’s constitutional right to due process. Specifically, petitioner claims he...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an employment discrimination action brought by the plaintiff, a United States citizen of Mexican ancestry, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983 and 2000e et seq. (Title VII). Plaintiff has also brought a pendent claim based on the Kansas Act Against Discrimination (KAAD), K.S.A. 44-1001 et seq. Plaintiff contends that he was terminated from his position as a corr...
Views: 35
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an interlocutory bankruptcy appeal which has been given expedited treatment by the court. The appellant is a creditor, The Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company in Rehabilitation (“MBL”). The appellee is the debtor, Stanley Station Associates, L.P. (“Debtor”). The issues in this case primarily concern the timing provisions, under 11 U.S.C. § 362(e), for decidi...
Views: 0
Page 6961
OPINION AND ORDER
This action was brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on February 6, 1992 against defendants Oxford Capital Securities, Inc. (“Oxford Capital”), Oxford Consolidated Corporation (“Oxford Consolidated”), James A. Sehn, Samuel 0. Forson, Leonard C. Donner, and Guillermo P. Tolosa, charging violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Se...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On September 26, 1991, this court consolidated civil actions B-91-018 and B-91-155, and asked the State of Texas as well as the Secretary of Commerce to brief the question of what relief this court may grant plaintiffs assuming an impermissible census has been conducted. This Memorandum and Order considers this question as well as the standing of the individual plaint...
Views: 2
ORDER The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kemp de novo in light of the defendant’s objections. The Court finds the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to be well reasoned and hereby accepts it in whole pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Accordingly it is hereby ordered: 1. That the Secretary’s response to the EAJA petition filed by plaintiff, cons...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ Cross Motions for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, 12(c). The Plaintiffs in this case are a group of media, and trade associations, as well as individual artists, publishers and photographers.
Plaintiffs have brought this action challengi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility, Hutchinson, Kansas, was convicted on July 28, 1987, of four (4) counts of aggravated robbery and one (1) count of aggravated battery in connection with a series of robberies at fast food restaurants in Wic...
Views: 0
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Background
Plaintiff, HERMAN CORN, Trustee (“CORN”), sued the CITY OF LAUDER-DALE LAKES (the “CITY”) and several of its officials for damages under Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983,
1
essen
*366
tially alleging that a CITY ordinance arbitrarily deprived him of a 261-acre parcel without the due process of just ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Edward Arioli, Sandra L. Arioli [the “Ariolis”], Dean E. Huber, Mary Ann Huber [the “Hubers”],
1
John J. Laga and Denise Laga [the “Lagas”],
2
individually and as trustees for their respective revocable trusts which are also plaintiffs, Robert E. Wolfe,
3
Lawrence A. Brainard and Rebecca S. Brainard [the “Brainards”] filed thei...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court upon an Emergency Ex Parte Application for Payment Authorization Pursuant to Criminal Justice Act, and Motion to Seal of Lori Kaps-Eisnaugle. Kaps-Eisnaugle has been identified as the subject of a grand jury investigation regarding the importation of approximately 700 grams of cocaine into the United States on or about April 2 and 3, 1992. LAW AND ANA...
Views: 2
*708
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff filed its complaint with this court November 20, 1990. Plaintiff filed its first amended complaint December 5, 1991; and, after this court dismissed Counts I and II by order dated July 25, 1991, plaintiff filed a second amended complaint January 30, 1992.
Plaintiff filed the instant mot...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court is Cleveland Tankers, Inc.’s (“Cleveland”), motion to dismiss and/or for partial summary judgment as to the punitive damages claims of plaintiffs, James Thomas Warren, Joseph Callahan, and Paula M. Sexton (as representative of the estate of decedent Thomas Sexton). Plaintiffs have filed a response to such motion. For the reasons which follow, this Court ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT’S JANUARY 6, 1992 MOTION TO DISMISS
The government filed a motion to dismiss January 6, 1992. The court .believes that plaintiff’s February 26, 1992 letter was filed as a response to the motion. Pursuant to LR 7.1(e)(2) (E.D.Mich. Jan. 1, 1992), no oral argument will be heard.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Upon a motion to dismiss pursua...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Hearing was held on the matter of defendant’s release pending sentencing on May 8, 1992, pursuant to the Order of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanding the case with instructions to reconsider the Government’s motion to detain and to apply 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2). Following conviction by jury of six offenses relating to the manufacture and distribution of methamphetam...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motion to alter or amend the court’s October 1, 1991, 774 F.Supp. 1564, order and judgment. After consideration of the matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to alter or amend the court’s October 1, 1991 order and judgment is DENIED....
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 329 (1992)
Evelyn T. SEDLACEK, on Behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
MORGAN WHITNEY TRADING GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants.
No. CV-90-5124-RSWL(Sx)
United States District Court, C.D. California.
January 31, 1992.
*330 Thomas F. Edwards, III, in pro per.
Kathleen Russell, in pro per.
Carol A. Samek, Stroak & Lavan, for defendant Safrabank.
Richard ...
Views: 1
ORDER In this civil action, plaintiffs Peter and Diane Kokaras sue the United States for damages arising out of an automobile accident involving their car and a vehicle driven by a United States Postal Service Employee. The action is brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq., with jurisdiction being grounded upon 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Currently before the Co...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The case is before the Court on defendants The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., Housing Investment Corporation, Manuel Jiménez, his spouse Maria Luisa Suarez and their conjugal partnership’s Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment (docket entry 24), the brief in support thereof (docket entry 28), as well as plaintiffs’ opposition (docket entry 36).
1
The plain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
In this action brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.,
and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4551 et seq., Defendants Casco Bay Weekly, Inc.
{“Casco Bay Weekly ”
or “Defendant”) and Monte Paulsen, editor and publisher of
Casco ...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this action Plaintiff seeks civil forfeiture of Defendant automobile under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4) on the grounds that it was the locus of a drug transaction and was used to transport cocaine. Claimant Germain Ramirez-Fernandez is the title owner of Defendant. He was convicted by a jury verdict in this court on an indictment charging in perti...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this consolidated civil action, individual plaintiff Robert Zabarsky and corporate plaintiffs Zee-Bar, Inc. — N.H.; T & Z Realty, Inc.; R.Z., Inc.; and Zee-Bar, Inc., of Vermont seek damages for alleged violations of the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute by defendants Gerald N. Kaplan, Stanley L. Shuman, and Lynne C. Norton. Plaintiffs also asser...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a Title VII employment discrimination case brought by plaintiff Dennis Diamond, a 41-year old GM-15 attorney, against his government employer, the Agency for International Development (“A.I.D.”). Diamond is a white male who was passed over in February, 1989, for the position of A.I.D.’s Director of Equal Opportunity Programs (“EOP”) in favor of a black female. He al...
Views: 1
*265MEMORANDUM AND FIRST ORDER ON AMTRAK’S MOTION FOR AN ORDER FOR RULE 35 PHYSICAL EXAMINATION (# 15) After a review of the cases cited and consideration of the oral arguments of counsel, it is ORDERED that Amtrak’s Motion For An Order For Rule 35 Physical Examination (# 15) be, and the same hereby is, ALLOWED. Although it is indeed true that the defendant does not have an absolute right to choos...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Procedural Background On June 5, 1991, the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts filed a Complaint for and on behalf of the United Kingdom seeking the provisional arrest and extradition of Curtis Andrew Howard (“appellant”). The following day, June 6, 1991, following his arrest in Boston, the appellant was charged with Murder, Contrary to Common Law, ...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER Before this Court is the petitioner’s motion for a- writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the following reasons, the Court finds that this petition constitutes an abuse of writ and the petition is denied pursuant to Rule 9(b). See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Rule 9(b) (Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Proceedings). I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 2...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY This cause comes before the Court on Defendants’ Gary D. Williams and Sheila J. Williams joint motion to compel discovery. On October 30, 1991, this Court entered a preliminary order providing for discovery pursuant to applicable rules, statutes, and law. Defendants now request this Cou...
Views: 3
In this action, plaintiff Sterling Drug Inc. (“Sterling”) alleges that defendant Bayer AG (“AG”) and its subsidiaries have made use of the trademark and trade name “Bayer” and the name “Bayer USA Inc.” in a manner that violates Sterling’s rights under two contracts between Sterling and AG, the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1051
et seq.
(the “Lanham Act”), the law of unfair compe...
Views: 2
ORDER
The plaintiff in this case has appealed the final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying her claim for supplemental security income (SSI) benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381a. Both parties have moved for summary judgment. In this judicial review, the Court must determine whether there is substantial evidence in the administrative rec...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the court in the above-captioned cause is a motion by defendant Paccar, Inc., to exclude from trial on plaintiffs’ claim of defective truck cab-roof design any and all evidence relating to truck cab design and manufacture, other than evidence of compliance or noncompliance with applicable federal statutes and regulations. Defendant contends that provisions of the Na...
Views: 0
ORDER REVERSING BANKRUPTCY COURT’S DECISION
This matter is before the Court on appeal by Professional Development Corporation and Thomas H. Campbell from the decision of the bankruptcy court disqualifying the firm of McDonnell Boyd as counsel for both Professional Development Corporation (“PDC”) and Thomas H. Campbell, jointly administered Chapter 11 cases under 11 U.S.C. § 101,
et ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provided...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
Appellants, retired former salaried employees of the LTV Steel Company, filed this adversary proceeding to challenge modifications in certain retiree health and welfare benefits. They appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lif-land, C.J.), dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim and denying their mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs UPIC & Co. and United Pacific Life Insurance Company are, respectively, the registered holder and beneficial owner of $12 million of subordinated notes issued by defendant Kinder-Care Learning Centers, Inc. (“KCLC”), and bring this action to recover principal and interest due under the notes.
1
Defendant KCLC now moves, pursuant to Rule 1...
Views: 2
Page 7032
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. (“National”) brings this action for a declaration that defendant Aetna Casualty and Surety Corporation (“Aetna”) was a co-insurer with National with respect to certain defenses and indemnity obligations owed to an insured. The matter was submitted to the Court upon stipulated facts for judgment...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis W. Sullivan (“Secretary”) has moved for dismissal of plaintiff Michael Hudson’s multi-count complaint. The Secretary maintains that Hudson has not exhausted all available administrative remedies pursuant to his claims for Title II (“Social Security Disability Insurance”) and Title XVI (“Supplemental Security Income”) benefi...
Views: 0
Page 7038
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed September 12, 1991, Defendant’s Amended Response, filed October 28, 1991, and Plaintiff’s Reply, filed December 20, 1991.
Background
Plaintiff has brought this suit to recover from Defendants the deficiency balance allegedly owing on two promissory notes following Plaintiff’s foreclo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In 1982, this court established Minnesota’s congressional districts, see LaComb v. Growe, 541 F.Supp. 145 (D.Minn.), aff'd sub nom. Orwoll v. LaComb, 456 U.S. 966, 102 S.Ct. 2228, 72 L.Ed.2d 841 (1982), and Minnesota’s state legislative districts, see LaComb v. Growe, 541 F.Supp. 160 (D.Minn.1982), as reflected in Minnesota Statutes §§ 2.019, 2.042, 2.702 (1983). At t...
Views: 0
Page 7061
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court are defendant’s motions to vacate an arbitral award, for a preliminary injunction, and for leave to file an amended counterclaim. We heard the parties in open court on January 29, 1992 and have fully considered the motions, the oppositions to the motions, and the replies. We decline to grant defendant’s motions to vacate the arbitral award and for a pr...
Views: 0
*239
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE
In this action Plaintiffs United States and the State of California have filed a Motion for entry of a consent decree entered into by Plaintiffs and PCBs Defendants Potlatch Corporation (“Potlatch”) and Simpson Paper Company (“Simpson”).
1
Pursuant to the decree, Potlatch and Simpson are jointly and severally obligate...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Court has before it two motions for summary judgment filed by various defendants: a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment filed by defendants Leon Faulkner, Martha Faulkner and Ruth Humbles (“Faulkner Motion”), and a motion for summary judgment filed by defendants District of Columbia and several top officials. Additionally, there is a motion to vacate a default...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is now before the Court on plaintiff Southland Corporation’s (“South-land”) Renewed Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants McClure Godette and Edith Godette (“the Godettes”), after ob-taming new counsel, opposed this Renewed Motion, and both parties have been heard in oral argument. Upon consideration of the prior proceedings in this case, the insta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Dr. Mario Garretto, M.D., and Digestive Disease Consultants, S.C., plaintiffs in this action, have brought suit under Wis.Stat. § 551.59(l)(a) to recover $100,000 they invested in Elite Properties, Ltd., (“Elite Properties”).
1
Jurisdiction is founded upon
*798
diversity of citizenship. Plaintiffs argue that defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER These personal injury actions arose out of an accident involving plaintiff Myron P. Leith. He and his spouse, Rosemarie C. Leith, sued defendants Lufthansa German Airlines (LGA) and Janusz W. Kieca (Kieca) in the Illinois Circuit Court. Both defendants petitioned to remove their respective cases to federal court. Before us now are plaintiffs’ petitions to remand each case t...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation regarding the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded to the plaintiff, and the objections thereto of both the plaintiff, the Hertz Corporation (“Hertz”), and the defendant, Ernest Lee Caulfield (“Caulfield”). The Magistrate Judge decided the matter on the basis of the briefs submitted by the parties, w...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER This opinion and order supplements our orders of April 30 and May 11, 1992, setting the schedule for the 1992 elections to the Mississippi Legislature. Pursuant to our orders dated August 2, 8, and 30, 1991, the State of Mississippi conducted interim legislative elections in *647 1991 in accordance with its 1982 reapportionment plan, Miss.Code Ann. § 5-1-1 et seq. (1991)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Facts On April 17, 1989, appellant (“debtor”) filed a petition under Chapter Seven of the Bankruptcy code. 1 Subsequently, debtor’s real property was sold by appellee (“trustee”) and her exempt homestead funds of $45,000 were put into a trust fund to pay 1988 taxes which the estate may have owed. This money was held in trust in the event that the bankruptcy estate would...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this last chapter of a lengthy dispute we deal with plaintiffs’ petition for costs and for fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Plaintiffs clearly are the prevailing parties. They contend that the position of the Secretary was not substantially justified and that they should be awarded fees for all hours expended at rates in excess of the EAJA maximum...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER I. General This is an action for money damages filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 *946U.S.C. § 2671 et seq. A trial was held at Hato Rey on February 6, 1992. The Court now renders its findings of fact and conclusions of law and enters judgment in the case. II. The Legal Theories of the Parties This action is brought to recover for damages for physical injuries sustained ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The Court has before it petitioner’s request for habeas corpus relief from a state court conviction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We are unable to review the merits of the habeas petition at this time, because the petitioner has failed to exhaust all state court remedies. Consequently, the Court shall dismiss the petition without prejudice, for the reasons that follow. Titl...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action brought under § 205(g) of the Social Security Act (“the Act"), as amended 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) denying plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits. We note from the outset that in reviewing the decision of the Secretary, we need only conclude whet...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff William McVeigh (“McVeigh”), who was employed as the co-pilot of John T. Dorrance’s (“Dorrance”) personal aircraft from 1979 until Dorrance’s death in 1989, is suing Dorrance’s executors (“Executors”) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”), for pension benefits that he alleges vested in him during his employment. McVeigh all...
Views: 0
BENCH OPINION * Dr. Reiser has filed an application for habeas corpus seeking release from mili *1073 tary service. She is a lieutenant in the Army Reserve and, at the moment, is under orders to report for duty as a physician in the Army next month. At the time of filing of the application for habeas corpus, it was contemplated that Dr. Reiser would be required to report at a date earlier...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs Alma M. Sealover and Donald E. Sealover filed this products liability action on April 29, 1988 against defendants W.R. Grace Company, (“W.R. Grace”), United States Gypsum Company (“US Gypsum”), GAF Corporation, National Gypsum Company (“National Gypsum”), Owens-Corning Fiberglas (“OCF”), and Johns-Manville Corporation (“Manville Trust”).1 Subsequent to Donald Sealover’s deat...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
This is an action in equity filed in December, 1991. Plaintiff seeks imposition of a constructive trust and return of funds. That claim arises out of an elaborate securities kiting scheme orchestrated by Steven D. Wymer.
Following hearing on January 21 and 22, 1992, I granted plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction to preserve and...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff James Kirby commenced this action asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged denial of his First Amendment right to free expression. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, the defendant Richard Largo, Chief Marshall for the Town of Crested Butte, has moved for summary judgment asserting the defense of qualified immunity. Plaintiff has responded by opposing th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an appeal from the decision of the bankruptcy court concerning the bankruptcy trustee’s “strong-arm” power to avoid statutory liens, when the trustee is actually the debtor and, thus, cloaked with hypothetical bona fide purchaser status. The plaintiff-appellees, who filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, resided in a house serviced by the water and sewer departments...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Following a bench trial, the court awarded plaintiff Olympic Marine Services, Inc. (hereinafter “Olympic”) $141,678, plus costs and prejudgment and postjudgment interest, after concluding that defendant United States breached its contract with Olympic. Specifically, the court equitably adjusted the contract, in which Olympic agreed to deactivate a United States public ve...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Sinclair Oil Corporation’s (Sinclair) Motion to Dismiss, Stay or Transfer. The hearing on the motion was held on Thursday, March 26 at 9:00 a.m. Stephen G. Crockett, Esq., Phelon S. Rammel, Esq., Jennifer Falk, Esq. and Peter M. Johnson, Esq. represented defendant Sinclair and Jerry D. Fenn, Jr., Esq. appeared in b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
1
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiffs Karen B. Kennedy, Pamela L. Drozd, and Trudy Swanson are current or former waitresses employed by defendant Morton’s of Chicago (“Morton’s”). Plaintiffs allege that, while employed at defendant’s downtown restaurant, they were subjected to sexual harassment and discrimination on the basis of their sex by certain ind...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff brought this case under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”), to force the release of certain Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) Laboratory reports. Defendants have moved for summary judgment. For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
I
In 1983, a Rhode Island state court conv...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S COUNTER MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. Introduction
This is a citizen’s enforcement action arising under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (“EP-CRA”), 42 U.S.C. Sec. 11001
et seq.
The Complaint alleges that the defendant, Ley-bold Technologies Inc. (“Leybold”), failed to...
Views: 2
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DIRECTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT The plaintiff in this action seeks to remove tax liens filed by the Internal Revenue Service against certain real property in Pierce County, Washington, and seeks, under 26 U.S.C. § 7432, an award of damages, costs, and attorney fees by reason of the government’s failure to -release the liens. The property is a residence ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a proposed class action. The putative class is comprised of customers, shareholders, and members of the thirteen defendants, rural electric cooperatives (“RECs”). The proposed representatives for the class are six individuals who are each members, shareholders or customers *311 of the defendants, Valley Electric Membership Corporation (“VEMCO”) or Bossier Rural El...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court held a status conference and motions hearing in the above-captioned action on May 26, 1992. The defendants initially filed Motions to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment. On April 24, 1992, the Court denied the Motion to Dismiss, allowed plaintiff the opportunity to conduct further discove...
Views: 0
AMENDED OPINION
Plaintiff, Carlos Benitez, brings this action against his employer, Portland General Electric, alleging race, color, and national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
(Title VII), and ORS 659.030.
These are my findings of fact and conclusions of law after the court trial. Fed. R.Civ.P. 52...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss and to strike portions of Plaintiffs’ First Amended complaint. The complaint alleges copyright infringement and state law violations, including breach of contract and tortious denial of contract, all arising out of Defendants’ alleged reproduction and sale of sound recordings of musi...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION TO TAX COSTS
This cause is before this court on defendant’s motion to tax costs pursuant to an order of reference dated November 22, 1991 from the Honorable Federico A. Moreno, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida. Since this court is of the opinion that the matter involved herein is non-dispositive in nature, it is being handled pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The taxable municipal bond was created in response to the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which limited the availability of the tax-free status previously afforded municipal bonds. Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc. (“Drexel Burnham”) played a significant role in promoting the taxable municipal bond. From July through October 1986, Drexel Burham underwrote seven substantial bond iss...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this action for copyright infringement, the plaintiff, Eddie Palmieri, alleges that in 1981 he wrote and recorded a song “Pagi-nas De Mujer,” to which he holds the copyright, and which was released in the United States by Barbaro Records the same year. Defendants Estefan, Casa and Ostawald claim that they composed the song “Oye Mi Canto,” in 1989. Plaintiff alleges that “Oye Mi...
Views: 3
OPINION
Plaintiff Judith Donaldson (“Donaldson”) brought this Title VII action against her former employer, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. (“Merrill”) alleging that she was dis
*500
charged from her position at Merrill on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
et seq.
Merrill now moves for an order pu...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Gregory E. Sohns (“Sohns”) moves (1) pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment against Defendant Little Prince Productions, Ltd. (“Little Prince”) on Claim II of the complaint, seeking compensatory damages for services rendered in the amount of $81,702.92, and (2) pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Proced...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Baxter Healthcare Corporation (“Baxter”) has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the Amended Complaint of Plaintiffs Aaron Bravman (“Bravman”) and his wife Muriel. For the reasons set forth below, Baxter’s motion is granted, and judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint will be entered.
The Parties
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this personal injury action, 1 defendant R.H. Macy’s, Inc. (“Macy’s) moves to transfer venue to the District of New Jersey pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) which provides: For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought. ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ira L. Mendell sues on behalf of Viacom Inc. and alternatively Viacom International, Inc., to recover profits defendants allegedly realized by trading Viacom International stock in violation of § 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78p(b). Section 16(b) prohibits an owner of more than 10% of any class of an issuer’s securities from purchasing and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court by virtue of an appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Court dismissing,
sua sponte,
the appellants’ Chapter 11 petitions for lack of good faith. This matter is also before the court on the motion of appellee to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that appellants were dilatory in obtaining the transcript necessary for briefing a...
Views: 3
OPINION
Robert Spinner was employed by Yellow Freight System, Inc. as a truck driver. The facts stated here have been drawn from the decision of Administrative Law Judge Rippey in
In the Matter of Robert C. Spinner v. Yellow Freight System, Inc.,
No. 90-STA-0017 (July 16, 1991). On October 3,1989, at 5:00 a.m., he was assigned to drive a tractor-trailer from Cleveland, Ohio to ...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
I.
Procedural History
Petitioner Alan J. Bannister (Bannister) was convicted of the capital murder of Darrell Ruestman and sentenced to death in the Circuit Court of McDonald County, Missouri, on March 10, 1983. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence.
State v. Bannister,
680 S.W...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is an appeal of a bankruptcy decision from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri. Appellant claims that the bankruptcy court erred in awarding attorney’s fees against appellant pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) (1990). Upon review of the record and arguments presented in this case, the bankruptcy court decision is affirmed. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On April 1, 1992, the above-styled matter was remanded to this Court for the limited purpose of considering the issues raised in defendant’s motion for downward departure. Defendant’s motion raises three issues: (1) whether defendant is entitled to a downward departure in his sentence, due to diminished mental capacity; (2) whether the Court, or the Attorney General, i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment, filed November 8, 1991. Plaintiff has filed no opposition to this motion. Since the Court considers materials outside the pleadings, it treats this motion as one for summary judgment. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no dispute of material fact and the moving par...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Ricardo Andrade brings this action against his former employer, Crawford & Company, alleging that he was constructively discharged due to discriminatory working conditions. On March 10, 1992, this Court issued a written opinion that reaffirmed its prior decision to grant Andrade leave to amend his complaint and assert a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, as amended by the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court pursuant to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, filed December 2, 1991, Defendants Jimmy Jones and Sergeant Holmes’ Motion to Dismiss, filed December 4, 1991, and Defendant Teresa Thornburg’s Motion to Dismiss, filed December 4, 1992. Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently incarcerated at Moberly Correctional Center, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are Barry Miles’s (“plaintiff”) motions to file his pro se complaint without paying the filing fee, to proceed in forma pauperis, and for appointment of counsel. As stated below, the court finds no legal basis for the claims and dismisses the action with prejudice. Therefore, the court denies these motions as moot. *213 FACTS Plaintiff is an inmate at the Joliet...
Views: 0
Page 7362
JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs sued to enjoin an allegedly unconstitutional drug testing program. The program was instituted by the United States Department of Justice for employees of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (the “Bureau”). Plaintiffs are a union that represents Bureau employees. In June 1988, this Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and enjoined the testing of any Bureau em...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER I. BACKGROUND Before the court is an appeal by creditor/appellant Beneficial Homeowner Service Corporation (“Beneficial”) from two orders of the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York (Mahoney, J.). Specifically, Beneficial appeals orders in which the court: (1) ruled that the debtors, David and Darlene Moreau, could modify the terms of their indebtedn...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the court on the Defendant’s, Tuskegee Gardens, Ltd. (“Tuskegee”), Motion to Dismiss, to Strike or in the Alternative for More Definite Statement (DE 20), the Defendants’, A. Bruce Rozet (“Rozet”), Deane Earl Ross (“Ross”) and the Management Assistant Group, Inc. (“MAGI”), Motion to Dismiss (DE 31) and the Defendant’s, Multi-Pro...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Ralph Gaines (“Gaines”) allegedly was injured while working as an em*314ployee for defendant Illinois Central Railroad Company (the “IC”). Gaines filed a two-eount amended complaint, alleging in count I that his injuries resulted from the negligence of the IC, and in count II, that the negligence of defendants Archer Daniels Midland Company (...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This major non-jury matter is before us on a motion for a preliminary injunction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65. At issue in this case is each parties’ right to provide world steel-makers with information and services related to 55% aluminum-zinc coated sheet steel. The coating is undertaken to protect the steel. For more than a decade, Plaintiff BIEC International, Inc. h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is an environmental action which the Tri-County Business Campus Joint Venture (“Tri-County”) has brought against the Clow Corporation (“Clow”). Tri-County seeks recovery of more than $1.7 million for testing, investigating and removing allegedly hazardous substances from an 85 acre tract in Pottstown Borough, Pennsylvania, which it acquired from Clow in 1985.
1
...
Views: 3
795 F.Supp. 733 (1992)
Arthur FREEMAN
v.
Stephen McKELLAR, Willie Mae James Leake, William Koterba, William Waldren and City of Chester.
Civ. A. No. 91-6146.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
May 27, 1992.
*734 *735 Jon J. Auritt, Media, Pa., for plaintiff.
William F. Holsten, II, Media, Pa., for defendants.
*736 MEMORANDUM
WALDMAN, District Judge.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed thi...
Views: 1
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This action involves the interpretation of an exclusionary provision contained in a group life insurance plan arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
The Defendant, Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company (“Principal Mutual”), and the Plaintiff, the estate of Nelson J. Mill...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of defendant, Jobst Institute, Inc. (“Jobst”) to transfer venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.
FACTS
Plaintiff, Medi USA, L.P. (“Medi”), is a limited partnership which sells medical compression stockings and related equipment. Its principal place of business, as well as its only physic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 brought by a state prisoner under sentence of death. The petition was filed on July 9, 1990, together with an application for stay of Petitioner’s execution then set for July 10, 1990. In order that Petitioner’s claims could be judiciously considered, the Court entered a stay of execution on Jul...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court are the cross motion for summary judgment (Document # 107) filed by defendant Whittaker Corporation (“Whittaker”) and the motion for partial summary judgment (Document # 108) filed by plaintiff Brochsteins, Inc. (“Brochsteins”). On April 8, 1992, this Court held a pretrial conference in the above styled cause. During that conference both of the parties asked...
Views: 0
ORDER
A hearing was held in the captioned case pursuant to the court’s order of November 22, 1991, for the defendant Mitsubishi International Corp. (“MIC”) to show cause why the plaintiff Dixie Aluminum’s (“Dixie”) request for a stay of arbitration should not be granted [4-1]. The case is also submitted on MIC’s motion for a more definite statement [7-1].
GENERAL FACTUAL BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before this Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. We have fully considered the parties’ motions, oppositions and replies, and we heard the parties on January 29, 1992. Accordingly, we grant plaintiffs’ motion and deny defendant’s motion.
I.
Background
The plaintiffs are petitioning the Cour...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court are defendants’ motion for summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion to withdraw admissions. On consideration of the entire record, the Court denies defendants’ motion without prejudice and grants plaintiff’s motion. The Court awards defendants the costs of filing the motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(4). This is an action for wrongful evic...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7445: Osborne v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund
Page 7445
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
On February 21, 1992, this court entered an order denying defendant New York State Teamsters Conference Pension and Retirement Fund’s (“Fund”) motion for summary judgment. Osborne v. New York State Teamsters Conf. Pension and Retirement Fund, 783 F.Supp. 739 (N.D.N.Y. *1781992) (McCurn, C.J.). Defendant now moves for reconsideration of that order.
For the reasons set...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 816 (1992)
Bruce SCHNABEL, Plaintiff,
v.
PHILADELPHIA AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. H-90-3948.
United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division.
April 3, 1992.
*817 David W. Waddell, Hoover, Bax & Shearer, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
Maria Wyckoff Boyce, Baker & Botts, Houston, Tex., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LAKE, District Jud...
Views: 1
ORDER Plaintiff, Nathan Andrew Russell (“Andy”) and plaintiffs, Frank and Barbara Russell, his parents, have brought this civil rights action against the Fannin County School District, the members of its board of *1578 education, its superintendent, and the high school principal seeking damages and other relief as a result of injuries Andy sustained when another student, Nathan Lewis (“Nathan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Having considered the evidence, record, and credibility of the witnesses, the Court concludes, for the reasons articulated below, that Claimant Cellie Horton, the owner of the Respondent property, has estab
*629
lished, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she did not know the' property was used to commit or to facilitate the commission of narcotics vio...
Views: 0
Defendant’s motion for modification of period of supervised release presents the question whether a sentence imposed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) may include a period of supervised release. A panel of the Fifth Circuit recently held that “no supervised release is allowed under the punishment provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 924.” United States v. Allison, 958 F.2d 870, 875 (5th Cir.), petition for c...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff W. Randolph Adams’s (“Adams”) motion for summary judgment on Count III of his first amended complaint. For reasons that follow, the motion is denied.
FACTS
Adams worked for Cresap, McCormick and Paget, Inc., a Chicago-based management consulting firm, between 1974 and
*167
1990.
1
That firm became an operating division ...
Views: 0
Page 7454
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This action arises under the “citizen suit” provision of the Federal Water Pollution Prevention and Control Act (“Clean Water Act” or “Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1365 (1988). Plaintiffs commenced this suit in 1990 seeking punitive, injunctive, and declaratory relief from defendant’s alleged illegal discharge of industrial wastewater in Fulton County, New York. This c...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 374 (1992)
William NECHERO, and Chris Nechero, Plaintiffs,
v.
PROVIDENT LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
No. 91-231-M Civ.
United States District Court, D. New Mexico.
April 21, 1992.
*375 Stephen T. LeCuyer, Mettler & LeCuyer, Albuquerque, N.M., for plaintiffs.
Charles A. Armgardt, Douglas R. Vadnais, Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk, Albuquerque, N.M...
Views: 0
ORDER
In these consolidated cases, the court is called upon to either adopt or create plans for the redistricting
1
of South Carolina’s Senate, House of Representatives, and Congressional districts. Following tabulation of the 1990 decennial census, it was apparent the existing Senate, House, and Congressional plans could not be continued.
2
Although the South Carolin...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Alma M. Sealover and Donald E. Sealover filed this products liability ac
*570
tion against defendants W.R. Grace Company, (“W.R. Grace”), United States Gypsum Company (“U.S. Gypsum”)
1
among others. Plaintiffs alleged that as a result of Donald Sealover’s exposure to asbestos during his sojourn in the Merchant Marines and durin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND On October 4, 1991 the United States of America filed a complaint in condemnation seeking to take fee simple title to 18.67 acres of land in Cumberland Township, Adams County, Pennsylvania, to be added to the Gettysburg National Military Park (the “Park”). According to the complaint (Schedule “B”), the purported owners are Harold L. Yingling, Betty J. Yingling, Keith L. ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: FORECLOSURE SALE The above-captioned matter came for trial before United States Senior District Judge Aldon J. Anderson on August 16, 1991. Kirk C. Lusty and George Harris, Department of Justice, for the United States and Aron D. Stanton for defendants Daryl R. Jensen, Celia N. Jensen, and Barbara Jean Jensen Keister. The court had previously entered a partial summary judgment order t...
Views: 0
*744ORDER ON RULE 59(e) MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND On October 30, 1991, the Secretary-moved to alter or amend my October 16, 1991 order affirming the administrative decision in this case and awarding attorney fees to the Plaintiff. The Secretary argues that I misconstrued the order remanding this case for further proceedings as a “sixth-sentence” remand, and not a “fourth sentence” remand, because a...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES
Plaintiff Ralph Wilderson commenced this action on August 5, 1991, seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary to issue a decision on his application for disability benefits. On August 28, 1991, the Secretary issued a decision favorable to Wilderson, awarding him benefits. Wilder-son moved for an award of attorney fees under the Equal Access to Jus...
Views: 0
Page 7472
795 F. Supp. 795 (1992)
VALE NATURAL GAS AMERICA CORP.
v.
CARROLLTON RESOURCES 1990, LTD., et al.
Civ. A. No. 92-441.
United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.
May 21, 1992.
Felix Henri Lapeyre, Jr., Matthew J. Randazzo, III, Lapeyre, Terrell, Rusch & Randazzo, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff.
*796 William H. Collier, William C. Hollier, Reginald J. Ringuet, Hollier & Ringuet, Lafayet...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This is an action brought by the Secretary of the United States Department of
*643
Labor pursuant to Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (hereinafter “the Act”), codified at 29 U.S.C. § 660(c). The Secretary contends that the defendants, Anslinger, Inc. and its owner and president, Urban Anslinger, discharged...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, Ronnie Rice and Christopher Samson, filed a four-count complaint in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. Defendants, James Burks and Mark Harvey, filed a timely notice of removal, bringing the case to this court. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a), (b); 1446(a), (b). See also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343; 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants have moved for summary judgment on ...
Views: 0
Before the Court is defendant’s (“Pen-rod”) Motion to Dismiss pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The gravamen of Penrod’s motion is that the plaintiff, Paul Pitre (“Pitre”) compromised any and all claims he had against it and executed a Receipt and Release on October 26, 1990 to that effect.1 Penrod further contends that this case involving a seaman’s release is obviated b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil enforcement action brought by the People of the State of California (People) by and through the District Attorney of the County of Los Angeles, State of California. The complaint charges two violations of state law: the state antitrust statute, known as the Cartwright Act, Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code, § 16720
et seq.,
and the state unfair ...
Views: 2
*393
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Invesco MIM’s (hereafter “Invesco”) Motion to Dismiss Count I and to Strike Plaintiffs’ (hereafter “the Trust”) request for Attorney’s Fees.
FACTS
On December 15, 1982, the Trust entered into an agreement with Invesco to have Invesco serve as a general investment ad-visor to manage the Plaintiffs’ Trust assets. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of Malcom Walter Blair (“defendant”) to depose Nicholas Esposito, attorney for the plaintiff, M & R Amusements Corporation (“M & R”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a), (b).1 For the reasons set forth below, the court denies the motion.
FACTS
The amended complaint reveals that M & R owned and operated Evanston Theaters. M & R obtained coverage f...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Associated Electric and Gas Insurance Services Ltd.'s (“AEGIS”) motion to dismiss. For reasons that follow, the motion is granted.
FACTS
This declaratory judgment action involves an excess liability insurance policy that plaintiffs West Shore Pipe Line Company and Amoco Pipe Line Company (together “West Shore”) obtained from AEGIS. In June 198...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Sherwin-Williams Company’s (“Sherwin-Williams”) motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, the motion is granted.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Donald P. Lulich (“Lulich”), was employed by Fred P. Berglund & Sons, Inc. (“Berglund”).1 In May 1987, Sherwin-Williams contracted with Berglund to build a boiler house on Sherwin-Williams’s industrial facility. On ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 461 (1992)
Charles Henry BALL, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-1633.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
May 22, 1992.
*462 *463 Ira M. Lechner, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
O. Gregory Lewis, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Office of the Corp. Counsel of the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINIO...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this civil action, plaintiff Helen M. Godfrey
1
seeks redress for alleged acts of sexual harassment on the part of defendant Perkin-Elmer Corporation and three of its employees, Robin L. Wilson, John W. El-dridge, and Marlin A. Braun. Plaintiff complains in Count I that defendants’ actions were unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U....
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 309 (1992)
Celestus BLAIR, Jr., Plaintiff,
v.
Steven SHANAHAN, individually and in his official capacity, James Lassus, individually and in his official capacity, Christopher Breen, individually and in his official capacity, Jeffrey Levin, individually and in his official capacity, Frank Jordan, individually and in his official capacity, and The City and County of San Francisco, Defe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant, James Richard Flynn, has moved for the entry of judgment of acquittal on both counts of an indictment against him pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29. Defendant was tried and convicted by a jury on two counts: (1) possession with intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2; and (2)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Respondent moves for reconsideration of my May 12, 1992 order granting petitioner habeas corpus relief. • Respondent also moves for a stay of execution pending review of this motion. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid their resolution. Because appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) was not reasonably available in this...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff C/R TV Cable, Inc. (“C/R”) filed a Verified Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief (the “Verified Complaint”) and Motion for Preliminary Injunction (the “Motion”) on March 20, 1992 against Defendants Shannondale, Inc. (“Shannondale”), Michael M. Johnson, Mid-Atlantic Cable Limited Partnership of Jefferson County and Mid-Atlantic Cable Services Company (“Mid...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, who is currently an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted on May 19, 1988, of aggravated robbery and aggravated battery. Petitioner was sentenced in accordance with the Habitual Criminal Act, K.S.A. 21-4504 and receive...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter is before the Court on the motions of the plaintiff, The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation (“Colonial Williamsburg”), for a finding of civil contempt against The Kittinger Company (“Kittinger”), Michael P. Carlow (“Car-low”), and Nicholas J. DeFino (“DeFino”), and for sanctions for violations of the Consent Judgment entered by this Court ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER IN RE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO VOLUNTARILY DISMISS CLAIMS ARISING UNDER THE UTAH CONSTITUTION
This matter came regularly before the court on April 10, 1992, on plaintiffs’ Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Claims Arising Under the Utah Constitution. Janet Ben-shoof, Eve Gartner, Rachel Pine, Jeffrey Oritt, Howard Lundgren, Dominique Bravo and Simon Heller appeared f...
Views: 2
*1539 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER IN RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND CERTAIN ISSUES IN DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter came regularly before the court on March 13, 1992, on defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Janet Benshoof, Eve Gartner, Rachel Pine, Jeffrey Oritt, Howard Lundgren and Simon Heller appeared for plaintiffs, and M...
Views: 1
OPINION
On March 15, 1991, plaintiff Anthony J. Cutrona (“Cutrona”) commenced this litigation by filing a class and derivative action against defendants Nevius M. Curtis, Howard E. Cosgrove and H. Ray Landon and naming Delmarva Power & Light Company (“Delmarva” or “Company”) as nominal defendants. On May 15,1991, plaintiffs Leon and Cecelia Moskowitz (“Moskowitz”) filed a class action nam...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court for consideration of plaintiffs’ objections to the United States magistrate judge’s recommendation that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted and that sanctions be imposed on plaintiffs’ attorney pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. This record includes a report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge made in accordance with 28 U...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is a declaratory judgment diversity action in which Evanston Insurance Company (“Evanston”) has requested that this Court determine its liability under a claims-made, architectural and engineering professional liability policy which it issued to Kenneth Treister (“Treister”) in the amount of one million dollars. At issue is whether Evanston is liable under the policy for a...
Views: 0
OPINION
I.
Background
On December 1st, 1989, defendant New Jersey National Bank (“Bank”) informed plaintiff Windsor Shirt Company (“Windsor”) that it was ending its banking relationship with Windsor. The Bank called Windsor’s Loan Agreement of November 18, 1988 (“Loan Agreement”), which was not due to expire until May, 1990, because it believed that Windsor had materially bre...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend her complaint. The motion has been thoroughly briefed and is now ripe for ruling. The issue at the heart of this motion is whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991 applies retroactively to pending litigation. In its 2 December 1991 order, the court stated that the Act does apply to pending litigation and therefore invi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action is a consolidation of five cases brought by shareholders as class actions against Scott Paper Company (“Scott”) and two of Scott’s senior executives, defendants Philip Lippincott (“Lippin-cott”) and Ashok Bakhru (“Bakhru”).1 Defendant Scott is a Pennsylvania corporation whose principal products and activities are manufacturing consumer and commercial paper products, as well...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 13 (1992)
Fouad Yacoub RAFEEDIE, Plaintiff,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 88-0366 (JHG).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
May 28, 1992.
*14 William W. Taylor, III, Kerry W. Kircher, Zuckerman, Spaeder, Goldstein, Taylor & Kolker, Washington, D.C., David Cole, Center for Constitutional Rights, New York City, Michael M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
We earlier asked for further assistance respecting Robert Chapter’s claim on behalf of himself and we have received it. We now enter summary judgment for Robert Chapter on count II and for the defendants on count I of 91 C 2424 and for the defendants in 91 C 5427. Riverside Medical Center necessarily must recover through Robert Chapter individually and not as guardian of Audr...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 319 (1992)
ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
Frank YI, an individual, Sandra Chu Yi, an individual, and Ryan J. De Jesus, an individual, Defendants.
No. C-91-4030 FMS.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
April 30, 1992.
*320 Lesley E. Woodberry, James C. Nielsen, Wright Robinson McCammon Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff....
Views: 0
Page 7559
OPINION
After a settlement between Vas-Cath and Mahurkar, the initial adversaries in this patent case, only two accused infring-ers remain as parties: IMPRA and Kendall Med-West, a division of The Kendall Company. We are in the final stages of discovery, with depositions by the dozen. Trial is set for August 10.
On May 20 Kendall and its parent filed bankruptcy petitions in the bankr...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants, Pravin Banker (“Banker”), Huguette Banker a/k/a Huguette Pestel (“Pestel”), Pravin Banker Associates, Ltd. (“Pravin Banker Associates”), Prabank Capital Ltd. (“Prabank”), and Global Financial Group, Ltd. (“Global”), have all moved pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order granting them summary judgment and dismissing Plaintiff B.N.E., Swe...
Views: 0
ENTRY
This matter comes before the Court on the defendant’s motion for entry of a protective order.1 For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part the defendant’s motion.
Background
Eli Lilly & Co. (Lilly) is the defendant in a number of products liability suits consolidated in this Court for pretrial purposes by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. In all th...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is Officer Marco Glu-mac’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). The court grants the motion for reasons stated below. FACTS The facts are undisputed. Officer Glu-mac and his partner are Calumet City, Illinois, police officers. They were told shortly before October 4, 1989, by the Chicago Police Department that there was a judicially ...
Views: 0
ORDER MODIFYING PROTECTIVE ORDER
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Modify the Protective Order was referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge by the District Court (Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong) and set for hearing December 19, 1991 and continued on the court’s own motion. The matter was submitted on the papers, pursuant to Local Rule 220-1.
The moving and opposing papers and the record in this case having...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, the Fort Belknap Indian Community (“the Community”), instituted the present declaratory judgment action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202, challenging the State of Montana’s authority to prosecute Indian persons for criminal violations of state liquor laws that occur within Indian country. 1 Having considered the ar *950 guments presented by the parties in ...
Views: 0
ORDER In order to enter Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Court must decide whether it has jurisdiction to adjudicate the rights of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe (“Paiutes”) in the 1934 Reservation (“Reservation”) and what remedy is available to the Paiutes. In summary, the Paiutes claim that they fall within the jurisdictional provision of 25 U.S.C. § 640d-7(a), contending t...
Views: 0
ORDER Re: lands purchased by or on behalf of the Navajo Nation or privately owned lands relinquished pursuant to Sec. 2 of the 1934 Act. Defendant Peterson Zah, on behalf of the Navajo Nation, 1 moves for partial summary judgment, requesting that this Court find that the Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe (“the Paiutes” or “Paiute Tribe”) do not have a claim to lands which the Na...
Views: 0
ORDER
RE: SCHOOL LANDS
Defendant Peterson Zah, on behalf of the Navajo Nation,
1
moves for partial summary judgment, requesting that this Court find that the Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe (“the Paiutes” or “Paiute Tribe”) do not have a claim to lands designated to the State of Arizona “for the support of common schools” in the Arizona Enabling Act. This is ...
Views: 3
ORDER
Re: Allotments for which patents did not issue
Defendant Peterson Zah, on behalf of the Navajo Nation,
1
moves for partial summary judgment, requesting that this Court find that the Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe (“the Paiutes” or “Paiute Tribe”) do not have a claim to lands in the 1934 Navajo Reservation (“the Reservation”) which were allotted to indi...
Views: 1
ORDER
On December 11, 1989, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) of the Department of Interior (“Interior”), issued its notice of final determination that the San Juan
*1180
Southern Paiute Tribe (“the Paiutes” or the “Paiute Tribe”) exists as an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law.
1
The BIA found that the Paiute Tribe met all of the criteria set forth ...
Views: 4
OPINION AND ORDER Defendants filed a joint motion for suppression of evidence and/or dismissal of indictment, (hereafter “motion to suppress”), on December 17,1991. The United States filed a response on January 7, 1991. On January 17, 1991 we referred this case to the magistrate for a report and recommendation as to the disposition of defendants’ motion. The magistrate conducted a February 24...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises out of defendant insurance company’s failure to pay disability benefits under a sickness and accident disability policy issued to plaintiff on November 24, 1986. Plaintiff previously worked as a customer engineer for IBM Corporation in Hato Rey, Puerto Rico from August 9, 1971, until March 1, 1989, when IBM placed him on medical disability.
On June ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM, ORDER AND JUDGMENT
By authority of New York’s complex of environmental statutes and rules, plaintiffs, regarded by the state as persistent polluters, have been put out of the business of transporting petroleum and petroleum products on New York’s waterways. Claiming violation of their federal rights, they seek damages and permission to restart their business. For the reasons i...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner pro se, Derrick Sanford (“petitioner” or “Sanford”), an inmate at the Clinton Correctional Facility in Dannemora, New York, petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Daniel Senkowski, Superintendent of the Clinton Correctional Facility, is named as respondent. For the reasons stated below, Sanford’s petition is dismissed. ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
By this complaint, filed April 14, 1992
1
, plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that it has established priority trademark rights in the name “Windows User” (“the mark”), and that defendant’s use of said mark constitutes false designation of goods’ origin in violation of § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125, and New York’s common law of unfair compet...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This case concerns the liability of a vacation tour operator for personal injuries sustained by a tour patron while she was walking in and about the majestic Grand Teton National Park — an area not under the control of the tour operator.
This Court recently decided two motions to dismiss brought by the Government and by the Grand Teton Lodge. In a Memora...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the court to resolve the objections of Charles J. Waidelich and Charles V. Wheeler to the proposed class action settlement and, if those objections are found insufficient to warrant rejecting the settlement, to treat class counsel’s fee application. No timely objection has been raised to the fee application itself, although one letter from a class member that...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
Introduction
On November 5, 1990, argument was held on defendants’ original motion to dismiss the amended complaint in this case, plaintiffs cross-motion to disqualify defendants’ counsel, and defendants’ motion for sanctions pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. After hearing argument, the Court denied plaintiff's motion to disqualify and denied defendants’ mo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The court heard oral argument on October 11, 1991 in Syracuse, New York. For the reasons stated below, the court grants defendant’s motion.
I. BACKGROUND
This case arises out of three letters written by defendant Anthony Picarazzi, business manager for...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO TRANSFER VENUE AND TRANSFERRING THIS ACTION TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN PITTSBURGH I. INTRODUCTION This breach of contract/breach of warranties action is presently before the Court on two of the Defendants’ separately filed motions — the “Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue, or in the Altern...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff in this action to recover damages for housing discrimination based on the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601
et seq.,
(the “FHA”), and for claimed violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1982, moves for partial summary judgment on liability, on the basis of collateral estoppel. Defendant opposes the motion, and the motion was marked fully submitted on...
Views: 1
792 F. Supp. 1046 (1992)
Steven Scott KILDEA, et al., Plaintiff,
v.
ELECTRO WIRE PRODUCTS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-CV-40126-FL.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D. at Flint.
May 13, 1992.
*1047 Patrick J. Marutiak, Neal J. Wilensky, Bobay, Kaechele & Wilensky, P.C., Owosso, Mich., for plaintiff.
Francis J. Newton, Jr., Berry, Moorman, King & H...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs filed their motion on October 22, 1991. After expiration of the filing deadline, defendant filed a Response on November 19, 1991. A hearing was held on November 21, 1991. Following the hearing, the Court ordered the parties to supplement the record, detailing and clarifying the issues raised in ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Four Bronx county voters brought this action against,
inter alia,
New York Governor Mario Cuomo, New York Lieutenant-Governor Stan Lundine, the Speaker of the New York State Assembly, Saul Weprin, and the temporary President and Majority leader of the New York State Senate, Ralph Marino (the “legislative defendants”), in New York State Supreme Court, Bronx Coun...
Views: 1
ORDER The parties in this matter have agreed “that the decision of the Bankruptcy Court abstaining from this matter may be affirmed.” It is so ordered. SO ORDERED: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ABSTENTION, AND DENIAL OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS Before the Court are two Motions to Dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted, and five Motions for Abstention. The twenty-two na...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION Petitioners ask the Court to quash three Internal Revenue Service summonses. The three summonses were issued to various banks for the purpose of comparing bank records to the personal records of petitioners for the tax years 1987, 1988, and 1989. For the reasons discussed below, the petition will be denied. Petitioners claim that the Internal Revenue Service seeks to use ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
. Plaintiff, Robert E. Brizendine, moves that this court reconsider its order of May 11,1992, directing the clerk of this court to transmit the contents of this court’s file to the clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois or, in the alternative, moves that this court withdraw the reference to the bankruptcy court.
...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Plaintiff’s § 1983 Claims (#62) which was filed on August 19, 1991. Plaintiff, Howard Haupt (“Haupt”), submitted an Opposition (#72) on November 1, 1991 followed by an Erratum (# 74) filed on November 4, 1991. Defendants filed their Reply (# 77) on December 16, 1991. On April 17, 1992, the Court conducted a hearing rega...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought under § 205(g) of the Social Security Act (“the Act”), as amended 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) denying plaintiffs claim for disability insurance benefits. We note from the outset that in reviewing the decision of the Secretary, we need only concl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION RE MOTION TO STAY AND COMPEL ARBITRATION
Introduction
In 1991, plaintiff O. Beirne Chisolm filed a lawsuit against defendants Kidder, Pea
*480
body Asset Management, Inc. (“KPAM”) and Kidder, Peabody & Co., Inc. (“KP”) in New York Supreme Court.
See Chisolm v. Kidder, Peabody Asset Management,
No. 33022/91 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.). In that action p...
Views: 1
Page 7649
Before the court is an appeal by the United States of two orders issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Appellant presents the following issues for review on appeal: (1) whether the bankruptcy court had subject matter jurisdiction over this turnover proceeding; (2) whether the bankruptcy court should have abstained and deferred this matter to another co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION . AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion for order for return of *699settlement brochure. A hearing was held on the motion on January 27, 1992. Present were the following counsel: W. Harold Flowers, Jr., attorney for Plaintiffs, and Bruce Menk, attorney for Defendant. The Court heard argument of counsel and then took the matter under advisement.
I.
Prio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Richard Graff, filed a first amended complaint alleging claims against defendants, City of Chicago and Mayor Richard M. Daley, arising out of defendant City of Chicago’s ordinances, both new and old, regulating newsstands. Specifically, Count I alleges that the new ordinance is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech; Count II alleges that the new ordi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Pennsylvania House, Inc. moves for rehearing on its motion for partial summary judgment. Juneau’s Pennsylvania House, Inc. was a dealer in Pennsylvania House furniture. At the time the dealership was created, Riley Juneau, Creóla Juneau, and Robert Juneau personally guaranteed the dealership’s debts to Pennsylvania House in an indemnity agreement drafted by Pennsylvania House. T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Travelers Insurance Company moves for summary judgment against Optimal Health Care Services, Inc. on the grounds that the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001,
et seq.
(1985) preempts Optimal’s state law causes of action.
*164
Vincent Sharlo, a retired employee of Texaco, Inc., was a participant in the Texa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is before the court. Defendants present two grounds for their motion. First, defendants assert that the applicable statutes of limitation bar plaintiffs claims. Second, defendants claim that the plaintiff does not present claims for cognizable damages.
FACTS
This lawsuit is an action by nineteen persons who purchased sha...
Views: 1
ORDER OF REMAND
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. For the reasons stated below, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be GRANTED.
I.
Plaintiff initiated the instant action on January 29, 1992. Plaintiff alleges that he was discharged by Defendant Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court upon petitioner’s request for injunctive relief under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 160(j), pending final disposition of the case before the National Labor Relations Board (Board). The peti
*1461
tioner seeks an order directing the respondent to cease and desist from failing to recognize and b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation (“Kerr-McGee”), the named defendant in the above-captioned negligence suit, moves this court for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
1
Original diversity jurisdiction rests with this court under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Plaintiff Mickey DeWayne Walker (“Walker”) asserts Alabama citizenship, de...
Views: 0
Page 7677
794 F. Supp. 1344 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
MISSISSIPPI VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION FOR the BLIND and the State of Mississippi, Defendants.
MISSISSIPPI VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION FOR BLIND, Counterclaimant,
v.
Roy S. ESTESS, in his official capacity as Director of the John C. Stennis Space Center of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Admiral Richard H. Truly, in ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 5, 1990, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) on the issues of class certification and summary judgment in this matter, recommending the class be certified and summary judgment be entered for the plaintiffs.
See Farley v. Sullivan,
Civ. No. 88-127, slip op. (D.Vt. Oct. 5, 1990) (Niedermeier, Mag. J.). On October 23, 199...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed a Complaint against defendants on March 14, 1990, seeking damages for negligence through medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and breach of express warranty. Two motions are currently ripe for adjudication: defendant La-Fiandra’s second Motion for Summary Judgment, and defendant Dorwart’s Motion for an Order Allowing Independent Vocational Rehab...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal of the Bankruptcy Court decision in In re Jane S. Baker, No. 90-334 (Bankr.D.Vt. February 10, 1991), in which Bankruptcy Judge Conrad awarded debtor costs, attorneys fees and punitive damages for the Bank of Boston’s violation of an automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). The Bankruptcy Court’s decision represents a final judgment in a core proceed...
Views: 1
Page 7681
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, the United States, moves for summary judgment in its favor in this case, arguing it has met its burden of showing that there is probable cause to believe that the defendant 1990 Pontiac Grand Prix (“the Vehicle”) is subject to forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4). Claimant Robert Mongeon, registered owner of the vehicle, responds that summary judgment should n...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Vermont’s maker of premier ice cream, filed this lawsuit seeking in Count I to recover payment for ice cream sold and delivered to its former distributor in Florida, FBJ Distribution, Inc., and in Count II a declaratory judgment concerning certain terms of the parties’ distributorship agreement. Defendant filed a counterclaim seeking damages...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On June 28, 1990, plaintiff Sharlene Fellows filed a Complaint in Vermont Superior Court alleging that Earth Construction, Inc. (“ECI”) discriminated against her be
*533
cause of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e
et seq.
(“Title VII”) and the Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act, 21 V...
Views: 1
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABE-AS CORPUS Petitioner Robert Medina is a federal prisoner serving a sentence pursuant to the Judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered January 25, 1988. He was sentenced to serve a period of incarceration of 14 years for various offenses. He has filed a Petition for a...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL Following trial of this product liability case, a verdict was returned by the jury in favor of the defendant and the plaintiffs filed a motion for a new trial. That motion has now been amended to waive all of the issues submitted on the original motion for a new trial except the issue of whether the testimony of Dr. Wallace Dixon Ward was a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a declaratory judgment action brought by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) seeking a declaration that the claims fall outside the coverage of the policy. Pending is defendants Armstrong Extinguisher Services (Armstrong) and Michael Larson's (Larson) joint motion to remove plaintiff’s counsel, Curt Ireland, on the basis of conflict of ...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
In this securities fraud action grounded in federal and state law, Kenneth L. Walsche and Mary Audree Walsche (the “Walsches”) sue their stockbroker, First Investors Corporation (“First Investors”), to recover a substantial portion of their life savings they claim they lost when First Investors fraudulently sold them shares of a mutual fund that consisted of junk bonds...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter stands submitted on PHE, Inc.’s motion to quash a grand jury subpoena issued to it on November 12, 1991,
1
by a federal grand jury sitting in the Western District of Kentucky.
*1313
I
PHE has filed both a motion and a supplemental motion to quash a grand jury subpoena
duces tecum.
In its initial motion to quash, PHE m...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant William Johnson’s motion to dismiss the government’s petition on supervised release. *243Following a trial by jury, defendant was convicted on three counts of distribution of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was sentenced on August 11, 1989 to a term of sixteen months imprisonment and three years supervised release on each count t...
Views: 0
ORDER The above-entitled action comes before the court upon defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (b)(6). Because this court finds that plaintiff’s fed *228 eral claims are barred by the doctrine announced in Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 71 S.Ct. 153, 95 L.Ed. 152 (1950)- ...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court denies defendant’s motion for summary judgment and grants plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Woodroast Systems, Inc. (“WSI”) owns and operat...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Bill Shepherd (“Shepherd”) moves for an order entering judgment on
*1010
the jury’s verdict in the amount of $37,-314.40, or, in the alternative, for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict is the result of a compromise, against the weight of the evidence, grossly inadequate, and it was harmful error for the court to admit defendant’s Exhibit F...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
This matter is before the Court on the motion of the Plaintiff Robert Lamb Hart Planners and Architects (“Hart”) for in-junctive and declaratory relief (doc. 1). Also before the Court is the cross motion of the Defendant Evergreen, Ltd. (“Evergreen”) to stay the litigation and compel arbitration (do...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Court held a bench trial on February 3-6, and April 6-8, 1992. The following
*826
items have been filed with the Court, which the Court has carefully considered: the Plaintiffs’ proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (doc. 63), the Defendants’ trial brief (doc. 68), the Defendants’ proposed findings of fact and conclusions...
Views: 0
*702ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (doc. 11), the Plaintiffs’ response (doc. 15), and the Defendants’ reply (doc. 19). The Court held a hearing regarding the Defendants’ motion on May 1, 1992. The sole issue before this Court is whether the doctrine of the exhaustion of administrative remedies und...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Engel Industries (“Engel”) brought this action seeking damages for a commercial transaction that broke down as a result of the onset of hostilities between the United States and Iraq. Plaintiff had a contract to sell equipment to defendant Medcon Enterprises (“Medcon”) which was in turn intending to sell the equipment to an Iraqi government agency. Defendant M...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff the United States of America and intervenor Rufino Vélez. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff’s motion is hereby GRANTED and intervenor’s motion is hereby DENIED.
I. Background
The facts of this case are not in dispute. On November 11, 1988, Mr. Rufino Vélez Rivera, travelling from St. Maarten in ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 253 (1992)
William P. FREIBURGER, Alfred R. Heikkinen, James A. McLaughry, Larry A. Slocum, and Vince L. Terrel, Plaintiffs,
v.
EMERY AIR CHARTER, INC., Defendant.
No. 91 C 20159.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, W.D.
June 1, 1992.
*254 *255 David J. Brown, Rockford, Ill., for plaintiffs.
Elmer C. Rudy, Stephen E. Balogh, Timothy J. Rollins, Williams & McCarthy, Rockf...
Views: 101
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiff Roger Kingsepp has moved pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 (“Rule 23”) to certify a class of plaintiffs for purposes of this antitrust action. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff’s motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Roger Kingsepp, a recent graduate of Wesleyan University, brought this antitrust action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The defendan...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 1144 (1992)
John R. WILLIAMS, and John B. Williams, Plaintiffs,
v.
DRESSER INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant.
No. 1:92-CV-333-RHH.
United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.
May 4, 1992.
*1145 Charles Wilson Dubose, Jennifer L. Wheatley Fletcher, Griffin, Cochrane & Marshall, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs.
R. Peter Catlin, III, Bishop & Catlin, Brunswick, Ga., Dav...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1131 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 1:91-CV-2280-RHH.
United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.
February 27, 1992.
Marlene F. Gibbons, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., Washington, D.C.; Daniel A. Caldwell, III, Asst. U.S. Atty., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.
Dorothy Yates Kirkley, William J. Holley...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
By motion fully submitted on April 21, 1992, plaintiff Paul F. McDonald moves this Court for additional relief on remand. As the disposition of this motion is controlled entirely by prior proceedings in the case, the Court will briefly summarize the history of this litigation, familiarity with which is , assumed.
Plaintiff McDonald is an airline pilot. He was employed in that c...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a bankruptcy appeal. Before the Court is the motion to dismiss the appeal of Rose Thompson and Janet Shill by Patrick Murphy, acting in his official capacity as Guardian of Cook County and Independent Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Cunningham, and the Office of the Illinois State Guardian, as Guardian of the Estate of Richard Cunningham (“the Gu...
Views: 0
792 F. Supp. 1278 (1992)
Teresa G. SUSSMAN, f/k/a Teresa M. Gaffney, Plaintiff,
v.
SALEM, SAXON AND NIELSEN, P.A., Bernice Saxon, Richard Salem, and Richard A. Nielsen, Defendants.
No. 91-776-CIV-T-17C.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.
May 29, 1992.
*1279 Neil Harvey Chonin, Chonin & Sher, P.A., Coral Gables, Fla., for plaintiff.
Thomas M. Gonzalez, Mark A. Hanley, ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS This cause comes before the Court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of venue filed on April 27, 1992, and the government’s opposition thereto, filed on May 7, 1992. The defendant argues that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the defendant has a right to be tried in the district where the crime was committed, and that this ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER Defendants Gene Gotti and John Carneg-lia move pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b) for reduction of sentences imposed by this Court on July 7, 1989. 1 The following statement of facts appearing in the Government’s brief is adopted by the Court: “On May 23, 1989, following a six-week jury trial, the defendants Gene Gotti and John Carneglia were convicted of racket...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This shareholders derivative action was originally assigned to the late Judge Cos-tantino and was reassigned to this Judge in May 1990. The court assumes familiarity with Judge Costantino’s opinions of August 16, 1986, and January 12, 1989, as well as this court’s Memorandum and Order of December 27, 1990.
I
Plaintiff, record owner of convertible preferred s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
By a Rule promulgated in 1990, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) requires lawyers to deposit certain non-interest bearing client funds into an Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Account (“IOLTA”).1 The interest earned on these funds is to be paid to a non-profit organization approved by the SJC “for use in (1) improving the administration of justice or (2) delivering civil legal...
Views: 0
*335
OPINION AND ORDER
Gates Construction Corporation (“defendant”) has sued Walter Koschak, Jr., and Carol Koschak (“plaintiffs”) for a declaratory judgment that Walter Koschak is not entitled to sue as a seaman under the Jones Act, 46 App.U.S.C. § 688, for injuries sustained while employed by defendant (“the declaratory judgment action”). Just after filing the declaratory judgm...
Views: 0
ORDER
I.INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Don Williams (“Williams”) has asserted a claim against Defendants, I.B. Fischer Properties, Inc. and Ira Fischbein (“Fischer”) and Foodmaker, Inc. (“Food-maker”) for violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, sections 1 and 2 (“the Act”), and for tortious interference with prospective advantage. Doc. No. 12. Additionally, Williams has asserted a claim aga...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss filed by defendants José Enrique Laborde, Salvador Arana, Patria Custodio, Néstor López Vázquez, Héctor Rivera Cruz, and the Puerto Rico Land Administration on May 10, Í990, and the Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment filed by defendant Federación de Pesca-dores de Playa Picúa, Inc. on June 4, 1990. For the reasons se...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION The defendant has been charged with one count of unlawfully and knowingly possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony. She has filed a motion to dismiss the indictment claiming that the government has violated her right to a speedy trial. The Court held a hearing on this motion and is now prepared to rule on it. A. FACTS On March 26, 1991, officers from the Metr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs request this Court to reconsider its May 5, 1992 Order which dismissed the above-captioned case on the merits pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(a). Although Plaintiffs do not present any new evidence, Plaintiffs contend that the Court erred as a matter of law in dismissing their First Amendment and Administrative Procedure Act claims.1 Upon further review of the p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Ade George Oyegbola sues Robert Y. Murray, who was Oyegbola’s court-appointed attorney in a criminal prosecution. Oyegbola, pro se, asserts claims of attorney malpractice and misrepresentation. The defendant has moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, claiming that neither diversity nor federal question jurisdiction is present. Oyegbola is a permanent resident alien. For pu...
Views: 0
Plaintiff/counterclaim defendant, Irwin Plotkin (“Plotkin”), brought the above-referenced action against defendant/counterclaim plaintiff, Bearings Limited (“Bearings”), as well as defendants, John Bauer (“Bauer”), Michelle Saunders, Jeff D. Feld-man, and Martin Granowitz (collectively “defendants”), alleging, inter alia, violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S....
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs and defendant have made cross-motions for summary judgment. The motions are essentially reciprocals of one another, and present the issue of whether the antitrust judgment entered against plaintiff Trailer Marine Transport Corporation is covered by the policies of insurance issued by defendant. The motions were argued and submitted to the ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff is a United States corporation which manufactures a soap under the trademark “Shield,” and a dishwashing detergent under the trademark “Sunlight” for sale in the United States. A British corporation that is affiliated with plaintiff also makes a soap and a dishwashing detergent using as trademarks the names “Shield” and “Sunlight.” The American and British versions, w...
Views: 0
795 F.Supp. 349 (1992)
JOPLIN ENTERPRISES, an Arizona partnership, Strong Arm Music, a division of Joplin Enterprises; and Texas Lion Productions, a New York joint venture, Plaintiffs,
v.
Jimmy ALLEN, and Gaye Anderson, individually and the marital community composed thereof, and d/b/a the New Orleans Performance Hall and the New Orleans Restaurant; and Susan Ross, Defendants.
No. C91-1035C.
Unit...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 391 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
CERTAIN ACCOUNTS, TOGETHER WITH ALL MONIES ON DEPOSIT THEREIN, et al., Defendants.
No. 91-1018-CIV.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
February 21, 1992.
*392 Kathy Stark, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff.
Brian S. Keif, Guy R. Strafer, Ana Barnett, Henry Bolz, Alan Fine, Donald Bierman, Barry D. Hunter, George V...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION TO STRIKE This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to strike, filed on February 3, 1992, from Plaintiffs Complaint claims for compensatory damages, under The Civil Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.). FACTS In this action, Plaintiff alleges that he was discriminated against based on his gender and national origin. Plaintiff further alleges that he w...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND This cause is before the Court on Plaintiff’s, Kirit S. Desai, complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. Plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint on February 18, 1992; in order to seek compensatory and punitive damages and a jury trial under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, in addition to any relief already available under Section 706(g) of the Civil R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity action arises out of an alleged agreement to purchase the assets of an affiliate company of the defendant. Plaintiff Venture Associate Corporation (“Venture”) brings this single-count complaint against Zenith Data Systems Corporation (“ZDS”), claiming breach of contract. Presently before the court are (1) ZDS’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Wayne A. Mors (“Mors”), brings this action against defendants Ranee Williams (“Williams”) and Samuel R.
*740
Elkins, Jr. (“Elkins”) (collectively “defendants”), for breach of oral contract. On January 24, 1992, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff brought this action in May of 1990 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq.
The single-count complaint charged that agents of the defendant corporations subjected plaintiff to unwanted sexual advances constituting sexual harassment and retaliated against her for failure to acquiesce to those advances....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, a user of defendants’ drain-cleanser products, originally filed this products liability action in state court. Although Pennsylvania law requires a plaintiff desiring a jury trial to make an affirmative demand under Pa.R.C.P. 1007.1(a), no jury demand was made during state court proceedings relating to this case.
On May 16, 1990, defendant Boyle-Midway H...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The FDIC filed suit on August 3, 1989, seeking declaratory relief against Edythe Sanders, Ken Penn Amusements, Inc., Nova Expositions, Inc., Citizens Bank and Algemene Bank.
Count I of the complaint sought a declaration that the March 25, 1988 sale by the Westmoreland County Sheriff to Edythe Sanders of vehicles and amusement rides which were subsequently seized by...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 240 (1992)
FAERBER ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., an Illinois corporation, and Great Lakes Construction Co., an Illinois corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
ATLANTA TRI-COM, INC., a Georgia corporation, Contractors Surety & Fidelity Co., Ltd., a Nevada corporation, Raytheon Service Company, a Delaware corporation, Defendants.
and
UNITED STATES of America for the Use and Benefit of FAERBER ELECT...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1093 (1992)
William H. CAMPBELL and Linda D. Campbell, Plaintiffs,
v.
ROBERT BOSCH POWER TOOL CORPORATION, etc., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-T-1018-N.
United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, N.D.
February 24, 1992.
*1094 *1095 Griffin Sikes, Jr., Barry E. Teague, Montgomery, Ala., for plaintiffs.
James B. Carlson, Birmingham, Ala., for Bosch.
ORDER
MYRON H. THOMPSON, Chief Judge.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS THIS CAUSE has come before the Court on the Petition of Nollie Lee Martin for writ of habeas corpus and Emergency Motion for Stay of Execution, filed with the Court on May 5, 1992. On April 7, 1992, the Governor of the State of Florida signed a death warrant for the period beginning Tuesday, May 5, 1992 through the following T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY FOLLOWING BENCH TRIAL John W. Selch wants his job back. In this lawsuit Selch is seeking to recover his former job with the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) by contending that in 1989 he was illegally fired by the administration of the newly elected Democrat Governor Evan Bayh. Mr. Selch alleges that he was discharged from his position as a subdistrict superintenden...
Views: 1
Plaintiff AgriStor Leasing (“Agristor”) is a Wisconsin partnership engaged in the lease and sale of grain storage equipment to farmers. On approximately June 28, 1979, Agristor entered into an Agricultural Equipment Lease Agreement with Floyd and Janet Harmeyer for the lease of various pieces of agricultural equipment. After several years of such leasing, the Har-meyers decided to purchase this eq...
Views: 1
Page 7839
ENTRY
I. BACKGROUND
Edward L. Miller is and has been a member of the Worldwide Church of God (at least) since 1982. One tenet of the Worldwide Church of God is that its members should not work from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.
*57R.R. Donnelley & Sons, has. employed Edward L. Miller since 1964. R.R. Donnelley occasionally requires its employees to work on weekends and pays its employees ti...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on an appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court dated July 16, 1991. Based on a review of the file and record, the court affirms the order of the bankruptcy court. BACKGROUND On November 6, 1990, the appellant James Michael Maurer (“Maurer”) filed a bankruptcy petition pursuant to Chapter 7. Maurer’s bankruptcy schedules indicated that he had no bank...
Views: 0
ORDER
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff MCI Telecommunications Corporation is a provider of interstate telecommunication services to individual and corporate users. Plaintiff alleges that it provided telecommunication services to defendant Garden State Investment Corporation, doing business as Adventures in Achievement, from September, 1989, to September, 1991, under the terms and conditions of M...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motions to remand. The motion will be denied.
FACTS
Plaintiffs in these two related actions are credit card customers of the defendant banks.
1
Defendants are national banks located in states other than Minnesota. Plaintiffs, all residents of Minnesota, brought suit in state court, challenging defenda...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff originally filed suit against General American Life Insurance Co. alleging that it “committed libel and slander in order to cause it to be believed that Plaintiff had violated the Medicare Act and committed mail fraud.” On October 18, 1991 the defendant filed a petition to substitute the United States of America as the defendant in this cause of action. The substitut...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court for a decision on the merits after trial to the Court. After consideration of the pleadings, the testimony and exhibits introduced at trial, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, the Court enters the following memorandum which it adopts as its findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Proce...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Proceeding by an order to show cause, the New York City Employees’ Retirement System (“NYCERS”) brings this action for a preliminary injunction that would enjoin defendant Dole Food Company, Inc. (“Dole”) from the solicitation of shareholder proxies for Dole’s upcoming annual meeting without informing shareholders of
*97
NYCERS’ shareholder proposal. In the...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 1405 (1992)
DOROTHY J., individually and on behalf of Brian B., Plaintiff,
v.
LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT; Centers for Youth and Families, Bruce Limozaine, individually and in his official capacity as former Administrator of Field Operations Management, Division of Children and Family Services, Dept. of Human Services; Corrine Means, individually and in her official capacity as former...
Views: 0
*172
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil,
in rem,
forfeiture case. In its complaint, the government alleges that the realty at issue was used to facilitate the manufacture and distribution of controlled substances in violation of federal law and is, therefore, subject to civil forfeiture under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a). The claimant, John Medogrol, holds title to the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The motion will be granted. FACTS
The facts of this case are more fully set forth in the Court’s earlier memorandum and order,
Ruzicka v. Conde Nast Publications, Inc.,
733 F.Supp. 1289 (D.Minn.1990) (hereinafter
Ruzicka I).
The lawsuit arises out of an article about...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case, filed on September 14, 1990, arises out of plaintiff Mary Lee Brady’s employment with Michigan State University (“MSU”). In her eight-count first amended complaint, Brady asserted claims based on the defendants’ failure to reappoint her to an administrative post within the University.
In her first amended complai...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 19, 1992, this court entered a judgment granting plaintiff monetary and injunctive relief. Defendant now moves to restrain plaintiff temporarily from executing that judgment and for a new trial pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(a). For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff is enjoined from collecting any monetary award for 10 days from the date of this Opinion, during ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants Arnold DiGregorio (“DiGre-gorio”) and Gregory Segnit (“Segnit”) (together, the “Defendants”) have moved for an order pursuant to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 and 3162 and Fed.R.Cr.P. 5(a) (“Rule 5(a)”) dismissing the indictment against them with prejudice.
1
For the following reasons, the motion is denied with respect to the Rule ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before this court is defendant Max Buchanan Co., Inc.’s August 2, 1991 motion to dismiss this action for lack of personal jurisdiction. For the reasons below, this court denies the motion.
BACKGROUND
On June 14,1991, plaintiff Mamco Corporation (“Mamco”) commenced this breach-of-contract action in the Circuit Court of *201Racine County, Wisconsin, alleging that defend...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Presently before this court is pro se petitioner Clyde R. Foster’s (“Foster”) June 14, 1991 petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to Title 28 United States Code § 2254. Because Foster has failed to exhaust available state court remedies with respect to two of his claims, this court must dismiss his petition without prejudice. BACKGROUND Foster is currently incarcera...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff in this case alleges that the defendants illegally seized several automobiles from his auto sales lot, thereby violating his Constitutional rights and causing him economic loss. He therefore seeks damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Plaintiff further ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case involves one of the more disturbing phenomena of the Washington scene — the leaking 1 of false information to damage the reputation or livelihood of an official. The events revealed by this case 2 *9 are particularly egregious for several reasons. First, although it was officially determined several times that the target of the leaks had done nothing wrong, the fals...
Views: 0
This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on both counts of the plaintiff’s complaint for declaratory judgment. Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) issued an automobile insurance policy, No. 573 5718-C11-14A (“the Policy”) to Bobbie Jo Braswell prior to September 7, 1990. The Policy declarations listed as the scheduled veh...
Views: 0
ENTRY
This matter comes before the court on Agmax’s motion for a temporary restraining order. Inasmuch as Countrymark Cooperative, Incorporated (“Countrymark”) has acknowledged receipt of notice of this motion, the court will treat it as a motion for a preliminary injunction. See Government Suppliers Consol. Servs., Inc. v. Bayh, 734 F.Supp. 853, 861 (S.D.Ind.1990); Wright & Miller, Federal Pract...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. For the reasons stated below, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be GRANTED.
I.
This case involves a parcel of real property in St. Mary’s Parish, Louisiana (the “Property”). Defendant Texaco, Inc. (“Texaco”) leased the Property from the then owners in 1941. In 1991, the Property was acquired jointly by Sout...
Views: 0
Page 7890
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on the DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT and DEFENDANT’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT which were filed on October 21, 1991. The REPLY BRIEF TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT was filed by the plaintiff on November 5, 1991. The DEFENDANT’S REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT was filed on Novemb...
Views: 0
ORDER TO REMAND This cause is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion to remand, filed May 5, 1992, and Defendant’s reply/opposition thereto, filed May 14, 1992. Complaint in this cause was filed in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in the and for Pinellas County, Florida (Case No. 92-1035-CI-7). This cause was removed to this Court by Defendants on March 31, 1992. Removal jurisd...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs brought suit to recover damages arising out of its use of a fungicide, known-as Benlate DF, which was manufactured by the defendant and sold by a distributor, Asgrow, a Florida Company. The jurisdiction of this civil action is based on 28 U.S.C. section 1332 as plaintiff and defendant are corporate citizens of different sta...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). The court grants the motion for the reasons set forth below.
FACTS
Due to complications arising out of the natural delivery of her first child in November of 1983, Bobbi Lee Lumpkin underwent reconstructive surgery for her perineal area. Medical personnel from the ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 117 (1992)
LEONE INDUSTRIES, Plaintiff,
v.
ASSOCIATED PACKAGING, INC.; Michael Sarbello; Clifford L. Stafford, Jr.; Joseph John Centurione; Maria Cusano, General Administratrix of the Estate of Harry Cusano; and Maria Cusano, Defendants.
Civ. No. 91-1052 (WGB).
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
May 18, 1992.
*118 Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis by Edward W. Ferruggia...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Michael Anthony Jewelers, Inc. (“MAJ”) and defendant Peacock Jewelry, Inc. (“Peacock”)
1
are both New York corporations engaged in the manufacture and sale of gold jewelry. Of particular rele-
*642
vanee to this lawsuit is the companies’ involvement in the manufacture and sale of “diamond-cut” gold charms.
MAJ commenced this action on April 1...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Helen Kimmel (“Kimmel”) brought this action against defendants William W. Wirtz, Arthur M. Wirtz, Jr., W. Rockwell Wirtz, Kenneth E. Scranton, Bruce W. McArthur, Wirtz Corporation, Consolidated Enterprise, Inc. Forman Realty Corporation (“Forman”), American Mart Corporation (“American Mart”), and 333 Building Corporation (“333 Building”). In her orig...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 501 (1992)
DATA GENERAL CORPORATION and Data General Service, Inc., Plaintiffs,
v.
GRUMMAN SYSTEMS SUPPORT CORPORATION, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 88-0033-S.
United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.
June 3, 1992.
*502 Robert S. Frank, Jr., Brian A. Davis, Robert M. Buchanan, Jr., Choate, Hall & Stewart, Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs; Jacob Frank, Morris G. Nicholson, Data Gene...
Views: 1
Page 7924
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The United States has appealed an order of the Bankruptcy Court granting Appel-lees Ray Stevens Paving Company (RSP) and Richard M. Stevens a preliminary injunction against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Bankruptcy Court enjoined the IRS from assessing a 100% penalty against Richard Stevens pursuant to 26 U.S.C. section 6672. The IRS contends the Anti-Injunction Ac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I This case involves a dispute between a local school board and a superintendent who was suspended with pay. No public announcement was made and no charges of personal wrongdoing were involved. Disputes over problems arising in the district led to dissatisfaction on the part of a majority of the board with plaintiff, possibly enhanced by preference of some for a superintend...
Views: 0
Page 7941
ORDER
In these consolidated cases Ceco Concrete Construction Company seeks to have an arbitration award confirmed; Schrimsher Construction Company seeks to have it vacated.
It is conceded that the arbitration under the construction contract rules of the American Arbitration Society involved a
*110
dispute relating to a construction contract involving interstate commerce ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 343 (1992)
SIDCO INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, Plaintiff,
v.
WIMAR TAHOE CORPORATION, Defendant.
Civ. No. 91-110-FR.
United States District Court, D. Oregon.
June 5, 1992.
*344 J. Pierre Kolisch, Peter E. Heuser, Kolisch, Hartwell, Dickinson, McCormack & Heuser, Portland, Or., for plaintiff.
Steven K. Blackhurst, Jeffrey J. Baker, Ater, Wynne, Hewitt, Dodson & Skerritt, Portland, ...
Views: 0
ORDER VACATING PETITIONER’S GUILTY PLEA THIS CAUSE came before the Court, upon petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. A United States magistrate conducted a review of the plea colloquy and sentencing transcripts and recommended that the motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence be granted and the petitioner’s plea of guilty vacated. Aft...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ESPIRITO SANTO BANK’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This cause comes before the Court upon the motion to dismiss of defendant Espirito Santo Bank of Florida (the “Bank”) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons given below, the Court will deny the defenda...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Mulvenna (“Mulvenna”) claims that he was permanently disabled by an acute anterior wall myocardial infarction. 1 Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan (“Secretary”) denied Mulvenna’s claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423. 2 Mulvenna has appealed that decision and now moves for su...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision (Director) seeks summary judgment in this action arising from a complaint filed by First American Federal Bank (First American) challenging the Director’s appointment of a receiver for First American.
Following oral argument and a separate evidentiary hearing, the Court has under advisement the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgmen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The United States Trust Company (“US Trust”), at the request of Central Savings Bank (“Central”), issued a letter of credit in favor of NCC Leasing, Inc. (“NCC”). The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), as receiver for the now insolvent Central, seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent NCC from collecting under the letter of credit from US Trust. The issue raised b...
Views: 0
ORDER
The court now considers plaintiff’s objection to the February 20, 1992, Report and Recommendation (R & R) of the magistrate judge which concluded that plaintiff’s motion for remand should be denied.
Background
Plaintiff originally brought this suit in state court to perfect a labor and materials lien for unpaid goods and services rendered to Eagle Square Realty Trust (“Eagle”). The suit h...
Views: 0
ORDER In this case the United States has appealed from the denial of its motion for relief from an ex parte order from the bankruptcy court, Honorable John T. Laney, III, presiding, directing that any tax refunds due to the debtor be paid directly to the U.S. Trustee as provided in the debtor’s Chapter 13 plan. After the original income deduction order was issued pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1325(...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant pled guilty to a conspiracy to obstruct commerce.
See
the ineptitude detailed in the companion case of
United States v. Vasquez,
791 F.Supp. 348 (E.D.N.Y.1992). He moves for an adjustment in offense levels under the Sentencing Guidelines and for a downward departure. For the reasons stated below, the offense level is adjusted down and a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CAME ON TO BE HEARD this day the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment, and the court, after considering the motion, the plaintiffs’ response, the defendants’ reply, and all affidavits and exhibits is of the opinion that the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment should be DENIED. The court fin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case involves the validity of the copyright on J.R.R. Tolkien’s three-part novel
The Lord of the Rings
(“the work”).
1
The operative facts are undisputed.
Plaintiff, a book packaging firm specializing in arranging for new editions of previously published material, seeks declarations that any U.S. copyright on the work is invalid, that its o...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1552 (1992)
PROTECT KEY WEST, INC., a Florida Not-for-Profit Corporation, d/b/a Last Stand, Plaintiff,
v.
Richard CHENEY, Secretary of Defense of the United States of America, H. Lawrence Garrett III, as Secretary of the Navy, and Admiral Frank B. Kelso, as Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, Defendants.
No. 91-10054-CIV-KING.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
Ma...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are before the Court on their motion to add the State of Illinois as a necessary party pursuant to Rule 19(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 19(a) reads:
A person who is subject to service of process and whose joinder will not deprive the court of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action shall be joined as a party in th...
Views: 0
Page 8024
MEMORANDUM
The law firm of Fox and Fox, counsel for the debtor in this Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, appeals from the January 17, 1992 Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court, disallowing and modifying its request for approval of counsel fees totaling $880 for representing the debtor in a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. The appeal is unopposed. For the reasons set forth below, the appeal shall be ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs are asking this court to set aside a determination by the Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) that the New Hanover Corporation (“NHC”) qualifies for a federal permit that would allow the filling of wetlands in order to construct a municipal waste landfill (“Landfill”) in New Hanover Township. Plaintiffs allege that the Corps’ determination that NHC had satisfied the requi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs are various organizations, businesses and individuals, who depend directly or indirectly on the timber industry in the Pacific Northwest and in the Southeast for their livelihood. They challenge two regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior (“the Secretary”) as contrary to the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544 (1988). They ...
Views: 3
OPINION
This is a wrongful death action. Defendants move for summary judgment. For the
*1051
reasons that follow, the motion is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED.
I. BACKGROUND
The material facts of this tragic case are undisputed.
Jeffrey Glockzin (“decedent”) was an employee of defendant Nordyne, Inc. (“Nor-dyne”)
1
, which manufactured heating ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Although we have set out the facts of this case in two previous decisions,
Freer v. Mayer,
No. 91 Civ. 2519, 1991 WL 355062 (S.D.N.Y. April 26, 1991),
Freer v. Mayer,
*90
No. 91 Civ. 2519 (S.D.N.Y. May 8, 1992), we will recite them here in detail.
Progressive Bank, Inc. is a New York holding company whose only subsidiary is the Pawling Savings B...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
The Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) seeks enforcement of three subpoenas duces tecum it served on respondent Grant Thornton (“Grant”), an accounting firm, on August 22 and September 27, 1991. The RTC is investigating Grant to determine Grant’s potential civil liability in connection with Grant’s past audits of three failed savings and loan associations. In. two of those cases, Cit...
Views: 0
OPINION
In bygone days, baseball reigned as America’s favorite pastime. Sadly, this honor seems to now belong to lawsuits. We see it on every front, on the front pages of newspapers, over cable television’s airwaves, and in the public discourse. Too often, the fields of dreams have given way to courtrooms, the drama of sport has dissolved into the wrangling of litigation. This case concerns anoth...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1457 (1992)
Karen FINLEY, John Fleck, Holly Hughes, Tim Miller and National Association of Artists' Organizations, Plaintiffs,
v.
NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS; and John E. Frohnmayer, in his official capacity as Chairperson National Endowment for the Arts, Defendants.
No. CV 90-5236 AWT.
United States District Court, C.D. California.
June 9, 1992.
*1458 *1459 David Cole, Center fo...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff George Jarro’s motion for temporary restraining order. This is an action pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7426 against the United States for wrongful levy by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) on property which is not the taxpayer’s. By the instant motion Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the IRS “from levyin...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a criminal action which originated on 16 June 1989 when an indictment (the “Indictment”) was returned. Defendants Richard 0. Bertoli (“Bertoli”), Leo M. Ei-senberg (“Eisenberg”) and Richard S. Can-nistraro (“Cannistraro”) (collectively the “Defendants”) were named in the Indictment.
1
On 29 September 1989 a six count superseding indictment (the “Superseding Indi...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 151 (1992)
COMPOSIFLEX, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-20 Erie.
United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania.
May 21, 1992.
*152 Norman Stark, MacDonald Illig Jones & Britton, Erie, Pa., for plaintiff.
Kerry A. Kearney, Don Webber, Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
MENCER, District Judge.
Plaintiff Composi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This is an appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court denying Global, Inc.’s (“Global”) attempts to recover $68,000 it paid to Harvey Sender (“trustee”) in order to obtain the trustee’s release of a deed of trust needed to complete the sale of a shopping center in Reno, Nevada. I have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). The deed of trust secured a promissory n...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The original four-count indictment in this case charged that defendant (1) possessed marijuana, intending to distribute it; (2) possessed crack cocaine, intending to distribute it; (3) possessed a semi-automatic pistol in connection with these drug trafficking crimes; and (4) received this pistol while state assault and accessory-to-murder charges were pending again...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Background
Plaintiff Hieu Smith (Smith) moves to amend her third amended complaint to conform to the 1991 Civil Rights Act (Pub.L. 102-166, Nov. 21, 1991, 105 Stat. 1071) (the Act) and for reconsideration of two March 16, 1992 magistrate judge orders. At oral argument Smith withdrew her motion to reconsider the magistrate judge’s order denying her moti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This civil action was removed from the District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado, upon the defendant's contention that the plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract, negligence and outrageous conduct are preempted by the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. § 11707. Accordingly, the defendant moved to dismiss those claims. The ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This case is before me on debtor’s appeal from a ruling by the bankruptcy court sustaining the chapter 7 trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of exemption. The bankruptcy court held that when a chapter 13 case is converted to one under chapter 7, exemption law in effect as of conversion date is controlling, not exemption law as of date of initial chapter 13 fi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by plaintiffs, Samuel P. Leonard (“Leonard”) and Tim Boardwine (“Board-wine”), two former Russell County deputy sheriffs, against defendant, J. Trigg Fields (“Fields”), the Russell County Sheriff, alleging that they were discharged in violation of their rights under the First Amendment because they exercised their rights of free spe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The issue in this bankruptcy appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in granting the government’s summary judgment motion because the debtor, Dale Lenard, failed to file a timely response to the motion. Lenard contends that he did not file a formal response because his counsel misinterpreted a new notice of hearing form issued by the bankruptcy clerk. In ...
Views: 1
ORDER Plaintiff instituted the above-styled civil action pro se on May 27,1992. A review of the Complaint demonstrates that jurisdiction is premised upon 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1343, and the doctrine of Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). Plaintiff seeks leave from the Court to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. In lig...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on appeal from the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, entered January 7, 1992. Lloyd C. March petitioned for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 11 on November 11, 1991, in the Eastern District of Virginia. David R. Kittay is the trustee for Stock-bridge Funding Corp. (hereinafter “Stock-bridge...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 15). The defendant argues that plaintiff’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations. In response to the motion for summary judgment, plaintiff does not dispute that the statute of limitations has expired on its claim. Rather, the plaintiff argues that the defendant is equitably es-topped...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs motion to amend (Doc. 156). Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint to delete the names of Julie Ann Brooks-Mays and Lee Brooks, Operator, and to substitute the name of Lee Brooks as sole plaintiff. The defendants have objected to the requested amendment, arguing that it is untimely, frivolous, without real effect, and futile. A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s application for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 19). Plaintiff requests a total fee in the amount of $880.00 (11.75 hours X $75.00 per hour). The Secretary has filed an opposition to the application for attorney fees. Plaintiff applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits on December 8, 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for approval of attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1) (Doc. 17). Plaintiff seeks an order approving fees in the amount of $4,578.75, which equals 25% of the retroactive benefits due plaintiff. The Secretary has objected to the plaintiff’s motion, and argues that a reasonable fee would be achieved by multiplying th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for relief from order (Doc. 161). Plaintiff seeks relief from two orders of Magistrate Judge Reid dated March 2, 1992 and April 17, 1992. Those two orders imposed sanctions against plaintiff’s counsel, Tom L. Schwinn, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(f) because of counsel’s failure to complete the pretrial order in a timely...
Views: 0
*842MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s application for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 28). Plaintiff requests a total fee in the amount of $4,893.75 (65.25 hours X $75.00 per hour). The Secretary has filed an opposition to the application for attorney fees. Plaintiff first applied for disabled widow’s benefits on July 16, 1984. Plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the intervenors’ motion for determination of workers’ compensation lien (Attachment to Doc. 54). Intervenors Travelers Insurance and National Carriers seek a determination of the amount due them pursuant to their workers’ compensation lien. The jury trial in this matter resulted in a jury verdict in favor of Clark in the amount of $302,000. A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, we will deny plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff Platt College of Commerce, Inc. (“Platt”), which has its main campus in St. Joseph, Missouri, is a for-profit provider of post-secondary educational courses. In addition to its ca...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In the spring of 1991, the Census Bureau furnished the State of Wisconsin with a detailed breakdown of the results of the 1990 decennial census. The breakdown showed that as a result of population shifts since the 1980 decennial census, the Wisconsin legislature was malapportioned — the shifts had produced large discrepancies in population between districts. The shifts h...
Views: 2
ORDER In November, 1990, Benjamin Gibson petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In this petition, Gibson alleged numerous grounds for relief, but only his claim that the admission of statements he made to a jailhouse informant violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel is at issue today. On direct appeal from Gibson’s conviction, the Illinois Appellate Court held t...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court are the plaintiff’s motion to enter judgment on the jury verdict and the defendant’s motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, for a mistrial, and for a new trial. For reasons that follow, the plaintiffs motion is granted and all of the defendant’s motions are denied.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Robert A. Vaillancourt (“Vaillancourt”), an engineer with th...
Views: 1
ORDER
The plaintiffs, Sandra Willis and Marvell Manns, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 against Jim Edgcomb, Treasurer of Macon County, in his individual and official capacity. The complaint alleges that Edgcomb discriminated against the plaintiffs, both black women, based on their race,1 political affiliation, and union support. Since the filing of the complaint, Sandra Willis ha...
Views: 0
ORDER
On November 6, 1991, a grand jury indicted Kenneth L. Nevius, F.J. Vollmer and Co., Inc. (F.J. Vollmer), Robert W. Vollmer, James B. McCabe and Dana R. Hales in an eighteen count indictment stemming from the sales of Steyr-Mannlicher model AUG-SA (Steyr AUG-SA) assault rifles. A grand jury issued a superseding indictment against the defendants on December 4,
*611
1991. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants Thomas Carney, Jr. and Arlene Carney have moved to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion must be denied.
BACKGROUND
For purposes of a motion to dismiss, the facts alleged in the complaint are accepted as true.
Cameron v. Fogarty,
705 F.2d 676, 678 (2d Cir.1983),
cert. denied,
481 U.S. ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action arising under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and principles of state common law. In broad strokes, the litigation focuses on the seizure and liquidation by Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Bear Stearns” or “defendant”) of the accounts of the plaintiffs, Pompano-Win...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The determinative issue is whether or not the one-year bar on removal of diversity cases found at 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) is jurisdictional. Because I conclude that it is, plaintiffs’ motion to remand, though untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), must be granted.
I.
Factual and Procedural Background
The defendant contends that the plaintiffs have obviously ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Having held a trial without a jury in the above styled action, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
I. FACTS
On April 28, 1989, the eighteen year old plaintiff, David Sumner, his older brother, Michael, and their friend, William “Junior” Miles, Jr., travelled in Miles’ car into an area known as the rear area of the Fort Campbell army ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court to consider the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. This action, brought by a “manufacturers’, representative” against one of the manufacturers it represented for a period of approximately 8 years, includes claims for breach of contract, wrongful termination of an agency agreement, unjust enrichment, and quantum me...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on remand from the Eighth Circuit, 960 F.2d 762 (1992), for reconsideration of an order dismissing plaintiff’s claims as untimely. Based on a review of the file and record, the court reaffirms its prior dismissal.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff brought the present action alleging that defendant refused to hire him because of his disability, in violati...
Views: 0
OPINION
I think that I shall never see a lawsuit as lovely as a tree. One may well wonder whether this would have been the opening of Joyce Kilmer’s poem had his experience with trees included an intimate association with this case. While trees may indeed make lovely poems, they lose some of their aesthetic appeal when made the subject of litigation.
*1198
We return to the c...
Views: 0
Defendants, individuals employed at the Nassau County Medical Center and by the New York State Office of Mental Health, have filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. The parties were informed that the Court would treat the motion as one for summary judgment. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion for summary judgment must be granted. FACT...
Views: 1
*797MEMORANDUM Pro se prisoner plaintiff filed a § 1983 action alleging violation of his Eighth Amendment rights with regard to the medical care he has received while incarcerated in the Missouri Eastern Correctional Center. Plaintiff alleges that his medical needs are not being adequately attended to because of insufficient fiscal budgets. This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ motion...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
This is an action for a wrongful levy, pursuant to Section 7426(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (26 U.S.C.) (hereinafter the “Code”) and 28 U.S.C. Section 1346(e). The plaintiffs seek (1) an injunction prohibiting the IRS from selling at public auction, a truck used by the taxpayer, Duncan Contractors, Inc. (“Duncan”), (2) a determination of the priority...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs’ objections (Filing No. 18) to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge (Filing No. 17), wherein it was recommended that plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Filing No. 10) be denied and that defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Filing No. 8) be granted. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Court h...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT This is an appeal from the Memorandum and Order (filed Oct. 2, 1991), 132 B.R. 226, (“Memorandum and Order”) of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, Alan H.W. Shiff, Judge, denying a declaratory judgment in Henry W. Bishop v. United States of America Internal Revenue Service and Richard Bel-ford, Trustee, Adv. ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 528 (1992)
Sebastian SHAUMYAN, et al.
v.
Shawn Mark O'NEILL, et al.
Civ. No. N-87-463 (AHN).
United States District Court, D. Connecticut.
May 28, 1992.
Joanne S. Faulkner, New Haven, Conn., for plaintiffs.
Carl Amento, New Haven, Conn., Matthew Karanian, Halloran & Sage, Hartford, Conn., for defendants.
RULING ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
NEVAS, District Judge.
This is a civil...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
On October 31, 1991, Imam Abd’Allah Halim Abdul Akbar, also known as Phillip M. Hudson, currently incarcerated at the Waupun Correctional Institution (Waupun), filed a petition to proceed in forma pauper-is seeking redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, Mr. Akbar demands redress from various prison officials at Waupun for alleged constitutional violations concern...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
On April 25, 1991, plaintiff Luis Veltze, presently a citizen of Bolivia, commenced this action in the circuit court for Milwaukee county against his former employer, Bucyrus-Erie Company. On May 20, 1991, the defendant, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in South Milwaukee, Wisconsin, removed the action on the ground that diversity of citizensh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Currently pending before this Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Background
A. The Parties
Plaintiff Hamilton Holding Company (“Hamilton”) owns 100% of plaintiff Ensign Financial Corporation (“Financial”), which in turn owns 100% of the stock of defenda...
Views: 1
ENTRY
On August 26, 1988, plaintiffs Corbitt and Lettie Pittman’s residence and its contents were severely damaged by fire. The plaintiffs carried a homeowner’s insurance policy with defendant Republic Franklin Insurance Company (“Republic”). The plaintiffs submitted their proofs of loss to Republic in December, 1988. Republic subsequently honored Lettie Pittman’s claim, and this court en...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 840 (1992)
Fred MIRON, Plaintiff,
v.
MENOMINEE COUNTY, Marinette County, Menominee-Marinette Twin County Airport Commission, James B. Busey and Federal Aviation Administration, Defendants,
and
City of Menominee, Michigan, and Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Intervening Defendants.
No. 2:92-CV-22.
United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, N.D.
April 24, 1992.
*841 Thomas ...
Views: 0
*58
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In a nine count indictment returned on February 12, 1992, defendant Kenneth R. Lonzo is charged with participation in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine.
1
Sometime in the late evening hours of February 12, 1992 or the early morning hours of February 13, 1992, an arrest warrant for Lonzo was issued and soon thereafter he was arrested a...
Views: 0
ORDER ON F.J. VOLLMER AND COMPANY, INC. POST TRIAL MOTIONS A jury found the defendant, F.J. Vollmer and Co. (F.J. Vollmer), guilty of one count of conspiracy and three counts of mail fraud. F.J. Vollmer has moved for a judgment of acquittal (docket # 83) or, in the alternative, for a new trial on all four counts, (docket # 85) For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied. BACKGROUND Th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner George Del Vecchio seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 concerning his conviction and sentence of death resulting from a 1979 trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. FACTS The following facts are taken from the Illinois Supreme Court’s opinions in People v. Del Vecchio, 105 Ill.2d 414, 86 Ill.Dec. 461, 465-66, 475 N.E.2d 84...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
This case is before the court on Richard Rossmiller’s (“debtor”) appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court entering a default judgment against the debtor as a sanction for his failure to comply with the court’s discovery orders. The debtor asserts that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion in entering the default order and in refusing to reconsider th...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court for consideration of claimant Hall Eskew’s motion to dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
BACKGROUND
Benjamin Bird is the owner of a thirty-four foot Wellcraft power boat named REALITY. On August 3, 1991, Mr. Bird, Hall Eskew, Gregg Highland, and two unnamed women boarded REALITY for a pleasure voyage. The group ancho...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on several motions. Hereinbelow are the rulings and determinations of the Court.
I.
Plaintiff, Marc A. Greidinger, is a resident of Stafford County, Virginia. On July 24, 1991, Plaintiff filled out a Virginia voter registration application card in the local Registrar’s office in Stafford County. He omitted his social security nu...
Views: 0
ORDER
On February 3, 1992, this court entered an order, upon motion of the plaintiffs, reinstating the plaintiffs’ federal securities claims under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“the 1934 Act”). Subsequently, the court learned that the defendant had been granted an extension of time in which to file a response to the plaintiffs’ motion for reinstatement. Th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before this court are motions for summary judgment filed by defendant Dell Publishing Company, Inc. (“Dell”) and defendant Daring Books (“Daring”), and a motion to dismiss filed by G. Lee Tippin. For the following reasons, the motions for summary judgment and to dismiss will be granted.
1
FACTS
Defendants Charles J. Patterson and G. Lee Tippi...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1212 (1992)
PUBLIC CITIZEN, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-0326.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
May 28, 1992.
Patti A. Goldman, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
Gail Walker, Civ. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THOMAS F. HOGAN, District Judge.
This case is bro...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS
Defendants have filed motions which present issues about unsettled areas of law; that is, the constitutional authority of the United States to investigate, intercept and prosecute drug activities occurring outside the United States.
I.
The six defendants in this case were on board a vessel, the Malekula, headed from Southeast Asia to Canada. As a res...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Alan E. Rosenthal (“Rosenthal”) was charged on May 9, 1991, in a multi-count indictment for acts arising out of his position in Drexel Burnham Lambert Incorporated's (“Drexel”) High Yield and Convertible Bond Department. Michael R. Milken and David B. Solomon (“Solomon”) were named as unindicted co-conspirators. Of particular relevance to this application is the charge that t...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
These cases were brought by the plaintiffs to enforce the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. They were consolidated, and a non-jury trial was held from April 27 to April 30, 1992. Judgment having been rendered at the conclusion of the trial for the defendant in each case, the court now issues the following Memorandum Opinion.
Background
The Mainland...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Taisho Marine and Fire Insurance Company, Limited (“Taisho”) as subrogee of Hamai Machine Tools of America, Inc. (“Hamai”) sues Maersk Line, Inc. (“Maersk Line”), Bridge Terminal Transport, Inc. (“Bridge Terminal”) and the vessel M/V Arnold Maersk (the “Vessel”) (defendants will be collectively referred to as “Maersk,” treated for convenience as a singular nou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Kevin King is a convicted murdered who filed a pro se petition in this court for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Mr. King was convicted on June 17, 1985 of the murder of Arthur Warren and sentenced to thirty years in prison. Respondent has moved to dismiss on the grounds of exhaustion and procedural default. As outlined and explained below, the court requests ...
Views: 0
*521MEMORANDUM OPINION
Domingo Guevara sued Maritime Overseas Corporation under the Jones Act and general maritime law for injuries he sustained while on board the OVERSEAS PHILADELPHIA. The jury found that Maritime was negligent, that the PHILADELPHIA was unseaworthy, and that Maritime’s negligence and the PHILADELPHIA’S unseaworthiness were the proximate cause of Guevara’s injuries. The jury fo...
Views: 0
ENTRY
This litigation involves alleged violations of state and federal securities laws as well as various state common law claims. Plaintiff Ross Pyle filed his original complaint in the Marion Superior Court, Civil Division, on July 24, 1989. The defendants
*382
subsequently removed the case to this court. On January 10, 1990, the plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint. Disco...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This cause is before the Court on the following: Dkt. 15, Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment; Dkt. 17, Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment; Dkt. 18, Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment; Dkt. 22, Defendant’s Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion ...
Views: 0
This action alleges violations of the federal securities laws and RICO
1
against various entities which are part of the enterprise known as Lloyd’s of London. The 91 investor-plaintiffs allege that solicitation of investor/underwriters in the United States by Lloyd’s agents constitutes “sale of securities” and that Lloyd’s syndicates are “issuers” within the meaning of the securities...
Views: 2
Sitting by Designation. This matter is before the court on appellant Farmers State Bank, Grafton, Iowa’s (Farmers State) appeal of an order of the bankruptcy court, entered May 22, 1991, which denied Farmers State’s objections to *406 debtor’s claim of exemption. Appel-lee/debtor resists appellant’s appeal and urges the court to affirm the bankruptcy-court’s decision. Both sides have filed br...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the court upon Federal Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 27 in Civil File No. 3-89-517; Docket No. 18 in Civil File No. 3-90-673), the Bureau of Engraving, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 15 in Civil File No. 3-89-517; Docket No. 22 in Civil File No. 3-90-673), and upon the Bureau’s mo...
Views: 3
795 F.Supp. 281 (1992)
Adrienne GOBUTY and Michael Gobuty, Plaintiffs,
v.
Brian F. KAVANAGH, M.D., Mayo Clinic, St. Mary's Hospital, Defendants.
ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL, Counter-Claimant,
v.
Adrienne GOBUTY, Counter-Defendant.
Civ. No. 4-91-380.
United States District Court, D. Minnesota, Fourth Division.
June 1, 1992.
*282 Allan F. Shapiro, Goff, Kaplan, Wolf & Shapiro, North St. Paul, Minn., fo...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Having held a trial without a jury in the above styled action, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
1
I. FACTS
Raymond L. Jenkins is the president of Murfreesboro Truck Sales (Murfreesboro Truck Sales), Inc. His grandson, Hugh R. Startup, Jr., began working for Murfrees-boro Truck Sales in 1981 at the age of fourteen. At t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On November 4, 1991, the Court heard oral argument on the following motions:
1. Motion of defendant Trans-Alaska Pipeline Liability Fund (“Fund”) for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. Rule 12(c) on the claims asserted in CV 91-334 by State Fish Company, Inc. and Qualy Pak Foods, Inc. and in CV 90-722 by Nitta d/b...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This cause is before the Court on a motion to dismiss complaint filed by Defendant, Ocean Products, on March 23, 1992, and response hereto.
A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that Plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to relief.
Conley v. Gibson,
355 U.S. 41, 45-46,...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 197 (1992)
Dr. Tom JACKSON, Plaintiff,
v.
Dr. RADCLIFFE, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. H-86-4721.
United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division.
April 13, 1992.
*198 *199 *200 Kenneth G. Norman, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
Daniel M. McClure, Stephen R. Kirklin, Mitchell J. Buchman, Jeffrey R. Parsons, Houston, Tex., Richard L. Tate, Richmond, Tex., Kenneth C. Curry, ...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiff Dawson filed this lawsuit for personal injuries in state court. Defendant Wyatt’s removed on the grounds that a suit for benefits under an ERISA plan is preempted. Dawson moved for remand, arguing that the suit arose under the state workers compensation laws and that ERISA did not preempt the suit. Before Dawson moved for remand, the court permitted the Texas Board of In...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Serafín Flores (“Flores”), a prisoner at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”), has submitted a self-prepared Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) against unnamed defendants that he describes as “Cook County Jail Medical Staff” and “Menard Corretion [sic] Center Medical Staff.” Because Flores has not tendered the required filing fee together with his Comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Gary Brockman (incorrectly identified as “Brochman” in the Complaint) and Michael Jensen have moved for summary judgment in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) action brought by George and John Vanderlinde (“Vanderlindes”). Because Vanderlindes have not responded to the motion by filing a- statement under this District Court’s General Rule (“GR”) 12(n) in respons...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 860 (1992)
Roberto RODRIGUEZ, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Biagio GATTUSO, et al., Defendants.
No. 89 C 6151.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
May 29, 1992.
*861 Ramon Muniz, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs.
William E. Dicks, Jr., Chicago, Ill., for defendants.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
SHADUR, District Judge.
Roberto ("Roberto") and Carol ("Carol") Rodriguez ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING BANKRUPTCY COURT’S DECISION
CAME ON TO BE CONSIDERED the appeal by FirstBank of the Bankruptcy Court’s denial of appellant’s lien on Jimmy R. Pope and Janis B. Pope’s home. The court, after reviewing the briefs of the parties, the record, and the exhibits, is of
*117
the opinion that the ruling should be AFFIRMED.
THE SALE
The ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 20, 1991, defendant/third-party plaintiff H.L. Libby Corporation (“H.L. Libby”) filed a motion for leave to file a consolidated amended counterclaim and third-party complaint. The proposed pleading would consolidate all of H.L. Libby’s claims against both the plaintiff and the third-party defendants into a single document. It would also drop all claims against John Luca...
Views: 0
Page 8242
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court attaching welfare benefits under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) Program to fund debtors’ Chapter 13 bankruptcy claims. In each case, the debtor is a recipient of AFDC from appellant, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW), and in each case, the debtor sought to use a portion of the mont...
Views: 0
*886 ORDER This matter is before the court on appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Bankruptcy Rules 8001 and 8002. Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 8013, on appeal the district court shall not set aside the findings of fact of. the bankruptcy court unless clearly erroneous. The defendants-appellants have appealed the order of the Honorable William Thu...
Views: 0
*688MEMORANDUM
This is an appeal from an Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court dated June 18, 1991 granting in part Appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees. Appellant, Alfred G. Mattera, filed a motion for attorney’s fees after his chapter 13 bankruptcy case settled. Appellant sought attorney’s fees of $18,450.50 plus $1,527.26 for costs against each of the three sets of defendants jointly a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Matthew E. Jackson, Jr., an attorney who is representing himself, initiated the above-captioned case on February 1, 1985. On July 1, 1991, the court ordered Mr. Jackson to produce certain federal income tax returns to the defendant University of Pittsburgh (the “University”). On October 15, 1991, the court again issued an order requiring production of the income tax re...
Views: 0
782 F. Supp. 42 (1992)
James KEELER, Plaintiff,
v.
Ray A. PEA, Supervior of the Dutchman Correctional Institution, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 7:90-127-20H.
United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Spartanburg Division.
January 9, 1992.
*43 James Keeler, pro se.
Barbara Bowens, Staff Atty., South Carolina Dept. of Corrections, for defendant.
ORDER
HERLONG, District Judge.
The plaintiff, James...
Views: 0
The question presented by the instant motion to suspend legal action is whether the mandatory stay provided by 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(12) may remain in place more than 90 days after the Resolution Trust
*1153
Corporation (“RTC”) is appointed Receiver of an insured depository institution.
I
Plaintiff Oslin Nation (“Nation”) filed suit in Texas state court seeking to recover j...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Lauritz A. Williams (“Williams”) filed a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on June 2,1992, requesting this Court to require the Austin Independent School District (“AISD”) to allow his son, Lauritz A. Williams, Jr., (“Williams, Jr.”) to participate in the McCallum High School Graduation Ceremony on June 3, 1992. Because Williams, Jr. would not be allowed ...
Views: 0
SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER AND REASONS
Defendant Oklahoma Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association (“OIGA”) filed a motion on May 14, 1992, for an expedited hearing on a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on the issue of subject matter jurisdiction. On May 20, 1992, Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) filed a similar motion on the issue of s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff in this case manufactures computer hardware. The defendants are Army officials who are responsible for procuring computer equipment that the Army needs for a particular intelligence project. Plaintiff filed this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief after the defendants determined that the procurement would not be bid under the small business set-a...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon The Travelers Insurance Company’s Notice of Removal. After carefully considering the propriety of permitting Travelers, a third-party defendant, to remove the above-styled action in its entirety to this federal court, the Court finds that removal by Travelers is not permissible. Accordingly, the Court will remand the cause to the state court...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT QUIGLEY’S MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Where is the dwelling house or usual place of abode of a young person who has recently graduated from college, has left home and is serving on board ship in the Military Sealift Command for most of the year and spends his time off visiting various relatives and vacationing in different parts of the country or abroad? That is the quest...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Count Three of the pending indictment against Thomas Pitera charges him with violating 21 U.S.C. § 848(e)(1)(A), a crime for which the maximum possible sentence is death. Defendant’s constitutional challenges to the death penalty are addressed in a separate memorandum and order filed today.
As discussed in that memorandum, the government is required by law to adv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Thomas Pitera stands before the court charged in a twenty count indictment with racketeering, drug trafficking, and various firearms violations. Count Three of the indictment accuses Mr. Pitera of killing two persons, Richard Leone and Solomon Stern, while engaging in or working in furtherance of a continuing criminal enterprise. Such conduct carries a possible senten...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in these actions have styled as “repetitive stress injury” (RSI) cases a number of suits for injuries allegedly caused by the routine use of computers, adding machines, supermarket checkout scanners and other mechanical and electrical devices. They have moved to consolidate 44 such cases now pending in the Eastern District, claiming that the cases represent the van...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 1028 (1992)
Nicholas T. SCOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. 92-00011 ACK.
United States District Court, D. Hawaii.
June 4, 1992.
*1029 Nicholas T. Scott, pro se.
Daniel Bent, Michael Chun, U.S. Attorney's Office, Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendants.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
KAY, Chief J...
Views: 4
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR TRANSFER ACTION TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Defendants American Hawaii Cruises, Inc., American Hawaii Cruises, A Joint Venture, American Global Lines, Inc. and the S.S. Constitution (hereinafter collectively referred to as “defendants”) motion to dismiss or transfer action to the United States District Court for ...
Views: 2
ORDER
Plaintiff Ralph J. Miller brings this “hybrid”
1
action against USPS for breach of contract and NRLCA for breach of its duty of fair representation. Jurisdiction is based on 39 U.S.C. § 1208(b).
2
Presently before the court are all parties’ respective motions for summary judgment.
Factual
Background
3
Plaintiff began working for USPS ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case arose out of Plaintiff Fleet Bank of Maine (“Plaintiff” or “Fleet Bank”)
1
seeking foreclosure of realty owned by Defendants John Matthews and Jacqueline Norton (“Defendants”), that was provided as collateral for a promissory note (“Note” or “1985 Note”) dated May 28, 1985 in the principal amount of $52,000 for which they were comakers.
See
Exhibit ...
Views: 0
Page 8314
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DECREE OF FORFEITURE This is a civil forfeiture action in which the Plaintiff, the United States of America, seeks the forfeiture of the Defendants in rem pursuant to provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 981 and 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6). The claimants of record herein are Patrick S. Cunan and Prestige Precious Metals, Inc., a corporation which holds titl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
This case involves the interpretation of 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a). That statute provides that a United States district court may, upon the application of any interested person, order a person residing in the district to give testimony or a statement or to produce documents for use in a foreign proceeding. The question here is to what degree this discretionary authority shou...
Views: 2
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiffs, United States Senators William S. Cohen and George J. Mitchell, United States Representative Olympia J.
*1002
Snowe, Governor John R. McKernan, Jr., the Towns of Limestown, Ashland, Caswell, Fort Fairfield, Mars Hill, New Sweden, Van Burén, the Cities of Caribou and Presque Isle, Aroostook County, the Save Loring Committee, Paul D....
Views: 0
Page 8317
OPINION AND ORDER ON STIPULATED RECORD
This case involves an interpleader action initiated by Centex-Simpson Construction Company, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “Centex”) against Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland (“Fidelity”), The Fels Company, Inc. (“Fels”), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”).
1
Fidelity filed on
*37
March 25, 1991, a counterclaim ...
Views: 1
*81 ORDER Plaintiff’s decedent Jeremy Derron Fahl, was visiting the Grand Canyon with his brother Kevin on July 1, 1989. The brothers made reservations to eat dinner at the Bright Angel Lodge at 9:45 P.M. and they went their separate ways planning to meet at the restaurant for their reservation. Jeremy failed to appear at the restaurant at the appointed time and Kevin began to search for him....
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 1020 (1992)
Sabil M. MUJAHID aka Terry Smith, Plaintiff,
v.
Howard APAO, Cheryl Zembik, and Tera Harper, Defendants.
Civ. No. 91-00213 HMF.
United States District Court, D. Hawaii.
June 3, 1992.
*1021 Sabil M. Mujahid, pro se.
Warren Price, III, Atty. Gen., State of Hawaii, Thomas D. Farrell, Deputy Atty. Gen., Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART MAGISTRATE JUDG...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action was brought by the parents of a deceased seaman alleging negligence under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688 and unseaworthiness under general maritime law. This case is within the admiralty and general maritime jurisdiction of this Court.
On February 17, 1992, the defendants filed a motion and opening brief for summary judgment. Defendants contend that summary judgme...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 702 (1992)
Anna FREUND, Ruth Arnold, Alice Laughlin, Joseph Pikus, Kathryn A. Smith, Kenneth Benson, Evelyn Borgen, Donald Mintz, Meyer Schreiber, Albert C. Shaw, H. Williard Stern, Lilyan B. Wright, Robert W. Harper, Plaintiffs,
v.
James J. FLORIO, Edward D. Goldberg, Herman James, William Maxwell, Elsa Gomez, Irvin Reid, Robert A. Scott, Vera King Farris, George Pruitt, Harld W. Ei...
Views: 0
OPINION
The parties are presently before the court upon motion of defendants Donald J. Trump, Robert S. Trump, Harvey S. Freeman, The Trump Organization Inc., Taj Ma-hal Funding Inc., Trump Taj Mahal Inc., and Trump Taj Mahal Associates Limited (collectively “the Trump defendants”) and defendant Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith (“Merrill Lynch”) for dismissal with prejudice, pursu...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1986, plaintiff Jim Dan, Inc. (“Jim Dan”) purchased a golf course. Although the plaintiff had no prior experience with a full-size golf course, the president of the company had owned a restaurant, a miniature golf course, and a driving range for fifteen years.
The greens on the plaintiff’s golf course have a history of crabgrass infestation. In 1985 and 1986, Ji...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the court is a motion by the defendant, Advance Transformer, Inc. (“Advance”), requesting a protective order that would strike plaintiff Perkasie Industries Corp.’s (“Perkasie") supplemental responses to defendant’s expert witness interrogatories. Perkasie’s supplemental responses identified three expert witnesses upon whose testimony it is prepared to rely to establis...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), defendant, Fahnestock & Co., Inc., filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. Having considered the parties’ briefs, I will grant Fahnestock’s motion.
*32
I. BACKGROUND
This motion is the latest episode in a long running drama. The story began when Fahnestock discharged Joseph Waltman in December, 1988. B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION By a Report and Recommendation dated November 27, 1991, United States Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell recommended the dismissal of Stanton T. Story’s in forma pauperis complaint alleging a civil rights violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Story filed an Objection to the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation dated December 4, 1991. After a careful and independent review of...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Following a one day non-jury trial, the court, based on the record and the evidence *510presented, makes, from its front row center seat, the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exi...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
On August 14, 1991, the plaintiff, Milwaukee Concrete Studios, commenced the above-captioned action alleging copyright infringement under the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. The defendants, Fjeld Manufacturing and Janice Krueger, filed a motion to dismiss the action for improper venue, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion was gr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is before the Court on defendants’ motion for separate trials and bifurcation of discovery pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 42(b). For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an altercation that occurred between the plaintiffs and several of the defendants on April 30, 1989, outside Yankee Stadium in the Bronx. ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A class of private plaintiffs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought two civil rights actions in 1973 against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (“NMDU” or “Union”) and more than fifty news publishers and distributors within the Union’s jurisdiction. Both suits charged that the Union, with the acquiescence of the p...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 216 (1992)
PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
James G. ALTMAN, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-70698.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
June 3, 1992.
*217 Francis Ortiz, Dickinson Wright, Detroit, Mich., for plaintiff.
Mayer B. Gordon, Southfield, Mich., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR BACKPAY
Plaintiffs filed their complaint April 10, 1973. Plaintiffs filed the instant motion for backpay March 16, 1992. Defendants filed their reply April 15, 1992. Plaintiffs have not filed a reply.
I
This case involves sex discrimination by the Detroit Police Department [“DPD”] against four plaintiff classes of female police officers and applic...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 210 (1992)
Adam J. MAIDA, Plaintiff,
v.
RETIREMENT AND HEALTH SERVICES CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 91-CV-72950-DT.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
May 29, 1992.
*211 David Hipp, Detroit, Mich., for plaintiff.
Robert Carson, Birmingham, Mich., Paul Erickson, Baltimore, Md., for defendant.
COHN, District Judge.
I.
This is an action to quiet title. Plaintiff, Adam J. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
This is a case brought pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1601
et seq.
Plaintiff, Lynn Green (Green) says defendant, Thomas D. Hocking (Hocking), who is an attorney, misstated in a civil complaint and an amended complaint filed in a local court the amount of money she owed her creditor, Lee Acceptance Corp. (Lee)...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reinstate Section 10(b) claims dismissed by Order of this Court on September 25, 1991. At issue is the constitutionality of § 476 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act, Pub.L. No. 102-242, 105 Stat. 2387 (1991).
1
The Court finds that § 476, which adds § 27A to the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, is u...
Views: 0
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
This matter came before the Court upon a motion by the plaintiffs for summary judgment pursuant to. F.R.Civ.P. Rule 56. The essential question to be decided is whether the United States Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter referred to as “IRS”) perfected hens in five specified parcels of real property located- in Davidson County, Tennessee, by virtue of notices of federal ta...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court has before it the parties’ objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, dated November 1, 1991 (“Remand Report”). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has conducted a
de novo
review of the record. Our sole point of departure from the Remand Report is our finding that the unclean hands of defendant Be...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendants Appraisal Group International (“Appraisal Group”) and Irwin J. Stein-berg (“Steinberg”) have moved to dismiss the claims against them pursuant to Rule 12(b)(5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This action is related to the Integrated Resources Real Estate Limited Partnerships Securities Litigation, M.D.L. 897, S.D.N.Y. Misc. 21-61. For the reasons set forth below, Appra...
Views: 0
795 F.Supp. 1152 (1992)
Jesse ETHREDGE, Plaintiff,
v.
Robert HAIL, Deputy Base Commander of Robins Air Force Base, in his official capacity as an officer and agent of the United States Air Force, an agency of the United States of America, Defendant.
Civ. No. 92-187-2-MAC(DF).
United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Macon Division.
June 5, 1992.
*1153 Gerald R. Weber, ACLU of Georgia, Atlanta,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This copyright infringement action was originally brought by plaintiffs Ray Repp and K- & R Music Inc. (“Repp”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (the “Illinois District Court”). On defendants’ motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the action was transferred to this Court. Repp now moves under § 1404(a) to h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Professional incivility has become an issue of particular concern within the Seventh Circuit and the Northern District of Illinois. Final Report of the Committee on Civility of the Seventh Federal Judicial Circuit, at 3-5 (June 1992) [hereinafter “Final Report”];
see also Castillo v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.,
938 F.2d 776, 779 (7th Cir.1991)....
Views: 2
In this suit alleging securities fraud, common law fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, the defendants, Time Warner Inc. and four individual officers of the company,
1
move to dismiss the amended class action complaint
2
under Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., on the grounds that plaintiffs have alleged neither material misstatements nor material omissions and that...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff's motion to amend her complaint is before the Court. This is an employment discrimination case. Plaintiff seeks to amend her complaint to include additional allegations arising out of a recent decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Plaintiff additionally seeks to amend her cause of action pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Defendant contests...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Stone, Corbin, Brookover, and Good (hereafter collectively “Stone”) bring this action seeking a declaration that the congressional redistricting plan enacted by the West Virginia Legislature during its 1991 special session, codified as amended at West Virginia Code Chapter One, Article Two, Section Three (hereafter West Va. Code § 1-2-3), is unconstitutional. They ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
In this action, plaintiffs Sidney and Sheila Kauffman seek to recover, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8371 (Purdon’s Supp.1991), for the alleged bad faith conduct of defendant Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (Aetna) during the course of previous litigation between the same parties in this court. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. Aetna has moved for summary judgme...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 921 (1992)
Phyllis LIVINGSTON, Bert Mason, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
ITT CONSUMER FINANCIAL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, Thorp Credit and Thrift, a Minnesota Corporation; Aetna Finance, a Wisconsin Corporation; and ITT Financial Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants.
No. 3-91 CIV 809.
United States District Court, D. Minnesota, Third Division...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This is a suit to enforce a French judicially affirmed arbitration award pursuant to treaty.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On January 26, 1980 plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract under which defendant agreed to build certain vessels for plaintiff, a West German shipowner. Defendant was a state owned Romanian foreign trading company engaged in shipbuilding, whic...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER In this bankruptcy case, a customer of a securities firm in bankruptcy seeks to pursue a class action against the debtor firm, based upon that firm’s use of a distant bank for payments to customers of the firm, allegedly in order to delay payments to the profit of the debtor. In In re Thomson McKinnon Securities, Inc., 133 B.R. 39 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (hereinafter the “Opinion,”)...
Views: 0
OPINION
I
This case involves the issue of whether a patent on a pharmaceutical product can be sustained where information containing test results on a given species of animals contrary to the results intended to occur in humans, was deliberately withheld from the patent examiner, and was not reflected in the patent as issued. This opinion contains my findings of fact and conclusions ...
Views: 1
*141
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, plaintiff’s Response, and defendant’s Reply. A hearing on the motion was held on November 12, 1991. The questions presented by this motion are (1) whether plaintiff raises jury issues regarding the establishment of a
Toussaint
“termination for cause” employment contract and, ...
Views: 0
792 F.Supp. 663 (1992)
Fred LOGAN, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
No. 1:92CV8SNL.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, S.D.
June 8, 1992.
*664 Fred Logan, pro se.
Michael A. Price, Asst. U.S. Atty., Cape Girardeau, Mo., for defendant.
ORDER
LIMBAUGH, District Judge.
Pro se plaintiff has filed a claim against the United States averring that his brother received neglige...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before me is defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Because I find that plaintiff’s federal claims must fail, I GRANT defendants’ motion as to those claims, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), I REMAND this case to the Circuit Court for the County of Wayne, State of Michigan.
This is a housing discrimination case brought pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. §§ ...
Views: 0
ORDER OF TRANSFER At a hearing held May 1, 1992, I denied, without prejudice, plaintiffs’ motion to adopt the mental health orders entered in USA v. Michigan, File No. 1:84:CV:63, Honorable Richard A. Enslen, United States District Judge for the Western District of Michigan. I likewise denied, without prejudice, defendants’ motion for this court to relinquish control and supervision of the me...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
On March 20, 1992, the Court heard Plaintiff Joseph Hernandez’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that defendant has not raised a genuine issue that sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for custodial work in a women’s dormitory. The Court orally announced its ruling on the motion during the hearing, but the Court now issues this Memorandum an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Petition of Rickey Bernard Roberts, a person in state custody, for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After a jury trial in December 1985, Petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder, armed sexual battery, armed kidnapping, and two counts of armed robbe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff originally brought this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, [“Title VII”], 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.,
alleging race and sex-based discrimination in her employment with defendant Honeywell. Plaintiff also asserts various state claims. The action was originally filed in the Court of Common Pleas for Franklin County, Ohio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff investors charge defendants with fraudulent conduct in connection with the sale of interests in an oil and gas limited partnership. Plaintiffs allege as a first cause of action “Prospectus and Brochure Fraud” under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). Second Amended Complaint ¶¶ 6-35. Plaintiffs also assert claims of common law fraud...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 519 (1992)
George E. BERARD and Joao S. Almeida, on behalf of themselves and the class of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
ROYAL ELECTRIC, INC., Royal Electric, Inc. Retirement Plan for Salaried Employees, Martin Wright, Jordan Wright, FL Industries, Inc., and FL Industries, Inc. Retirement Plan for Salaried Employees, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 90-367B.
United States Distr...
Views: 1
Plaintiff, John MacDonald brought this wrongful discharge action against defendant, Tandy Corporation. The case was submitted to the jury, which found in favor of Mr. MacDonald. Tandy Corporation moved for judgment
non obstante veredicto
or, in the alternative, for a new trial.
Facts
On October 1, 1986, John J. MacDonald had been employed by Tandy Corporation (Radio Shack) ...
Views: 2
OPINION Plaintiff Joseph Carlucei and third-party defendant Carmine Magnotta owned the Davenport Restaurant in Stamford, Connecticut. The Davenport was organized as a corporation; it is alleged that Magnotta and Carlucei were officers and directors of the corporation in addition to being shareholders. In his complaint, Carlucei alleges that Magnotta was responsible for the management and operat...
Views: 0
*844MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on motions by the government and the defendant, Maurice Ziegler, for reconsideration of the sentence imposed by this court February 28, 1992. For the reasons stated in this order, the government’s motion (Doc. 61) will be denied1 and the defendant’s motion for a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines (Doc. 62) will be granted. As ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On April 7,1992, this matter came before the court for trial of Westchester Fire Insurance Company’s declaratory judgment action. The issue presented is whether a mixture of malathion and diesel fuel used by the defendant City of Pittsburg as a pesticide is a “pollutant” under the terms of a commercial general liability insurance policy issued by the plaintiff to the City. ...
Views: 0
795 F.Supp. 362 (1992)
CATTLE FINANCE COMPANY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
BOEDERY, INC., a/k/a Boerdery, Inc., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-2040-O.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
May 20, 1992.
Joseph R. Colantuono, Polsinelli, White, Vardeman & Shalton, Overland Park, Kan., David Mullin, Steven L. Hoard, Joel R. Hogue, Mullin, Hoard & Brown, Amarillo, Tex., for Cattle Finance Co.
Richa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant American Family Mutual Insurance Company’s (“AFM’s”) motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or in the alternative, to alter or amend a judgment, or in the alternative, for remittitur, or in the alternative, for new trial (Doc. # 1008). Having reviewed the motion, the court is now prepared to rule.
I. Backgr...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the court is the motion of plaintiff for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. In this action, plaintiff asks the court to rule that an invocation and benediction at a high school graduation ceremony violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
This action was filed on May 27, 1992...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In 1987, defendant SMS Sutton, Inc. (“Sutton”) sold a replacement main cylinder for a hydraulic extrusion press to an Israeli company, KLIL Industries, Ltd. (“KLIL”). Defendant Hodgson Steel, Inc. (“Hodg-son”) had manufactured that replacement cylinder. The cylinder later malfunctioned on three occasions, each of which temporarily shut down KLIL’s plant. It eventually had to ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Pamela Habe became a substitute cook with defendant Fort Cherry School District (the “school district”) in April, 1986. In 1987, her son, who was in first grade, began experiencing difficulty in school. Mrs. Habe appeared at a public meeting of the Fort Cherry School Board on March 23, 1987, to complain about the lack of a remedial reading teacher at her son’s...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1364 (1992)
Carl Anthony MAIO, et al.
v.
ADVANCED FILTRATION SYSTEMS, LTD., et al.
Civ. A. No. 86-0899.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
June 17, 1992.
*1365 Alexander Kerr, Hoyle, Morris & Kerr, John P. McShea, Philadelphia, Pa., for Maio.
William J. Lehane, Philadelphia, Pa., for Ernst & Whinney.
Vicki M. Cherkas, Norris D. Wolff, Kleinberg, Kaplan, Wolff &a...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This dispute arises from the renovation of a shopping center in LaValle, Maryland. Defendant H.L. Libby Corp. (“Libby”) was the general contractor for the renovation of that shopping center. Plaintiff Mid-State Electric, Inc. (“Mid-State”) was a Subcontractor for electrical work on that project. Mid-State has asserted two claims against Libby — one for breach of contrac...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDINGS OF FACT This is an employment discrimination case arising under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791, 794a. It was tried by the Court on February 25 and 26, 1992. In addition to plaintiff, a total of ten (10) witnesses testified with the same number appearing for each side. Upon the conclusion of trial, each party submitted findings...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Individual defendants Frank Saenz, Carson Earnest, Henry Gralak, and Steven Ma-chain (collectively, “individual defendants”) have moved to dismiss or strike portions of plaintiff Michael Green’s first amended complaint. 1 As noted below, we grant the motion in part, and deny it in part. Green’s first amended complaint has six counts, all alleged pursuant to 42 U...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for an order requiring defendants to produce transcripts of civil investigative demand (“CID”) depositions. For the reasons stated below the Court will grant in part plaintiffs’ motion and will defer ruling on the remaining portion of plaintiffs’ motion pending submission of information by defendants.
Plaintiffs seek an order requiring defend...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This mortgage foreclosure action was brought in this District Court by the invocation of diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction by mortgagee World Savings and Loan Association (“World Savings”).
1
As always in
*826
these cases, this Court appointed its own special commissioner (in the recent past Alan Mills, Esquire (“Mills”) has been it...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM In McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350, 107 S.Ct. 2875, 97 L.Ed.2d 292 (1987), the Supreme Court rejected the application of the mail fraud statute to schemes designed to defraud citizens of their intangible right to good and honest government. Id., 483 U.S. at 360,107 S.Ct. at 2881-82 (Court limited § 1341 “in scope to the protection of property rights.”) The petitioner Robert Loftu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
By separate Orders dated September 26, 1991, the Bankruptcy Court denied the appellants’ motion to reject an executory contract and granted the appellees’ motion for relief from the automatic stay. The appellants, raising various asserted errors, appeal from the September 26, 1991 Orders. For the reasons that follow, the court will affirm the Orders of the Bankruptcy Court.
...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
On May 31, 1991, the plaintiff, while on probation, filed the above 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint alleging a malicious prosecution, an abuse of process and both procedural and substantive due process violations caused by the defendant district attorney’s participation in a probation revocation proceeding. The defendant has moved for summary judgment asserting that the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM By Information filed on March 2, 1992, the Government charged the defendant Norwood Klotz, as the responsible official of Dar-Nek, Inc., with ten counts of willful failure to file returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. 1 Document 1. On April 10, 1992, the Government filed a motion in limine to preclude Klotz from introducing evidence that, after the due dates, he submitted d...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 802 (1992)
Janelle M. VIGARS, Plaintiff,
v.
VALLEY CHRISTIAN CENTER OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA, Valley Christian Schools, et al., Defendants.
No. C91-2185 THE.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
May 20, 1992.
*803 *804 Frank D. Presto, III, Pleasanton, Cal., for plaintiff.
Seven H. Lave, Fremont, Cal., William C. McKinley, Gary L. Hall, McKinley Gay & Keitges, Sacramento, ...
Views: 1
ORDER BACKGROUND Appellant San Francisco Drake Hotel Associates, a California Limited Partnership (“S.F. Drake”), is a debtor and debtor in possession in a Chapter 11 case commenced on February 25, 1991, and pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. The principal asset of S.F. Drake and of the Chapter 11 estate is the Sir Francis Drake Hotel locate...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff Alstate Insurance Company has filed a declaratory relief action. Defendants Shaucat Salahutdin and Jennie S. Salahutdin have cross-complained alleging bad faith. Alstate now brings summary judgment motions on both the declaratory relief action and the bad faith action. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS both motions.
STATEMENT...
Views: 0
Before the Court is the defendant’s Motion for a New Trial, based upon a claim of ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. The defendant was tried before this Court on November 25 and 26, 1991 on a two-count indictment charging him with distributing more than five grams of cocaine base, and with distributing the same within one thousand feet of a school. The jury convicted him of both counts....
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are post-trial motions by two groups: a motion for a new trial by a group of defendant/counter-plaintiffs known as the Gardner parties, and a motion to alter or amend the judgment, or alternatively for a new trial, by a group of defendants who have joined together as the Task Force for Black Political Empowerment (“Task Force”). For reasons that follow, the motions are de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On June 6, 1991, Magistrate Judge Lefkow issued a report and recommendation on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment concluding that plaintiffs had prepared the 1979 personal income tax returns of seventeen investors, and that they had willfully understated the tax liability on each return in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 6694(b). Under § 6694(b), an income tax r...
Views: 0
Page 8620
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
On March 13, 1989, plaintiff N.S.N. International Industries, N.V. (“NSN”), a corporation organized and existing under the law of the Netherlands Antilles, commenced this diversity action against E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc. (“Du Pont”), a Delaware corporation. NSN alleges breach of contract and misappropriation of technology. Du Pont filed its answer on June 9, 1989 and...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action arises from a loan of $250,-000.00 to George Marderosian, a Rhode Island attorney, by the plaintiff Focus Investment Associates, Inc. (“Focus”). Focus brought this action against the title company, American Title Insurance Company (“American”), that issued the title policies in connection with the transaction. A jury returned a verdict of $49,000.00 on plaintiff’s brea...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Over twelve years ago, on October 18, 1979, arbitrator Theodore W. Kheel issued an Opinion and Award to resolve whether *80bus drivers employed by New York Bus Tours, Inc. were entitled to compensation for a period of three months during which they were out of work due to a wild-cat strike that led the bus company to close down operations. His opinion, in major part, read as foll...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court to consider the application of the Plaintiff, Harry L. Reynolds, Jr. to convert the Temporary Restraining Order issued on May 28, 1992, and extended on June 8,1992, into a preliminary injunction: The International Amateur Athletic Federation (“IAAF”) has refused to participate in this action, and it has informed Reynolds by letter t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment. The Court, having considered the materials in support of and in opposition to the motion, having considered the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, FINDS and ORDERS as follows:
Background
Plaintiff, a citizen of Wyoming, was a passenger in a c...
Views: 4
ORDER GRANTING MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On August 10,1990, based on his plea of guilty to one count of possession with intent to manufacture methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 1 plaintiff was sentenced to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for...
Views: 0
*207
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Motions of Defendants, filed 14 November 1991, to Dismiss or Transfer. On 20 December 1991, Defendants filed a Memorandum in Support of their earlier-filed Motions. Subsequently, on 3 January 1992, Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in Response to the Motions of Defendant. On 21 January 1992, Defendants filed a Reply to this Response. Furth...
Views: 0
OPINION This civil action was filed originally in the Circuit Court of McDowell County, West Virginia. The plaintiff, William Hicks, seeks damages against the manufacturer and the merchandiser of a mobile home he purchased for $45,444.63. Plaintiff claims that both halves of the mobile home were damaged in transit when delivered and that the mobile home was faultily designed and constructed. Pl...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This ease raises a question of federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c) as that statute existed in June 1990, prior to its most recent amendment. The court, finding that it lacks jurisdiction, is compelled to remand this action to the Circuit Court of Mercer County.
The plaintiff, Roger L. Spence, a citizen and resident of West Virginia, brought thi...
Views: 0
OPINION Presently before the court is plaintiff Nghia Van Le’s motion to dismiss Five Fathoms Inc.’s (“Five Fathoms”) complaint for exoneration from or limitation of liability and for relief from the April 24, 1992 stay imposed in Van Le’s lawsuit against Five Fathoms. A hearing by telephone was held on June 8, 1992. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE On February 22, 1991, Nghia Van Le, filed a complai...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 711 (1992)
CIBA-GEIGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
ALZA CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 91-5286.
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
June 5, 1992.
*712 Robert Fettweis, Sills Cummis Zuckerman Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross, Newark, N.J., and Hugh A. Chapin, Kenyon & Kenyon, New York City, for plaintiff.
George J. Kenny, Connell, Foley & Geiser, Roselan...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 693 (1992)
FIRST VALLEY LEASING, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
Theodore GOUSHY, Defendant.
Civ. No. 91-1202 (CSF).
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
June 2, 1992.
*694 Barbara Lanza Farley, P.C. by Barbara Lanza Farley, Haddonfield, N.J., for plaintiff.
Borrus, Goldin, Foley, Vignuolo, Hyman & Stahl, P.C. by Anthony B. Vignuolo, Eileen M. Foley, North Brunswick, N.J., for defend...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
The United States instituted this action on November 10, 1986, seeking injunctive relief and recovery of response costs pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9606(a) and 9607(a), in connection with the Taylor Borough hazardous waste site located south of Scranton, Pennsylvania. T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
On October 7, 1991, plaintiff Judith S. Tyler filed this action under the Equal Pay Act 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)
et seq.
and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.,
alleging sex discrimination. Tyler has filed a motion to amend her complaint to include requests for compensatory and punitive damages and a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
In this action, Geisinger Health Plan (“Geisinger”) seeks to intervene as a defendant in a suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief brought by Pennsylvania State University (“Penn State”) against the United States Department of Health and Human Services and Louis H. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services (collectively, the “Federal Defendants”).
In accor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before this Court are several motions from Plaintiff and Defendants. Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss (Paper No. 18) and a Motion for Sanctions (Paper No. 22). Both motions are opposed by Plaintiff, Maryland National Bank. Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Strike Defendant Lawrence Weisman’s Motion to Dismiss (Paper No. 20), a Motion for Sanctions (Paper ...
Views: 0
Page 8641
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 12, 1992, plaintiff Natural Resources Defense Council (“NRDC”) initiated this action against Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), challenging EPA’s refusal to open to the public meetings of the Governors’ Forum on Environmental Management (“Governors’ Forum” or “Forum”). On the same date, plaintiff also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction request...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs are four members of the U.S. House of Representatives with oversight responsibility for the District of Columbia, who seek a declaratory judgment that a local statute, the Assault Weapon Manufacturing Strict Liability Act of 1990 (“the Liability Act”), D.C. Act. 8-289, is invalid for failure to comply with the Home Rule Act, D.C.Code § 1-201 et seq. The Home Rule Act...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Defendants James Gribben and Carlos Maldonado, New York City Police Officers assigned to the 43rd Precinct, move pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 12 for dismissal of Indictment S 91 Cr. 995 (KTD) against them.1 The indictment charges both defendants with conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 1623 (Count l).2 It charges Gribben with one count of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Count ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On May 11, 1992, plaintiff County of Cook (the “County”) filed an action in the Circuit Court of Cook County against Mellon Stuart Company (“Mellon Stuart”), Federal Street Construction Company (“Federal Street”), Baker Engineering, Inc. (“Baker Engineering”), Michael Baker Corporation (“MBC”), Mellon Stuart Construction Inc. (“MSCI”) and Seaboard Surety Compa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In 1986, the plaintiffs Nu-Life Construction Corp. (“Nu-Life”) and' Terminate Control Corp. (“Terminate”) commenced this action pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. In effect, there were two separate law suits combined in this case, namely, the Nu-Life suit and the Terminate suit. In addition, th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff commenced this suit on December 24, 1991 in New York State Supreme Court, Franklin County, seeking a prescriptive easement or an easement by necessity through defendants’ land in Chateaugay, New York. Defendants removed the case to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2) (1988 & West Supp.1992) (diversity of citizenship). Plaintiff asserts tha...
Views: 3
OPINION
Plaintiffs New York State Association of Career Schools, NYS Beauty Schools Association, Inc., and certain schools which are members of the two organizations (collectively “NYSACS”) have moved pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to amend their Complaint. The Defendants, the State Education Department of the State of New York, its Commissioner and certain of its ...
Views: 1
Page 8661
MEMORANDUM On October 4, 1988, the United States of America, through the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), filed a complaint for forfeiture, seeking to condemn and destroy articles of food alleged to contain unsafe food additives in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq. (“FDCA”). Claimant Oak-mont Investment Co., Inc. (“Oakmont”) owns the subject bo...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1489 (1992)
PORTLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY, Headwaters, the Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, Inc., Siskiyou Audubon Society, Central Oregon Audubon Society, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Salem Audubon Society, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society, Natural Resources Defense Council, Lane County Audubon Society, and Oregon Natural Resources Council, Plaintiffs,
v.
Manuel LUJAN, in his official capaci...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT POPOVITCH’S MOTION TO DISMISS
In this action Plaintiff seeks relief against three
1
current and former employees of Combustion Engineering, Inc. (CE) for common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in connection with the construction for Plaintiff of a hydroelectri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 16), filed on May 12, 1992. The Court has today granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 10), filed on April 24, 1992. The Complaint before the Court at the time that...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case involves a power-of-sale foreclosure auction conducted by Maine Savings Bank (“MSB”) on November 18, 1990, at which time Plaintiff Arthur E. Cutler (“Plaintiff”) was the high bidder at the foreclosure sale and signed a Purchase and Sale Agreement (“PSA”). On December 14, 1990, Plaintiff filed his...
Views: 0
*582MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. This case, seeking recovery for certain debts allegedly owed to Plaintiffs predecessor in interest and foreclosure on mortgages given to Plaintiffs predecessor in interest, was originally filed in Maine Superior Court in November, 1989. It was removed to this Court in November, 1991, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpora...
Views: 0
Page 8669
795 F. Supp. 513 (1992)
Antonio PARIS, Odessa Hayes, Lucille Annette Dee and Theresa Gomes, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT and Corcoran Management Co., Inc.
Civ. A. No. 86-0624-T.
United States District Court, D. Rhode Island.
June 4, 1992.
*514 John W. Dineen, Providence, R.I., for plaintiffs.
Stuart M. Gerso...
Views: 0
ORDER
Motion to Remand; Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay
The court has before it a motion to compel arbitration filed by defendant British Marine Mutual Insurance Association, Limited. British Marine also requests a stay or dismissal of further proceedings in this court. Plaintiff Glenn Organ opposes the motion and requests that the matter be remanded to state court. By noti...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER
Petitioner Donald Eugene Harding, presently in state custody on death row at the Arizona State Prison Complex, Florence, Arizona, filed this Petition for Writ of Ha-beas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on March 27, 1992. Harding additionally filed a Motion for Stay of Execution, currently scheduled at 12:05 a.m. on April 6, 1992, Motion for Evidentiary Hearing, Motion to Require...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Scott has filed a response to defendants’ motion.
Plaintiffs Walter F. Scott and the Posh Club, Inc. bring this civil rights action against the Department of Public Safety Excise Division, Mayor Vincent Schoemehl and Robert Kraiberg, Excise Commissioner for the City of St. Louis. Plaintiffs claim that...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1438 (1992)
Sandra K. MANN, Plaintiff,
v.
Anthony M. FRANK, Postmaster General, Defendant.
No. 90-1122-CV-W-5-BC.
United States District Court, W.D. Missouri, W.D.
June 10, 1992.
*1439 *1440 *1441 William Nulton, Shughart, Thomson & Kilroy, Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.
Jerry Short, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.
JUDGMENT ORDER
LARSEN, United States Magist...
Views: 1
Page 8674
ORDER
BACKGROUND
This case involves various disputes arising out of the renovation and new construction of the Ford Mall project (“project”).
1
On December 29, 1986, Ford Mall Association Limited Partnership (“FMALP”), the project’s developer, executed a mortgage to MWF Mortgage Corporation (“MWF”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association ...
Views: 0
Page 8685
OPINION AND ORDER VACATING THE BANKRUPTCY COURT’S ORDER DENYING MICHIGAN NATIONAL BANK’S MOTION TO DISMISS
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on creditor Michigan National Bank’s (“MNB”) December 27, 1991 Notice of Appeal. MNB wishes to prevent Debtor llene Ruth Moses from proceeding with her Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition. To this end, MNB filed a motion to dismiss in the b...
Views: 0
Page 8692
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
I. INTRODUCTION
This case arises out of beatings which allegedly occurred during the 1991 Freedom Festival Fireworks display held on June 28, 1991 at the Hart Plaza in downtown Detroit. Plaintiffs Joanne Was, Antoinette Was, Melina Was, Deborah Sweeney and Debbie Jermanus contend that the City of Detroit and the Day...
Views: 0
OPINION
This bankruptcy appeal raises the issue of whether administrative claimants have standing to bring a claim under 11 U.S.C. § 506(c). Although this issue has been addressed by all of the bankruptcy judges in this district
1
, it is an issue of first impression for this court
2
and this Circuit.
I. Facts
Kessler, Inc., (“Debtor”), a manufacturer of ch...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION.
This discovery dispute raises the question of whether a federal court in a claim arising under federal law with pendent state law claims must respect and apply a limited confidential privilege created solely under state law. This issue arises in the context of an employment discrimination claim pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 e...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 1253 (1992)
Duncan ROBINSON and Elizabeth Robinson, Plaintiffs,
v.
Marjorie EICHLER and There's No Place Like Home, Inc., Defendants.
Civ. No. 3:92CV00269 (TFGD).
United States District Court, D. Connecticut.
June 11, 1992.
*1254 Joseph D. Garrison, Janet Arterton, Garrison & Arterton, New Haven, Conn., for plaintiffs.
Judith D. Meyer, William R. Breetz, Rogin, Nassau, Caplan, La...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1238 (1992)
ARAWANA MILLS CO.
v.
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORP.
Civ. A. No. 5:91CV00711 (JAC).
United States District Court, D. Connecticut.
May 7, 1992.
*1239 *1240 Douglas A. Cohen, Peter M. Nolin, Franca L. DeRosa, Schatz & Schatz, Ribicoff & Kotkin, Stamford, Conn., Ira B. Grudberg, Steven D. Ecker, Jacobs, Grudberg, Belt & Dow, P.C., New Haven, Conn., for plaintiff.
John ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Barry Glick commenced this civil action against defendant MTV Networks (“MTVN”) to recover damages for violations of New Jersey’s gambling laws.
1
The complaint was originally filed in the Superi- or Court of New Jersey on May 7, 1990. On June 4, 1990, the matter was removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction to the
*744
United Stat...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING THE ALT’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING
Plaintiff appeals the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ’s) decision denying him Social Security disability insurance benefits. The matter is now before the Court upon review of the pleadings and the parties’ oral arguments.
I.
The Court’s sole function is to determine whether the ALJ’s non-disability finding is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Taurean Norfleet died after being taken into protective custody and placed in a foster home by the State of Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS). The plaintiffs say that his death was the result of the defendants’ failure to provide appropriate medical care. They bring this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that such failure violated the Due Process Clause of th...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and Plaintiff’s response thereto. FACTS The Plaintiff sued CAP, a federally chartered corporation, 36 U.S.C. §§ 201-208, and Pilot “John Doe” (known as Eugene *794W. Mcknight), for damages under Florida’s Wrongful Death Statute for the death of CAP Cadet Shawn Kelley. On August 13, 1989,...
Views: 1
793 F. Supp. 627 (1992)
NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
PHILLIPS PUBLISHING, INC., and Richard E. Band and The Wall Street Digest, Inc., Defendants.
Civ. N-90-1374.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
June 9, 1992.
*628 Theodore Sherbow, Michael P. Smith, and Weinberg and Green, Baltimore, Md., for plaintiff Nat. Life Ins. Co.
Lee T. Ellis, Jr., Anne R. Noble, Bruce W. Sanfo...
Views: 1
Page 8730
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case arose out of a series of contracts between Allied Erecting and Dismantling Company, Inc. (“Allied”) and USX Corporation (“USX”), formerly known as United States Steel Corporation, for the *1225 dismantling of certain USX steel mill facilities throughout the eastern half of the country. By October of 1991, after half-a-dozen years of litigation, four judges, two hu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before this Court is Plaintiffs Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. Defendant, through the Attorney General for the State of Maryland opposes Plaintiffs Motion. After consideration of the arguments made by the parties at this hearing and in their pleadings, this Court denies Plaintiffs Motion for a Preliminary Injunction.
I.
Legal Analysis
A. Legal St...
Views: 0
ORDER On December 26, 1991, one of the defendants, PPG Industries (PPG), filed a Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery, seeking to compel a deponent, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigator Mark Lofstead, to answer questions as to which the deponent had asserted a deliberative process privilege. Although the plaintiffs did not file a response to this motion, the EEOC filed a...
Views: 1
ORDER I On April 20, 1992, a grand jury returned a three count indictment charging the defendant, Kevin Ingram, and a co-defendant with conspiring to rob and then robbing two banks in Little Rock, Arkansas on December 16, 1991. Little Rock law enforcement officers placed Mr. Ingram under arrest on April 4,1992. He remained in State custody until he was released to federal authorities, pursuan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an action to review [42 U.S.C. § 405(g)] the Secretary’s denial of social security disability benefits to plaintiff, Larry A. Graham. The case is ready for decision on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Dk. 8) and on the Secretary’s motion to affirm (Dk. 13). On June 1, 1988, the plaintiff filed his second application for disability benefits under Title ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the defendant’s motion to strike the plaintiff’s jury demand. In the order filed February 10,1992, this court granted summary judgment for the defendant on all of the plaintiff’s claims except her claim under
*285
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
(“ERISA”). Plaintif...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on cross motions. Defendants move for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, for summary judgment (Dk. 13). Plaintiff moves for summary judgment (Dk. 17). Plaintiff filed this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, in particular, an order invalidating and enjoining the enforcement of 7 C.F.R. §§ 400.351 and 400.-35...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff/Appellant, Vernon Lee Finney, filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. After the bankruptcy court, per Judge Hal J. Bonney, denied Finney’s discharge, he then sought to convert his petition to one under Chapter 11. The trustee objected, and the court denied the debtor’s motion to convert. Plaintiff then noted this appeal.
I. Pr...
Views: 1
OPINION Defendants, students at Old Dominion University (“ODU”), sold cocaine to an undercover agent in defendant Samet’s apartment on December 4, 1991. Upon a signal from the undercover agent, members of the Portsmouth City Police Department and Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) Task Force entered Samet’s apartment to arrest Samet, Adamson, and Christensen, at which time the officers seized evid...
Views: 0
OPINION AND FINAL ORDER
This matter came before the court on April 21, 1992, for declaratory judgment. At issue was the interpretation of the provisions of a declaration of trust and a supplemental declaration of trust. A trial was held on that date and a partial judgment was issued from the bench. Additionally, the parties were directed to file post-trial memoranda on several legal issues that a...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING FINAL ORDER OF BANKRUPTCY COURT
This matter came before the court on Defendant/Appellant Iron County’s appeal from a final order of the bankruptcy court. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) (1988),
1
this court exercises appellate jurisdiction to review final orders of the bankruptcy court. The court heard oral argument on May 15, 1992, and took the matter under advi...
Views: 1
*819 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Ronald Muck commenced this action under 26 U.S.C. § 7422 for refund of a penalty assessed and collected pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6672 based on his alleged failure to pay over wage withholding taxes. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 13 the defendant, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), has counterclaimed under 26 U.S.C. § 7401 seeking to reduce to judgment outsta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This case is before the court on Louis Tepe’s (“claimant”) appeal from a decision of the bankruptcy court denying his administrative claim for attorney fees and affirmatively ordering him to disgorge $7700 paid to him as a real estate commission. I have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). I review the factual findings of the bankruptcy court on a clearly erro...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 768 (1992)
SALOMON FOREX INC., Plaintiff,
v.
Laszlo N. TAUBER, Defendant.
Laszlo N. TAUBER, M.D., Counter-Plaintiff and Third-Party Plaintiff,
v.
SALOMON FOREX INC., Counter-Defendant,
v.
SALOMON BROTHERS INC., et al., Third-Party Defendants.
Civ. No. 91-1415-A.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division.
June 1, 1992.
*769 Eugene D. Gulland, William D. Iverson,...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this case defendant Tom Nguyen, a/k/a “Johnny” (“Nguyen”), was indicted on three counts (the “Indictment”).
1
Count One alleged that during the time period beginning January 1991 and ending July 1991 Nguyen conspired to engage in the business of dealing in firearms without a federal license in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1)(A) and (2). Count Two alleged Nguyen kn...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Brian Mills (“Mills”) was named in the first count of an eight-count superseding indictment alleging a conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute kilogram quantities of cocaine hydrochloride, and in seven substantive counts. The five-day trial of Mills and three alleged co-conspirators commenced before this court on December 9, 1991. Immediate...
Views: 0
ORDER
The plaintiff in this case filed a Complaint on January 27, 1992, alleging that the defendants failed to follow prison disciplinary procedures, thereby denying his rights to due process in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 1983. This court referred the case to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(b)(1)(B). On February 12, 1992, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recomme...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On April 29, 1992, a hearing was held on defendant Dennis C. Huie and Officer David Greer’s Motion for Protective Order before the Honorable Dee Benson. Ross C. Anderson and Timothy W. Miller represented the plaintiff. Byron J. Benevento and John T. Nielson represented Huie and Greer for the purpose of this motion only.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Late on September 13, 1990, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before me on appeal from the Bankruptcy Court. Piedmont Trust Bank (“Piedmont”) has appealed the Bankruptcy Court’s denial of its motions to revoke the order confirming the debtor’s plan, to convert the case to Chapter 7, and to lift the stay. Piedmont contends that because of inadequate notice and procedural irregularities its claims have been improperly r...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s motion for entry of a protective order. A hearing was held on the motion on January 3,1992. Present at that hearing were the following: Robert Schuster and Phillip Pearlman, attorneys for Plaintiff; Plaintiffs Orin and Jacquline Farnsworth; and William McClearn and Jack Smith, attorneys for Defendant.
Argument was present...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves for additional findings of fact and a corresponding amendment of the judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(b). Additionally, defendant moves under Rule 59(a) for a new trial or rehearing of my findings of fact and conclusions of law, 793 F.Supp. 981. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid their resolution. Because ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Before the court are the cross Motions for Summary Judgment filed by the plaintiff, the United States of America, and by the defendant, Capital Blue Cross (“CBC,” “Blue Cross”). These motions, which address precisely the same issues, are ripe for disposition and will be disposed of simultaneously.
Background
Both parties agree that there are no disputed material f...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1060 (1992)
Andrew HARRIS and Robert Hutchinson, Plaintiffs,
v.
Bill EVANS and Ed Gardner, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-2021.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
May 1, 1992.
*1061 Bryan E. Nelson, Overland Park, Kan., for Andrew Harris and Robert Hutchinson.
Jeffrey J. Simon, Bryan Cave, Kansas City, Mo., James L. Eisenbrandt, Bryan Cave, Leawood, Kan., for Bill Evans.
Ed Gardner...
Views: 1
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8805: Oxford Transportation Services, Inc. v. Mab Refrigerated Transport, Inc.
Page 8805
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the motion of defendant MAB Refrigerated Transport, Inc. (MAB), to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) or to transfer for improper venue pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) (Doc. # 6). Plaintiff Oxford Transportation Services, Inc. (Oxford), has sued MAB for breach of contract and fraud stemmi...
Views: 0
ORDER Petitioner, a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in F.C.I. Morgantown, West Virginia, seeks review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 of Respondent’s determination setting his offense severity rating as Category Six. Specifically, Petitioner claims that Respondent improperly determined that the amount of money involved in a fraud scheme operated by Petitioner exceeded $1,000,000. A review of ...
Views: 0
ORDER In this action for declaratory and injunc-tive relief, plaintiffs, affiliated electric utility owners of -power plants, seek judicial review of proposed actions and stated positions of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in relation to duties delegated by Title IV of the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act. See, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7651-7651o. On January 21, 1992, the Court he...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiffs instituted the above-styled civil action in October 1990 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, seeking to recover for damages occasioned by use of a wire rope manufactured by a subsidiary of Defendant Amsted Industries, Inc. (“Amsted”) *611and supplied by Defendant The Voto Manufacturers Sales Company (“Voto”). Defendant Amsted has filed a cross-claim seeking contribution from Defendant ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case presents a thought-provoking issue arising out of an apparent conflict between the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1819 (1988 & Supp. I 1989), and the principles of comity and abstention embodied in the Tax Injunction Act of 1937, 28 U.S.C. § 1341 (1988). Plaintiffs are the Bank...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case involves the alleged failure to give proper notice to an employee of his rights to elect continuation of coverage under a group health care plan after termination of his employment. Plaintiff Jerry
*405
Phillips claims that the failure to give such notice violated certain provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) ...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 1476 (1992)
The NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, an unincorporated association, Plaintiff,
v.
Robert F. MILLER, Governor, State of Nevada; Carolyn Sparks; James Eardley; Lonnie Hammargren; Shelley Berkley; Jill Derby; Joseph Foley; June Whitley; Daniel Klaich and Dorothy Gallagher, members of the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada; Ronald Ganulin; Tim Grgurich; Jer...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 1525 (1992)
Jesse NIPPER, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Lawton CHILES, Governor of Florida, et al., Defendants.
No. 90-447-Civ-J-16.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division.
June 2, 1992.
*1526 *1527 *1528 *1529 Denise Marcel Prescod, Jacksonville, Fla., Mitchell F. Dolin, Anthony Herman, Jeffrey S. Harleston, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., Brenda Wrigh...
Views: 3
OPINION
Defendants Martin E. Bruetman (“Bruetman”), Douglas Keill (“Keill”), Mauricio Agudelo (“Agudelo”), High Tech Medical Parks Development Corp. (“High Tech”), and Alta Tecnologia Medica, S.A. (“Alta-2”), have moved jointly for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Agudelo, Keill, and pro se Defendant Ronald Tash (“Tash”) have separately moved for su...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8831: Stat Medical Services, Inc. v. Daughters of Jacob Geriatric Center, Inc.
Page 8831
OPINION
Plaintiff, Stat Medical Services, Inc. d/b/a Stat Nurses Registry, (“STAT”), is a California corporation with its principal place of business in Los Angeles. Its primary business is to supply licensed nurses and nurses aides who register with it to hospitals and nursing homes. STAT has had an office in New York since early 1989 and has. offices in ten other cities in the United States as ...
Views: 0
OPINION Pending before the Court are two motions. First, Plaintiff Schwarzkopf Technologies Corporation (Schwarzkopf) filed a Motion to Strike Ingersoll Cutting Tool Company’s (Ingersoll) Affirmative Defenses, or in the alternative, to Compel Deposition Testimony (Motion to Strike). Second, Ingersoll filed a Motion to Compel Production of a List of Withheld Documents. The Court held a hearing rega...
Views: 1
ORDER BACKGROUND Petitioner David B. Powell filed an “emergency” petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 on June 9, 1992 accompanied by a petition for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris. Powell filed the action on behalf of himself and his four-year-old son, Aaron B. Powell, whom he alleges cannot be properly cared for by his mother, Elizabeth Powell (presumably petitioner’s ex-wife). Powel...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant, Nefdale Calle, was indicted, together with Beatrice Taylor and Martha Grisales, for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute over 5 kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and for possession with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(ii). On December 2, 1991, the defendant pled guilty to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Thomas S. Dodge alleged in this
*830
ADEA action
1
that he was discharged from his employment as business manager at Susquehanna University (“the University”) because of his age. 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1). Dodge left the University’s employ on November 19, 1989. His departure was preceded by a discussion which took place on November...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Nearly ten months ago this social security disability action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c), was before this court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Despite objection by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”), by Order dated August 23, 1991, this court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the matter be remanded b...
Views: 1
*161MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity action arises out of the purported malfunction of a Frigidaire dishwasher. Plaintiff State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (“State Farm”), as subrogee of Richard Lutz, Jr. and Patricia Lutz, brings this lawsuit against Frigidaire, a division of General Motors Corporation, alleging negligence and strict liability in tort. Presently before the court is...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s summary judgment motion. The plaintiff, Jennifer Hoult, alleges nine years of sexual abuse and violence, from age four in 1965 to age thirteen in 1974, by her father, the defendant, David Parks Hoult. As a result, plaintiff alleges that she has suffered serious psychological and physical injuries. However, plaintiff claims that she...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 508 (1992)
Rosa SANTIAGO, Individually, and as the Next Friend of Jose Santos, a Minor, Plaintiffs,
v.
BARRE NATIONAL, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-10227-WD.
United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.
June 8, 1992.
Thomas M. Kiley, Thomas M. Kiley, P.C. Associates, Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs.
Stephen D. Menard, Badger, Dolan, Parker & Cohen, Boston, Mass., for defendan...
Views: 1
795 F.Supp. 1036 (1992)
Cynthia GENOVIA, Plaintiff,
v.
JACKSON NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Michigan corporation, and the Security Mutual Life Insurance Company of Lincoln, Nebraska, a Nebraska corporation, Defendants.
Civ. No. 91-00288.
United States District Court, D. Hawaii.
June 11, 1992.
*1037 Clyde Wm. Matsui, Randall Y.S. Chung, Kevin P.H. Sumida, Matsui, Chung & Sumida, Honolulu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In three related cases, incarcerated aliens petitioned this Court for deportation hearings. The Court orders the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) to carry out the mandate of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(i) and begin the deportation process as soon as possible for these plaintiffs.
I
Mr. Ramon Abreu is a citizen of the Dominican Republic. On July 5, 1990, he...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in this matter filed suit against defendants under the Education for the Handicapped Act (“EHA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1401
et seq.,
seeking a total of $52,508.76 in attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses for allegedly prevailing at an administrative hearing held pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(2). The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary jud...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff in this Medicare case challenges a determination made by the Provider Reimbursement Review Board (“PRRB”) that it lacked jurisdiction to hear plaintiff’s cost appeal for the 1983 fiscal year. 1 Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons outlined below, the Court will grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment a...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff filed this lawsuit alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and his eighth amendment right to be free from deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment June 3, 1992. Plaintiff filed a response and defendants filed a reply. Oral argument was heard June 18, 1992...
Views: 0
OPINION Pending before the court is the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant, Buxton, Incorporated. Plaintiff, Richard Cook, commenced this civil action in which it is alleged in Count I that defendant, his former employer, terminated his employment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. In Count II, plaintiff all...
Views: 1
Presently pending before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Paper 10) and defendant Mayor and City Council of Baltimore’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Paper 25). These motions present the following issue: at what point must the City of Baltimore pay overtime compensation in a workweek to employees of the fire department’s division of Emergency Medical Services (herei...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on motion by the defendants for summary judgment. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion is granted and plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed in its entirety.1
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The following material facts are undisputed. Defendant, the Albany Insurance Company (“Albany”), issued a named perils policy of hull, protection and indem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Now before the Court is a motion for reconsideration and/or motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Cars &
*117
Concepts, Inc. (“Cars & Concepts”).
1
Having reviewed the record and all pertinent papers, the Court will grant Cars & Concept’s motion and enter summary judgment in its favor and against Rafael.
I. INTRODUCTION
Cars & Concepts...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Donald and Diane Woods bring this action on behalf of their daughter,
*770
T.W., alleging that various state and local agencies in New Jersey violated the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1485, formerly the Education of the Handicapped Act (“EHA”), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by failing,
inter alia,
to fund the res...
Views: 3
ORDER
This matter is before the court on cross motions for summary judgment by the plaintiff, Liberty Corporation (“Liberty”), and the defendant, NCNB National Bank *553of South Carolina (“NCNB”). The parties agree that there are no disputes of material facts.
On October 21, 1989, Mr. and Mrs. John M. Bristow were traveling in their automobile when it was hit by a dump truck in Charlotte, North C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF THREE-JUDGE COURT
Before the court is yet another lawsuit prompted by New York State’s recent legislation setting forth new state Assembly and Senate district boundaries.
See
1992 N.Y. Laws ch. 76-78. The controversial legislation has thus far supplied the impetus for at least five separate lawsuits, three of which (including the instant suit) have been ...
Views: 0
OPINION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. Introduction This action was commenced on November 28, 1989 when plaintiff Flexi-Van Leasing, Inc. (“Flexi-Van”) filed suit against defendant Pharos Lines, S.A. (“Pharos Lines”). Flexi-Van claimed breach of contract and conversion regarding marine equipment it had leased to Pharos Lines. On August 10, 1990, Flexi-Van filed a separate ac...
Views: 1
ENTRY ON MOTIONS FOR JNOV AND FOR NEW TRIAL I. Introduction Bobby Cotton went on a rampage one night in Indianapolis, throwing rocks and creating a disturbance to which two police officers were summoned. No video camera was present that night so it is not possible for this Court to say with absolute certainty what happened next. What is undisputed is that Cotton and the officers engaged in ...
Views: 0
792 F. Supp. 1224 (1992)
MUSCLE SHOALS ASSOCIATES, LTD., an Alabama limited partnership, and Alabama Realty Associates, Ltd., an Alabama limited partnership, Plaintiffs,
v.
MHF INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Defendant.
Civ. No. 92-HM-1229-NW.
United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Northwestern Division.
June 18, 1992.
*1225 James A. Harris, Jr., Sirote and Permutt P.C., Bir...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are: Plaintiff CJC Holdings’ Motion for Attorney’s Fees, filed on April 20, 1992; Defendant Wright & Lato’s oral motion for Rule 11 sanctions; and, Defendant Wright & Lato’s Petition for Attorneys’ Fees, filed June 8,1992. On May 18, 1992, this Court held a hearing to consider the Plaintiff’s motion. On May 12, 1992, this Court ordered that the attorneys be prepared to disc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Waterloo Furniture Components, Ltd. (Waterloo) filed this declaratory judgment action against defendant Ha-worth, Inc. (Haworth), owner of U.S. Patent No. 4,616,798 (’798 patent), asking this court to find that the ’798 patent is invalid and unenforceable, and that Waterloo did not infringe the patent claims. In its answer, Haworth admitted charging Waterloo...
Views: 2
Page 8978
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court upon the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs in this case are the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (“CSBS”), a professional association of state government officials responsible for chartering and regulating more than 10,000 state-chartered commercial banks and state-chartered savings institutions, and the Indep...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
These two actions challenge the 1992 State legislative redistricting plan enacted by the Maryland General Assembly on the grounds that it violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973 et seq., and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.1 Civil No. S-92-510 is brought by Marylanders for Fair Representation, Inc. (alleged to be “a not-for-pro...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Narco Avionics, Inc. (“Narco”) brings this patent infringement action to enforce a patent issued on a portable navigational communications transceiver. The patent, No. 4,843,399, was issued on June 27, 1989. Presently before the court are the motions of WIN and JAL to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The parties have conducted pertinent di...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court is whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071 [hereinafter the “Act” or the “1991 Act”] applies retroactively to three separate pending cases.
1
On May 28, 1992, the Court heard consolidated oral arguments on this issue. For the reasons set forth below, the Court con-
*343
eludes: (1) plaintiffs are n...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 777 (1992)
Theresa McINTYRE, Personal Representative and Administratrix of the Estate of David Andrew McIntyre, Deceased,
and
Theresa McIntyre, Individually, and Charles McIntyre, Individually, Plaintiffs,
v.
Eduardo J. SCHICK, M.D., and Virginia Beach General Hospital, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 2:91cv680.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division.
June 16, 1992.
Th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The above referenced actions were previously referred to the Honorable Jerry D. Hogg, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of a Report-Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Hogg submitted a Report-Recommendation and recommended that the above three cases be consolidated for joint resolution since they are controlled by the same legal principles. P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the Motion of Plaintiff Lufthansa German Airlines ("Lufthansa") for partial summary judgment. Lufthansa requests that this court find that the Warsaw Convention 1 ("Convention") does not apply to limit the liability of American Airlines, Inc. ("American Airlines") because of a fundamental breach in the execution of the contract of carria...
Views: 0
*551 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On May 18, 1992, plaintiffs Coalition to End the Permanent Congress (“CEPC”), Public Citizen, and National Taxpayers Union initiated this action against Marvin T. Runyon, Postmaster General, and Nicholas F. Brady, Secretary of the Treasury, (collectively, “Executive defendants”) and against Donald K. Anderson, Clerk of the United States House of Representativ...
Views: 1
Page 9021
OPINION AND ORDER
Before me are St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company’s (St. Paul) motion for summary judgment and motion to add third-party defendants, and Manley Bennett, McDonald & Co.’s (MBM) motion for summary judgment. The issues are: (1) whether St. Paul is obligated to indemnify MBM (a stock-brokerage firm) for the legal fees and expenses it incurred in defending itself against...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant moves to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record, including defendant’s objections to the Report and Recommendation, and hereby adopts the annexed Report and Recommendation of Chief Magistrate Judge A. Simon Chrein.
Defendant has not sustained its burden of showing that the balance of conveniences strongly favors dismis...
Views: 0
OPINION
This cause is now before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment filed January 17, 1992,
1
and on the materials submitted in support of and in opposition thereto. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343 and 2201.
Plaintiff is a former fire fighter with the Fire Department of the City of Montgomery, Alabama. Plaintiff claims that...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action for damages alleging the wrongful payment of the proceeds of a Federal Employees Group Life Insurance (“FEGLI”) policy. Defendants United States and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Met Life”) move pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be grant...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Patricia L. Strickland (“Strickland”) filed this lawsuit against Defendants MICA Information Systems, David Anderson and Harriet Anderson (collectively “MICA”). The complaint alleges that: (1) MICA violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) § 215 by discharging her in retaliation for her pursuit of a complaint with the Department of Labor; (2) MICA violated ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. The motion will be granted.
FACTS
This is an action challenging the constitutionality of the Minnesota Congressional Campaign Reform Act (Campaign Reform
*1440
Act), Minn.Stat. §§ 10A.40-.51. Plaintiffs are current members of the United States Congress. Compl. II 9-11; A...
Views: 1
*671
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, filed January 29, 1992, wherein defendants Gary Stangler, Director of the Missouri Department of Social Services (“DSS”) and Donna Checkett, Director of the Division of Medical Services assert that plaintiff’s Complaint should be dismissed, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and (6), for lack of subject matter jurisdict...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Defendants’ motion will be granted and plaintiff’s motion will be denied.
FACTS
Plaintiff Brian Nomi is a second-year law student at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Second Lieutenant on inactive status in the United States Army Reserves. In 1990, plaintiff founded a student o...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Plaintiffs are the operators of the Community for Creative Non-Violence homeless shelter (“CCNV shelter”) at 425 Second St., N.W., Washington, D.C. along with the class of homeless people who were present at the shelter in the early morning hours of January 9, 1992. Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants, the United States Marshals Service for the Superior ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Robert Petrelli commenced this action for damages and injunctive relief, pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (the “ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, against defendant the City of Mount Vernon (“Mount Vernon”).1 Both parties now move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
FACTS
The facts are not in dispute. In response to an official ann...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is now before the court on the motion for class certification, the motion to intervene filed by Annie Kate Williams, and the motions to dismiss filed by the defendants. For the following reasons, this court grants the motion for class certification, denies the motion to intervene and grants in part and denies in part the motion to dismiss. FACTS On December 27,1991, the Com...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ and plaintiffs’ cross motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiffs, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, (“AFGE”) and its affiliates, on behalf of all AFGE bargaining unit civilian employees of defendant, Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”), request this Court ...
Views: 0
Philip L. Matassa, Jr. filed this suit against the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company (Missouri Pacific). . The Court has conducted a non-jury trial in the case and finds that plaintiff’s suit should be dismissed with prejudice. The Court now issues its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, In formulating its factual findings, the Court took into consideration the credibility of the witnesses wh...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Plaintiff originally filed an action seeking review of Defendant Secretary’s decision to deny her disability benefits under the Supplemental Security Income Program (SSI), 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq. On February 25, 1992, upon Defendant’s motion, the Magistrate Judge reversed the Secretary’s decision and remanded the cause. Now before' the Court is Plaintiff’s ap...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ON MOTION TO INTERVENE
The Court has before it for final resolution a Motion to Intervene for Limited Purpose Requesting Court to Enforce and Modify Consent Decree. The motion was filed on September 17, 1991, and is directed to the Consent Decree approved by the Court on April 28, 1988. Movants represent consumer, pediatric and public interest groups. They contend, in sweeping terms, t...
Views: 0
ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC GRANTING PLAINTIFF COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,-518.20
BACKGROUND
Petitioner Ground is a former telephone operator who sought disability benefits pursuant the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381
et seq.
On July 1, 1991, the AD concluded that Ms. Ground was not disabled within the meaning of the Act between the p...
Views: 0
ORDER RE REMAND
I. Introduction
Plaintiff, Janet C. Mangini (“Mangini”), brought this suit in California court against defendant, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (“Reynolds”), among others, alleging violations of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (“Labeling Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 1333(a)(2), and California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200
et seq.
Mangini alleg...
Views: 1
Page 9158
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the defendant Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC”) Motion for Summary Judgment in the above-captioned case.
1
The plaintiff, Washington Properties Limited Partnership (“Washington Properties”, “WPLP”) has opposed the Motion for Summary Judgment on the rescission claim, and moved for a stay on the motion as it relates to the other claims ...
Views: 1
792 F. Supp. 834 (1992)
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE, Plaintiff,
v.
Manual LUJAN, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, et al., Defendants,
Mountain States Legal Foundation, et al., Intervening Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 91-1993.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
May 19, 1992.
*835 Brian B. O'Neill, Anne V. Simonette, Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff.
Peter H. Van Tuyn, U.S. Dept. of Justice, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, an attorney, challenges his suspension for one year from practicing before the Social Security Administration, effective May 16, 1991, for violations of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1740. The Secretary has moved to dismiss the complaint. After Jones filed an opposition to defendant’s motion, the Court, sua sponte, gave Jones an additional opportunity to particularize his somewhat rambling...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is one of the first of what the Court expects may become numerous cases alleging discrimination on the basis of HIV-positive status in violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701
et seq.,
and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1
The case, brought by an individual against the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Fire Departmen...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff David Ferguson has instituted this negligence action against defendant the United States of America pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq. Plaintiff has also sued defendant William Edens t/a Edens Tree Service (“Edens”) for negligence and breach of contract. Plaintiff Joan Ferguson, the wife of David Ferguson, has a claim f...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the court is Northern Central Bank’s (“Bank”) appeal from the
*704
Order of the bankruptcy court confirming the Sixth Amended Plan of Reorganization (“Plan”) of Sovereign Group 1985-27, Ltd., a Pennsylvania limited partnership d/b/a Cambridge Village Apartments Limited Partnership (“Debtor”) and entering a permanent injunction against for...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter involves an insurance coverage dispute between plaintiff General Metalcraft, Inc. (“General Metalcraft”) and defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”). Plaintiff, a manufacturer of filing cabinets, which are distributed nationally, faces liability in connection with the disposal of its hazardous wastes at various landfills in New Jersey. Currently b...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the Court on appeal from a final order of the Honorable Gregory F. Kishel, United States Bankruptcy Judge, filed February 21, 1992. 137 B.R. 311. By that order, the bankruptcy court denied appellants/debtors John and Sandra Mathern (the Matherns) their discharge in bankruptcy. The order is affirmed. Background The Matherns are bankruptcy debtors and appellee Un...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND MEMORANDUM OPINION This action is submitted to the Court on plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorneys’ fees to counsel, Jonathan C. Hardy, in the amount of $51,850.00, and to co-counsel, David Leightty, in the amount of $23,695.00 for legal services performed in an action to increase the attorneys’ fees awarded to them by the Veterans Administration [“VA...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court in the above styled action are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
The facts pertinent to the summary judgment motions are not in dispute. At all times relevant to this action, Specialized Systems, Inc. (Specialized), the plaintiff, and Express...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant has moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), to recuse all of the judges of the Eastern District of New York from presiding over his criminal contempt trial and to either transfer this action to the Southern District of New York or to a judge from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion must be...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
This is a breach of contract case. Plaintiff, Michael Hazime (Hazime), says defendant, Martin Oil of Indiana, Inc. (Martin Oil), breached a contractual obligation to sell real property improved with a gasoline station (the station) for $250,000.00. Hazime requests the Court to order the specific performance of his contract. On October 30, 1991, Martin Oil remo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The petitioner, an alien currently subjected to exclusion proceedings, is under detention by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”). She has applied to this court for a writ of habeas corpus. For the reasons indicated below, her application is denied. FACTS The petitioner, Marie Marcalle Pierre, is a citizen of Haiti. On November 29, 1988, the Attorney General of t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER-
This matter is before the court pursuant to numerous post trial motions in the above-captioned case.
1
This action involves a longstanding dispute between the plaintiff and counterclaim defendant Manildra Milling Corporation (“Manildra") and the defendant, counter-claimant and third-party plaintiff Ogilvie Mills, Inc. (“Ogilvie”) regarding the validity o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The above-captioned case involves a dispute between plaintiff Casey Equipment Corporation (“Casey”), which acts as a broker in selling equipment and other portions of steel mills, and Armco, Inc. (“Armco”), which hired Casey to sell certain of its equipment. Casey and Armco have filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment concerning only Count I of a four-count amended com...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant, Manpower, Inc., terminated the employment of plaintiff, Carol Gilmore, on March 10, 1988. According to Manpower, Gilmore refused to alter her flagrantly insubordinate behavior despite having received repeated warnings from her superiors.
In a three-count complaint filed against Manpower on November 21, 1988, plaintiff alleges that age discrimination, not...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The above-captioned case was docketed at adversary number 88-507 in bankruptcy case number 88-1233 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. It is captioned a “complaint to compel turnover of property,” but, in it, debtor Civic Center Cleaning Co., Inc. (“Civic Center”) asserts that Reginella Corporation (“Reginella”) breached a pre...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Louis Lee brings the above-captioned case to recover for -injuries he sustained when drain cleaner he had used to unclog his kitchen sink erupted while he was bent over the sink. Although plaintiff at one time asserted claims against both the defendants and the third-party defendants, he has settled with the third-party defendants, which will be referred to collecti...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff brought this two-count suit in order to recover for alleged misrepresentation and breach of contract on the part of the defendants. Both plaintiff and defendants have moved for summary judgment with respect to plaintiff’s misrepresentation claim.
1
For the reasons which follow, this court will deny both motions.
Plaintiff alleges that in 1982, ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW After hearing evidence and argument during a non-jury trial in the above-captioned case, and after having reviewed and considered the parties’ post-trial submissions, the court enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In 1984, defendant (the “Synod”) comprised an organization of Lutheran *192 churches in the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff John J.B. Jones was an attorney with the defendant law firm Baskin Flaherty Elliott & Mannino, P.C. (“Baskin Flaherty”) in 1989, when he withdrew from its employee profit sharing plan and its defined benefit pension plan. Plaintiff claims that he has not received the money due to him upon his withdrawal from the plans. Therefore, acting
pro se,
he f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On June 29, 1990, Wilfred W. Burgart and Anna F. Burgart (“debtors”) filed a Chapter 13 petition (“the first case”). The first case was dismissed without prejudice on July 25, 1990, for failure to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan. On August 31, 1990, the debtors filed a second Chapter 13 case. In that case, First Seneca Bank (“appellant”) moved for dismissal, alleging that d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this case, plaintiff Frank Holdampf, acting
pro se,
has sued various entities and persons for injuries he suffered in a tractor trailer accident on September 8, 1989. Pending before the court are motions for summary judgment filed by defendants James N. Tolar and J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. (“J.B. Hunt”), and motions to dismiss filed by defendants Fidelity &...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On the eve of trial, defendants Port Authority of Allegheny County (“PAT”), Larry Lutheran and Kathleen Radkoff move this court to strike plaintiff Elaine Savko’s demand for damages for emotional distress, and any evidence that may be offered in support of that demand (the “Motion”). The parties agree that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment *730as to All Affirmative Defenses Based upon Plaintiffs Receipt of Proceeds of Oil and Gas Sold From Properties Securing Defendants’ Obligations filed pursuant to Rule 56, F.R.Civ.P., by the plaintiff, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Defendants Larry 0. Hulsey (Hulsey) and Larry 0. Hulsey and Compan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Barry filed this action against the above named six defendants in their individual capacities seeking a temporary restraining order; a preliminary and permanent injunction; declaratory judgement; and compensatory and punitive damages for violations of his civil and constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution; an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) to set aside the judgment entered in this action by the District Court for the City and County of Denver. Hearing wqs held on June 19, 1992 and the motion was extensiyely briefed. However, I conclude that I have no jurisdiction to hear this motion because an appeal is pending. Therefore, this action is transferred pursuant t...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
This cause is before the Court on the following:
Dkt. 264 Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions
Dkt. 265 Memorandum
Dkt. 296 Supplemental Memorandum
Dkt. 297 Plaintiffs’ response
Dkt. 298 Memorandum
Dkt. 300 Defendants’ Reply.
Plaintiffs have requested oral argument. The Court finds that an evidentiary hearing is not necessary; the request for oral argument is denied. Par...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of Petroleum Insurance Limited (“P.I.L.”) to reconsider or amend the court’s order of April 14, 1992. 789 F.Supp. 268 (N.D.Ill.1992). P.I.L. requests the entry of a Modified Final Judgment against Amoco Transport Company (“Amoco”) in favor of P.I.L. in the principal amount of United States Dollars Twenty-One Million Seven Hundred Forty-eight Thousand F...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Gerard Licciardi (“Licciardi”) receives a monthly pension payment based on his peak average earnings while employed. In calculating that average, Kropp Forge Division Employees’ Retirement Plan (the “Plan”) and Lone Star Forge Company (“Lone Star”) excluded a large lump-sum cash payment that had been made to Licciardi in settlement of claims against his employer (a co...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER
In this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff claimed that the defendants violated his constitutional rights by intentionally depriving him of a legal brief which had been prepared by an inmate law clerk for a pending state court appeal. Plaintiff's property was allegedly lost when he was transferred from the Collins Correctional Facility (Collins) to the Attic...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Petitioner Edward Savitz (“Savitz”), presently in state custody awaiting trial and ill with AIDS, has filed this Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus challenging the constitutionality of the bail set by the Pennsylvania Superior Court and seeking release from detention. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 1 Savitz was arrested in Philadelphia on March...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER1
This patent infringement suit is before the Court on remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 954 F.2d 732. The remand directs this Court to dismiss the complaint as moot in light of the parties’ settlement on appeal, which led to the Federal Circuit’s subsequent vacation of this Court’s partial summary judgment order. That order held one of the patents in issue in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Harvey Tepper was charged with and pleaded guilty to knowingly and unlawfully possessing a short-barreled shotgun which was not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, in violation of 26 U.S.C.
*271
§§ 5861(d) and 5871. Subsequent to this court’s acceptance of Tepper’s guilty plea, but prior to his sentencin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On April 27, 1992 at 10:30 a.m., the above-captioned case came on for hearing. The plaintiffs had filed a motion for summary judgment against all the defendants, and defendants Goodwins and Nelsons had filed motions for summary judgment. The Court has fully considered this matter, including review of all papers and documents submitted by the parties in support...
Views: 2
ORDER
I. Procedural History
Pro se
Plaintiffs filed this civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 21, 1982, alleging that their transfer in job and institutional assignments unconstitutionally infringed on their right to file lawsuits and to assist other inmates with litigation. On January 28, 1983, Attorney Steven L. Seliger filed a “Notice of Attorney App...
Views: 0
OPINION
On June 18, 1992, pursuant to a notice adequately disseminated to the class, this Court held a hearing on the proposed settlement set forth herein. No one appeared in opposition to the proposed settlement. The Court stated its view that the settlement is in all respects fair and appropriate and that the compromises represented therein constitute a reasonable balance, especially be...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Sections 205(g) and 1631(c)(3) of the Social Security Act, as amended, (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) (1988), seeking review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”). Both parties cross-move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). For the reason...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Arleamon Sadler, Jr. brings this action
pro se
against thirty-six defendants, including numerous government officials and agencies of the city and state of New York, federal government agencies, judges, and assorted private entities and individuals. Plaintiff seeks damages of $100 trillion and injunctive relief stemming from defendants’ al...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs Russell T. Lund, Jr. (“Lund”) and Wardwell M. Montgomery (“Montgomery”) seek in this diversity action to recover from defendant Chemical Bank (“Chemical”) for the amounts of two checks dated March 9, 1981, drawn on Chemical (the “Checks”). The Checks, one in the amount of $716,946 and the other for $46,056, were fraudulently negotiated by William T. Rubin (“Rubin”). As ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Minebea Co., Ltd., Nippon Miniature Bearing Corporation and NMB Technologies (USA), Inc. (collectively, “Minebea”) has moved pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 37(a)(4) for an order compelling the further oral examination of non-party witnesses attorneys Thomas MacBlain (“MacBlain”), Arthur Tenser (“Tenser”) and Peter J. Phillips (“Phillips”) (collectively, the “Deponents”) and compellin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs bring this consolidated action on behalf of a class of purchasers of units of securities of Mizlou Communications Company, Inc. (“Mizlou”) during the period February 12, 1990 to March 23, 1990. Plaintiffs claim that they purchased the units in reliance upon Mizlou’s prospectus, which, allegedly, was materially misleading in violation of sections 11, 12(2), ...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the Court is Defendant C. Diane Bishop's Motion to Dismiss; Plaintiffs’ Mo *755 tion for Summary Judgment; Defendant Bishop’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; and Defendant Amphitheater Unified School District’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. I. A. Plaintiffs allege the following facts in their Complaint: Kristy Dreher is a seven year-old student whose parents resid...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS This cause comes before the Court on two motions filed by the plaintiff, Sam Galloway Ford, Inc. (“Galloway”), both of which are opposed by the defendant, Universal Underwriters Insurance Company (“Universal”). In addition, this Order recognizes both parties’ Motions for Summary Judgment. This Order responds to the following pleadings: (1) Galloway’s Motion For Stay, filed on F...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand, filed February 18, 1992. On June 4, 1992, this Court held a hearing to address the various issues relating to removal and remand in this case. Having reviewed and considered this motion, the responses thereto, and the applicable law, the Court finds that this motion should be GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
The plaintiffs initia...
Views: 0
Page 9299
OPINION AND ORDER
The record before us suggests that more than a million women have received silicone gel breast implants. Since the Food and Drug Administration held highly publicized hearings a few months ago about the safety of this product, a rush to the courthouse has ensued, although some litigation concerning the product has periodically been filed in the federal courts in the last ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The pertinent facts giving rise to the pending appeal are set forth in the bankruptcy court’s memorandum of decision sustaining plaintiff’s complaint (Bankr.Dkt. No. 38) and in this court’s opinion of April 11, 1990 (Dkt. No. 28), and need not be repeated here. On April 11, 1990, this court remanded the referred matter to the bankruptcy court with instructions that the court a...
Views: 0
793 F. Supp. 120 (1992)
COUNCIL OF UNIT OWNERS OF the WISP CONDOMINIUM, INC.
v.
RECREATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC.
Civ. No. S 92-394.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
July 2, 1992.
*121 Thomas M. Trezise, Joel D. Newport, Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, Towson, Md., Harry M. Rifkin, Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, Baltimore, Md., for plaintiff.
Neil J. Ruther, Baltimore, Md., for defendant.
MEMORAN...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The
pro se
plaintiff, who filed this suit over a 1976 bicycle accident on the eve of the expiry of limitations, claims that the remaining defendants (the claims against other defendants (the “State defendants”) having been dismissed by an earlier order of this Court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction under the Eleventh Amendment) committed legal ...
Views: 0
TRANSFER ORDER This litigation presently consists of two actions, one action each in the District of New Jersey and the District of Maryland. Before the Panel is a motion by the Maryland plaintiffs to transfer, under 28 U.S.C. *230§ 1407, the Maryland action to the District of New Jersey for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the action pending there. Defendants oppose the motio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
Plaintiff alleges race discrimination and retaliatory discharge, both in violation of 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 (“Title VII”). The ease was tried to the court in a trial lasting two days. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52, the court now makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff, Karen Ross, began her employment with defendant Amer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The court has for consideration the motion of Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), defendant in the above-entitled cause, for judgment on the pleadings. This motion is based on the contention that the statute of limitations bars the action. For the following reasons, the motion will be deferred for ruling for a period of ten (10) days on certain conditions to be set forth below....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant, Jerry Williams (“Williams”), Petition for Review of Detention Order, filed April 8, 1992, and Motion to Reopen and/or Reconsider Detention Based Upon New Evidence Now Available for Presentation, filed May 15, 1992. Being advised in the premises, this Court hereby AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Andrew P. Rodovich’s Detent...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action is brought by Edna M. Gal-lups, as Administratrix of the Estate of Gordon A. Gallups, deceased, against Dr. James L. Crook, the surgeon who unsuccessfully operated on Gordon A. Gallups, plaintiffs deceased husband. Plaintiff invokes Alabama’s Medical Liability Act of 1987 and Alabama’s wrongful death statute. The fact that this case is in a federal court...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The above entitled civil action was commenced on May 6, 1992 in the Circuit Court of Morgan County, Alabama by plaintiff Denbo Iron and Metal Company, Inc. against defendant Transportation Insurance Company1 and was removed to this United States District Court by defendant via Notice of Removal filed in the Office of the Clerk of this Court on June 4,1992 with subject matter ju...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Following removal of this action from state court, plaintiff moves for remand.
Background
Plaintiff York Hannover Holding, A.G. (“York”) and intervenors-defendants McDermott International, Inc. and related companies (hereinafter collectively “McDer-mott”) are engaged in a significant commercial arbitration administered by the American Arbitration...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS TO PERFORM THEIR MANDATORY DUTIES UNDER SECTION 303(d) OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT THIS MATTER comes before the court on plaintiffs’ motion to compel defendants to perform their mandatory duties under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Having reviewed the motion, all documents filed in support and in opposition, all supplemental memoranda an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Several months ago defendants William and Suzanne Chick (“Chick”) filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the grounds that Mrs. Chick did not join in the Camelback Canyon Investors’ (“CCI”) loan transaction with Meritor Savings Bank (“Meritor”). On November 8, 1991 this Court ruled that the plain language of A.R.S. § 25-214(C)(l) required joinder of both spouses in o...
Views: 0
OPINION FOLLOWING BENCH TRIAL At the June 10, 1992 bench trial in the captioned matter, attorney Charles Dorn represented Defendant, Thomas Buehler. Jeff Cutter, Legal Intern from the Office of the United States Attorney, represented Plaintiff, United States of America. Defendant consented to proceed before the United States Magistrate Judge. This Opinion memorializes the findings and conclusio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
This is a civil action brought by the former superintendent of the Hoover, Alabama city school system. In his original complaint, the plaintiff, Dr. Robert Mitchell, asserted six constitutional claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and three state law claims under the court’s supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1367, all of which arose out of events occurring in con...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the question of whether Tari Hasty Jahn, mother of Jacqueline Hasty, has the sole right to recover for the wrongful death of her deceased daughter. In making its determination, the court must decide whether or not Tari Hasty Jahn abandoned Jacqueline Hasty prior to her death. After careful consideration of the briefs of counsel and the record as a whole, the court here...
Views: 0
Page 9350
ORDER Before the court is the issue whether a hospital lien, not filed within the statutory time period, can be enforced against defendants, who had actual notice of the lien. This issue has not been addressed by the Georgia courts. Both sides have filed motions for summary judgment. FACTS The facts in this case are undisputed. On March 20, 1989, Russell A. Barber was injured in an automobi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This Opinion describes the basis of this court’s rulings by Order of February 14, 1992, on motions for summary judgment filed by parties to these consolidated actions.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Five separate actions are consolidated before this court.
Sarah B. Shields v. Charles H. Keating, Jr. (“Shields”),
a class action on behalf “all persons who purc...
Views: 2
ORDER This matter is before the Court on Robert A. Soy’s (“Soy”) Motion to Sever, and Motion for Transfer, filed May 29, 1992. Being advised in the premises, this Court hereby GRANTS Soy’s Motions in part and DENIES Soy’s Motions in part. Motion to Sever By his Motion to Sever, Soy argues that Counts Twenty-Two, Twenty-Three, and Twenty-Four of the indictment against Jerry Williams (“Williams”),...
Views: 0
*294 ENTRY This Court conducted a trial on April 22, 1992 to determine if the defendant, Elaw-renee Davis, is indebted to the plaintiff, the United States, for a defaulted student loan. Based on the evidence submitted at trial and the post-trial submissions, this Court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: I.Findings of Fact 1. Elawrence Davis defaulted on a $4565...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
On September 11, 1991, plaintiff Lehigh-ton Area School District (“Lehighton”) filed this complaint under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961,
et seq.
In addition to RICO claims, Lehighton has asserted claims for breach of contract, negligence, and fraud and conversion alleging jurisdiction under the doctr...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff moves to amend her Complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion is denied.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On January 7, 1991, Plaintiff Dorothy Thomas filed a Complaint alleging that the Defendant violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, on the basis of gender, religion and retaliation. Plain...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION RE INTERVENTION Introduction This action arises out of the Korean Airlines Flight 007 disaster on September 1, 1983 in which the decedent, Muriel A.M.S. Kole, was tragically killed. There are two plaintiffs in this case. Marjorie Zicherman (the decedent’s sister) and Muriel Mahalek (the decedent’s mother), in their individual capacities, are suing Korean Airlines for pecuniary...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION AND RECOLL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS I, II, AND III OF PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
This case involves the repudiation by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”)
1
as lessee of a lease with Doug
*606
las and Linda Cárdente (“Plaintiffs”). As a result of this repudiation, Pla...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM Pro se prisoner plaintiff has filed an § 1983 action alleging that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been violated because the defendant failed to deliver a personal letter to him on or about April 21, 1989. This cause is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Courts have repeatedly recognized that summary judgment is a harsh remedy that should...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff instituted the above-styled civil action seeking to collect mine reclamation fees allegedly owed by Defendant pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (“SMCRA”), 30 U.S.C. §§ 1201
et seq.
(1986 & West Supp.1992). Specifically, Plaintiff claims Defendant un-derreported the amount of coal upon which such fees are due during the period of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Introduction
This case, as originally filed, presented the question whether in the circumstances the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) was empowered to renew Woodstock Associates’ (“Woodstock’s”) expiring Housing Assistance Payments (“HAP”) contract automatically for five years, even though Woodstock desired to end the contractua...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiffs filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief claiming that the Vernonia School District’s drug testing policy violates their son’s rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 9 of the Oregon Constitution. The following constitutes my findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52. FACTS I. Bac...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is plaintiff Gus A. All-britton’s petition for an award of attorney fees and other legal costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B), for his lawyer’s services rendered in connection with plaintiff’s application for social security disability and disability insurance benefits. Defendant Secretary o...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Angel Brito brings this action asserting various claims in connection with his dismissal from his position as a Federal Police Officer employed by the General Services Administration (“GSA”). Defendants in this action are: William Diamond, Regional Administrator of the GSA, Region 2; the GSA, Region 2; Richard Austin, Administrator of the GSA; the GSA; the United States ...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM This matter is before the court on the disposition and sentencing of the defendant, Paul G. Davis, Cause Number FCR 91-22. The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 on August 28, 1991. The parties have agreed that the 1987 version of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“the Guidelines”, “USSG”) are the appropriate versio...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs brought this civil action against defendant on October 19, 1991, alleging, inter alia, that John Doe contracted the HIV virus as a result of defendant’s negligence in screening blood donors and testing blood for use in transfusions. Presently before the court are cross motions for summary judgment on the issue whether plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the statute o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT LOUIS W. SULLIVAN’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This cause is now before the court on the defendant Louis W. Sullivan’s (hereinafter “Secretary”) Motion to Dismiss filed together with his Answer on December 6, 1990. The Secretary filed this Memorandum of Law in Support of his Motion to Dismiss and in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on April 17...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motions for partial judgment on the pleadings and motion in limine. Having reviewed the motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, the memoranda in support and in opposition, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion should be granted. The motion in limine will be considered at the time of trial. This i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Chrysler Corporation seeks dismissal of the plaintiffs’ first amended complaint, alleging that the action is untimely. The complaint alleges that plaintiff Cindy Gardner was injured in a 1989 automobile accident. At the time of the accident, she was riding in a Dodge Caravan driven by Terri Garrison. The Garrison car was struck in the rear by a Toyota Corolla driv...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a products liability action wherein the plaintiffs allege that Christopher Snow-den, a minor, was injured as a result of a defective DPT (diptheria-pertussis-tetanus) vaccine. Plaintiffs assert that defendant Connaught Laboratories, Inc., a Delaware corporation, manufactured, sold and distributed the DPT vaccine. The defendant, Connaught Laboratories, Ltd., a Canadi...
Views: 0
ORDER
All motions then pending were resolved by Order entered June 5, 1992 save for the motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council [NRDC] and Fenton Communications. In the interest of economy, that Order is incorporated by reference. Suffice it to say that on February 26, 1989 CBS “60 Minutes” aired a televised report on A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant Scott Paper Company (Scott) for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff T.K. Stanley, Inc. (Stanley) has responded to the motion. The court has considered the memoranda of authorities together with attachments submitted by the parties and finds and conclud...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
John Howard Meadows, administrator of the Estate of James Meadows, Deceased, brought this suit as administrator and as Trustee on behalf of persons entitled to any right, profit, proceed, royalty, gain, advantage, title, or interest under a certain deed from Ephraim Garonzik to James Meaders, dated December 14, 1911.
As a matter of background, “Spindletop” was the dis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Cary Moore died when the automobile he was driving crashed into a building and burst into flames. At the time of the crash, Mr. Moore was insured under an accidental death policy issued by Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Company (Southern Farm). Following his death, his wife and beneficiary, Lou Ann Moore, sought to recover benefits under the Southern Farm policy....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs Alford Lee Thomas and Carol Thomas, as guardians of the Estate of Matthew Thomas, have responded to the motion and have moved for partial summary judgm...
Views: 1
ORDER I. Until April 13, 1989, American Continental Corporation (“ACC”) engaged in financial services and real estate activities. On April 13, 1989, ACC filed a Petition under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. On April 14, 1989 the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (“FHLBB”) found that ACC’s principal subsidiary, Lincoln Savings and Loan Association (“Lincoln”), was operating in an unsaf...
Views: 0
ENTRY DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS This matter is before the Court to. resolve Defendant Chris MacAslan’s motion to suppress statements he made to I.R.S. agents during an interview on July 12, 1989. The Court has conducted an eviden-tiary hearing on that motion, and based on the parties filings and the evidence presented, and being duly advised finds that the motion to suppress should be denied. I....
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 56(F)
This is a civil rights action brought under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth
*1350
Amendments of the United States Constitution. In 1988, the electors of Orange County approved a new form of county g...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This is an action by the Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe (hereinafter “plaintiff” or the “Tribe”) against the State of Arizona, its Governor and its Attorney General (hereinafter “defendants” or the “State”) for declaratory relief, seeking enforcement of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701, et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pu...
Views: 2
ORDER
Currently pending is plaintiffs’ motion to remand and defense motions to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment.
I. Transactional Events
On February 26, 1989 the CBS television program “60 Minutes” aired a segment highly critical of daminozide, more commonly known by its tradename as Alar. Alar was commonly used in the apple industry as a growth regulator. By m...
Views: 3
ORDER This matter is before the court on the following motions: (1) Glaxo’s appeal of a *873 magistrate’s order barring Glaxo’s in-house patent counsel from reviewing confidential Genpharm documents obtained through discovery; (2) Genpharm’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, or in the alternative, to transfer to the District of Maryland; and (3) Glaxo’s motion to consolidat...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL
This matter is before me on James M. Butters’ emergency motion for stay pending appeal. Butters appeals the bankruptcy court’s May 29, 1992 judgment confirming a first amended joint plan of reorganization submitted by the four debtor entities.
1
Butters contends that an emergency stay is necessary because, under the approved reorganizatio...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 266 (1992)
Albert H. BALENTINE, Wallace Young, Virginia Young, Allen Lee Dunbar, Ethel Lee Dunbar Tomiesene Johnson, Karen Young, and Ernestine Marshall, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
UNION MORTGAGE COMPANY, Skopbank, Five Avco Financial Services, Inc., Security Pacific Financial Services, Inc., Fleet Finance, Inc., and American General Fin...
Views: 0
ORDER REJECTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The United States Magistrate Judge having filed with the Court on April 10, 1992, with copies to counsel, his Recommended Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 24); and Defendant having filed its Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Orde...
Views: 0
ORDER On June 21, 1991, Defendants filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence and for the Return of Property (# 40). On January 14, 1992, the Honorable Lawrence R. Leavitt entered a Report and Recommendation (# 85) recommending the granting of Defendants’ above-referenced Motion. The Government filed Objections thereto (# 89) on March 5, 1992, in accordance with Local Rule 510-2 of the Rules of Practice ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Midlantic National Bank (“Midlantic”) appeals from three orders of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). For the reasons that follow, the court holds that Midlantic has a perfected security interest in rents which it may enforce in bankruptcy-
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The facts a...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 1352 (1992)
Brian CORDERO, a minor, by his mother, Irish BATES, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 1:CV-91-0791.
United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania.
June 23, 1992.
*1353 Leonard Rieser, Christina Aborlleile, Educ. Law Center PA, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
John G. Knorr, III, Er...
Views: 3
Page 9485
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The plaintiff, Site Microsurgical Systems, Inc. (“Site”), filed suit against the defendant, The Cooper Companies, Inc. (“Coo
*335
per”) alleging patent infringement. Before the Court is plaintiffs motion to join its parent corporation, the Iolab Corporation (“Iolab”), as a party plaintiff under Rule 15. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 69; 70.) Site contends that the ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the court is plaintiff’s motion for class certification in this facial challenge to New Jersey’s “Election Contest Subpoena Laws.” Plaintiffs propose that the class be defined as “all people who are registered to vote, or eligible to register to vote, in the State of New Jersey.” Cplt. ¶ 5. Defendant Donald Phelan, the Acting Clerk of the Law Division and of the Chancery Division o...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action by petitioner, Lawrence Simmons pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to obtain a writ of habeas corpus.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Petitioner was charged in a Passaic County Indictment, along with codefend
*780
ants David Wilson
1
and Donald Phillips,
2
for the May 27, 1977 murder of Dr. David Doktor
(N.J.S.A.
2A:113-1); mu...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on Motion of Defendant, filed 6 March 1992, to *661 Dismiss. On that same date, Plaintiff, who is appearing in this action pro se, delivered to this Court a letter. Although it is not clear; this letter is apparently in opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Background Cordy Hobbs Jr.. (“Hobbs”) is a former employee of Schneider National Carri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Linda L. Jaekel and Emily Eelkema sued their former employer, Equifax Marketing Decision Systems, Inc., alleging sexual harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (“Title VII”). They seek, inter alia, compensatory and punitive damages, and they demand a jury trial. These elements of re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Background Before me are Reece’s motions to dismiss for pre-indictment delay, to suppress evidence and testimony, for production of grand jury minutes, and to exclude his prior convictions. The motions have been briefed fully and I received evidence and argument on them at May 15, 1992 and June 15, 1992 hearings. The motions are denied in part and granted in pa...
Views: 1
ORDER Petitioner Tahan Jones, a corporal in the United States Marine Corps Reserves, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, on the grounds that he (1) was wrongfully denied discharge as a conscientious objector and (2) is currently being held on active duty in violation of Marine Corps regulations. This matter is before the court on respondents’ motion for summary judgment....
Views: 0
*1429
MEMORANDUM' OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on a motions by Defendant Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith to dismiss and/or to make more definite and certain (Filing No. 26). For the reasons set out below, the Court finds that the motion to dismiss should be granted as to the plaintiff’s claims involving state and federal securities laws (the First, Second, Fourth a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Billy Gray, a professional trainer of Tennessee Walking Horses, brings this action under 15 U.S.C. § 1825(d)(6), 28 U.S.C. § 2201, and 28 U.S.C. § 1331, seeking a declaration from this Court that the procedures used in administrative hearings conducted pursuant to the Horse Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1821-1831, are constitutionally deficient. Defendant has moved to ...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs’ consolidated shareholder derivative actions, on behalf of United Technologies Corporation (“UT”), a nominal defendant, allege that UT’s directors and officers (“defendants”) have fraudulently sought to obtain and retain United States defense contracts.1 Plaintiffs claim defendants violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (“RI...
Views: 2
793 F. Supp. 404 (1992)
Eric Anthony ABRAHAMS
v.
YOUNG & RUBICAM, INC., et al.
Civ. No. 5:91cv688 (PCD).
United States District Court, D. Connecticut.
June 26, 1992.
*405 Robert P. Herzog, New York City, Eileen McGann, West Redding, Conn., for plaintiff.
Robert N. Chatigny, Hartford, Conn., Thomas D. Barr, Stephen S. Madsen, Frances M. Lynch, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, New York City, for de...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 904 (1992)
Marie FITCH, Plaintiff,
v.
ARKANSAS BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD, Defendant.
Civ. No. 92-5036.
United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fayetteville Division.
June 12, 1992.
*905 Oscar Stilley, Fort Smith, Ark., for plaintiff.
David R. Matthews, Matthews, Campbell & Rhoads, Rogers, Ark., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
H. FRANKLIN WATERS, Chief Judge.
This is an a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.Statement of the Case
The plaintiffs, Tim and Doris Almand, brought this civil rights action under section 1983 against the defendants. In addition to their civil rights claims, the plaintiffs asserted various state law claims. Both factually and legally this case has been complex. After a number of continuances for various reasons and a mistrial, this matter...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
On July 28, 1986, plaintiff Carlyle B. Harris, proceeding
pro se,
commenced this action against the Columbus, Ohio Board of Education (hereinafter “CBOE”), James G. Hyre, Superintendent, Larry Cunningham, Unit Manager, Personnel Services, Michael J. O’Leary, Principal, South High School. Thereafter, on March 27, 1987, Plaintiff Harris file...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In the above referenced case, Peter J. Pinaud (“plaintiff”), a resident of Florida, *915 brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against current and former Suffolk County Assistant District Attorneys David Freundlich (“Freundlich”), John Holownia (“Holow-nia”), Kevin Fitzgerald (“Fitzgerald”), Patrick J. O’Connell (“O’Connell”) and Mark Cohen (“Cohen”) (collectively “district ...
Views: 4
OPINION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I.
Introduction
This suit was brought by the New York City Managerial Employees Association (the “MEA”) and fourteen managerial employees against the Mayor of the City of New York (the “City”), its Comptroller, the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (the “HHC”), the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New Yor...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9521: United States v. Real Property Located at 110 Collier Drive, Albertville
Page 9521
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION In this forfeiture action, 1 the United States claims that the claimant Julie Moon’s house and car were used or intend *1050 ed to be used to facilitate a violation of federal drug laws. It claims that the $8,861.00 in currency found in the house was furnished in exchange for controlled substances. 2 Based on affidavits submitted in support of plaintiffs motion for s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION The issue in this case is whether the Eufaula (Alabama) Adolescent Center is the least restrictive environment, for the education of plaintiff Mark Z under the Education for AH Handicapped Children Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq. (“The Act”). Based on the evidence adduced at trial, and the applicable legal authorities, the Court concludes that issue must be answered in th...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This action was filed by American Medical Systems, Inc. (AMS) against Medical Engineering Corporation (MEC) in October 1987. AMS owns, via assignment from William Klatt, U.S. Patent Number 4,597,-765, entitled “Method and Apparatus for Packaging a Fluid Containing Prosthesis.” AMS claims MEC has infringed the patent. MEC has counterclaimed for a dec...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Albert Conde, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for back pay, damages and injunctive relief alleging that he was dismissed from his employment with the Municipality of Juncos for political reasons, in violation of his rights under the First Amendment and under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Co-defen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET # 12, # 28 & # 32)
1
I. INTRODUCTION.
Plaintiffs are two former employees of defendant General Electric Company and are members of defendant Local 255. They have brought this hybrid action pursuant to § 301 of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, alleging, first, that on September 21, 1990 the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The above-captioned action is a citizens’ suit under the federal Clean Air Act. Plaintiffs, Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Inc., the City of New York and the State of New York challenge the failure of defendant United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to issue requirements concerning motor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs (“1/ Ms”), as mandated b...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter came on for consideration on the motion of Autoskill Inc. (Autoskill) for a preliminary injunction against National Educational Support Systems, Inc. (NESS) based upon copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets. A hearing was held on this matter from December 12-17, 1991. Prior to this hearing, NESS filed suit in this c...
Views: 7
OPINION
The Complaint in this action, filed on September 27, 1989, by Barnes Group Inc. (“Barnes”), is for infringement of federally-registered trademarks under the Trademark Act of 1946 (the “Lanham Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 1051
et seq.,
for use of false designations of origin and false descriptions and representations under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and ...
Views: 1
*900
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action by current and former fire fighters of the Operations/Fire Suppression Division of the Wichita Fire Department against the City of Wichita (City) for unpaid compensation, unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages and attorney fees. In their motion for partial summary judgment, plaintiffs contend the City has violated the requirem...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Motion Of Plaintiff Sverdrup Corporation For Entry Of Arbitration Award As A Final Judgment And Rule 54(b) Certification Of Judgment As Final Judgment. Defendant WHC Constructors, Inc. (“WHC”), opposes plaintiff's motion arguing that the motion is untimely because it was filed more than one year after entry of the arbitration award.1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
William R. and Karen L. Swartzbauer, Francis J. and Michelle M. Beckett, Raymond S. and Patricia A. Novak, Joseph T. and Linda L. Brooks purport to bring this class action
1
on behalf of all current and retired painters and their spouses in Pennsylvania and New Jersey who have been occupationally exposed to lead paint and lead pigment products. The seventee...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER On February 27, 1992, Productos Mistolín, S.A., plaintiff in Case 90-0964-Civ-Hi-ghsmith which is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, filed an emergency motion in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico to compel the appearance of a witness at a deposition and to impose sanctions. Heated and cordial argument w...
Views: 0
PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. Background
In 1968, David Oreck, an authorized RCA dealer, had the idea to market RCA products using the words “XL” and “X-TENDED LIFE.” However, concerned that the Federal Trade Commission might consider an “XL” mark misleading, RCA instructed Oreck not to use “XL” in connection with any RCA product.
Oreck complied with RCA’s request, but was und...
Views: 16
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS This matter comes before the court on the motion of Defendant Richmond Tank Car Company (“RTC”) to dismiss the second amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) or, alternatively, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Oral argument was heard on June 19, 1992. After careful...
Views: 0
*830
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The facts of this case press against the limits of federal common law and statutory protections afforded the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) when it takes over failed banking institutions. As banks continue to fail in troubled economic times, the FDIC, invoking protections carved out by the courts and Congress, has adopted an aggressive stan...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs’ untimely “Motion to Strike Defendants’ Non-Party Defense,” filed with leave of court after the final pretrial conference. The defendants responded, and the plaintiffs replied.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 13, 1988, one Joan J. Pritt (“Pritt”) drove a car in which plaintiff John Herman Rockrohr, Jr. (“Rockro...
Views: 0
I. Background
Ontario Corporation sold the assets of its successor corporation, Ontario Forge Corporation, to AeroForge, on January 12, 1989. Ontario Forge Corporation ceased operations and discharged its employees on Friday, January 13, 1989 (Friday the 13th). However, Ontario Corporation arranged the asset sale such that the non-union Ontario Forge Corporation employees (forty-three in total) ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter was before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge on November 25, 1991 on defendant’s motion to strike , plaintiffs’ October 17, 1991 jury demand. Also before the court is plaintiffs’ motion for a jury trial under Rule 39(b). Plaintiffs were represented by Joseph A. Thomson, Esq. Defendant was represented by Robert L. DeMay, Esq.
*133Because this case was removed to fede...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on plaintiffs motion to reinstate its Section 10(b) claims. Upon consideration of the briefs and arguments of the parties, plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
The plaintiff class in this matter filed this action stating several claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities an...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Petitioner is presently incarcerated at the Western Missouri Correctional Center in Cameron, Missouri pursuant to the sentence and judgment of the Circuit Court of Buchanan County entered on February 24, 1989, Case No. CR 688-171FX. Petitioner *818pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to sell a controlled substance pursuant to Mo. Rev.S...
Views: 0
Page 9642
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises out of the discharge of Ana Mojica Escobar from her position as a secretary to Manuel Ruiz Torres, the Director of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s Office of the Disabled Person Investigating Official (ODPIO). The plaintiff alleges that her discharge violated the Federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634. Plaintiff also claims da...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, Plaintiff Catherine Cotton seeks “a copy of any and all reports of the Office of Inspector General of the Smithsonian, respecting Andrea G. Snyder, a Senior Buyer at the Smithsonian Institution’s Museum Shops, and Kathy Borrus, a Merchandise Manager at the Smithsonian Institution’s Muse...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is the motion of Defendant Polly Peck International PLC (“Polly Peck”) to dismiss, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b), or alternatively to stay the action. For the reasons that follow, Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted.
1
BACKGROUND
Polly Peck is a publicly held, multinational conglomerate organized under the laws of the United...
Views: 1
*847
MEMORANDUM
This is an action brought by Leonard and Paula Weir (“Plaintiffs”) to recover unpaid medical bills allegedly due under the Employee Health Insurance Plan of Atlantic Western Personnel Leasing Corporation (“AWPL”). Plaintiffs have named Defendant Northwestern National Life Insurance Company (“NWNL”) in Counts III, IV and V of their Complaint. NWNL filed a Motion to...
Views: 1
ORDER
BACKGROUND
1. Procedural History
Plaintiff Technographics, Inc. (“Techno-graphics”) filed this action on June 19, 1989, alleging that defendant Mercer Corporation (“Mercer”) sold a defective coating machine to it in October of 1987. The initial scheduling order issued by the undersigned judge on November 14, 1990 placed the case on the May, 1991 trial list, and set other pretrial deadlines....
Views: 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction page 1300
II. Procedural History page 1300
III. Summary Judgment Standard page 1301
IV. Motions to Strike page 1302
A. Motion to Strike Texas Eastern’s Motion for Summary Judgment page 1302
B. Motion to Strike Certain Evidence Offered by Texas Eastern in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment page 1302
*1299
C.Sup...
Views: 1
PUBLIC OPINION Irving Bethea, Corey Grant, Vincent Jackson, and Andre Williams were indicted by a federal grand jury on a variety of counts, including a RICO conspiracy count, a substantive RICO count, and various drug charges. Shortly after their arraignments, this court ordered the government to turn over all exculpatory material in its possession as defined by the trilogy of Supreme Court ca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
As the Court has traveled a rather bumpy path to reach this point in the litigation, a brief history of recent events will set the stage for the current action. Plaintiffs are employees of R.W.F., Inc,
Laurans Standard
division; defendants are R.W.F., Inc. and Wetterau, Inc. (“the company”) and Teamsters Local 251, the union representing all employees of th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pursuant to Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States moved to strike certain defendants’ affirmative defenses from the pleadings as legally insufficient. The United States contended that section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9607, did not permit most of the asserted ...
Views: 0
ORDER RE DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR ORDER COMPELLING SET OFF; TO STRIKE PREJUDGMENT INTEREST; FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT AND FOR NEW TRIAL; PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT
.1. INTRODUCTION
This action raises an issue of first impression. Defendant AVCO Corporation
*1190
moves for an amendment of the Judgment which requires the Court...
Views: 2
FINDINGS ON SENTENCING
Whatever else may be said about the sentencing guidelines’ philosophy and substance, the guidelines’ procedural provisions create some clumsy and surprising issues. In this case, in which the parties dispute every potentially applicable guideline provision, the government is in the unusual position of trying to prove that a person was not involved in the charged cri...
Views: 0
ORDER Defendants seek by this motion to compel plaintiff to execute medical authorizations that permit defendants to conduct ex parte interviews with plaintiff’s treating doctors. A hearing on the motion was held December 2, 1991. Allan Shapiró, Esq. appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs. Creighton Magid, Esq. appeared on behalf of the defendants. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This case is a medical malpra...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Some observers of civil litigation believe that discovery rights will be taken from lawyers within the next decade or two, to be replaced by a system of standard disclosures. That belief is based on exaggerated perceptions of the failure of cooperative, properly limited discovery without court intervention. The method in which discovery has been conducted in this case, unfort...
Views: 0
FINDINGS ON SENTENCING
I.
This court came before the court for sentencing hearing on June 3, 1992; the parties presented evidence and argued their respective positions under the Sentencing Guidelines. The court took the issues under advisement to consider the evidence and arguments. The parties’ arguments require the court to consider the propriety of the use of the cross-references ...
Views: 2
OPINION
This lawsuit seeks to place the Pottsville Police Department, and indeed every police department, on the horns of an intractable dilemma. The defendant, a Pottsville Police Officer, has asked the court to resolve the dilemma by cutting off one of the horns pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, the court will do so.
When ruling on a 12(b)(6) Motion, the court
...
Views: 0
Page 9723
MEMORANDUM
The above-captioned actions have been filed as related cases. This Memorandum shall be applicable to each. Resolved in herein are the following attacks upon plaintiff’s Complaint: (1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (2) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Per
*8...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action arising from the sale of works of art. Plaintiff asserts claims of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, negligence, breach of contract, breach of a covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of warranty, and violations of Mass.Gen.L. chs. 93A & 231. Pending before the court is the motion of Sally M. Avery, March A. Cavanaugh, and Augusta M. Green...
Views: 0
Page 9732
*642
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the Court on plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 (1988). Plaintiff California Medical Products, Inc. (“CalMed”) holds the patent for a cervical extrication collar marketed as “STIFNECK ™.” CalMed seeks to preliminarily enjoin defendant Emergency Medical Products, Inc. (“EMPI”) from manu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant in the above-captioned case has filed a Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Amended Complaint. In essence, defendant objects to plaintiffs use of a fictitious name in his Complaint. For reasons which follow, the Court denies defendant’s motion, and authorizes plaintiff to proceed in this matter under a fictitious name.
I.
Plaintiff, a transsexual, has file...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL
On April 8, 1992, a jury found defendant guilty of being a felon in possession of a handgun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). This matter is presently before the court on defendant’s motion for a new trial or a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 29 and 33.
I. BACKGROUND
...
Views: 1
On March 31,1992, defendant pled guilty to a single count indictment charging him with bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). In the course of preparing the presentence report, probation determined that defendant has two prior convictions which constitute “crimes of violence” as defined in USSG § 4B1.2 and that he should be sentenced as a “career offender” under that section. Defendant ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Defendants in the above-captioned case have requested that the jury be specifically *394instructed regarding plaintiffs duty to mitigate damages arising from her lost earning capacity. The state courts of Rhode Island have not previously addressed the precise legal questions raised by defendants’ request. Federal courts are, of course, required to apply state common law princip...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jennifer A. Magnuson brings this
pro se
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Cook County Sheriff’s Police Department, Officer Michael Cassarella, nine unknown police officers, Cook County Board President Richard Phelan, and sixteen commissioners of the Cook County Board, alleging violations of the United States and ...
Views: 0
*818MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Michael Pittman seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent Rodney J. Ahitow, Warden, Illinois River Correctional Center, now moves to dismiss Pittman’s petition for lack of jurisdiction. For the reasons set forth below, respondent’s motion to dismiss is granted.
I.
Following a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Pittma...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court is the defendant’s Motion to Vacate Sentence and for New Trial pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The defendant bases his claim for relief on ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Specifically, he attacks his trial counsel’s alleged failure to properly object to the introduction of tape recorded telephone conversations between an undercover police officer and u...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff brings this action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (“LMRDA”), and violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) against defendants Paul Walsh, Construction Teamsters Health and Welfare Fund (“the Fund”), Teamsters Local 379 Health Services Plan (“the Health ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Braden Shielding Systems (“Braden Shielding”) makes shielding systems for magnetic resonance imaging devices (“MRIs”). An MRI is a highly sophisticated diagnostic instrument with which doctors can map a patient’s tissues without surgery. Because the device uses magnetic fields, shielding is necessary to contain the fields and to prevent outside inter...
Views: 0
*598
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on defendants’ motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) Fed.R.Civ.P., or in the alternative for a more definite statement pursuant to Rule 12(e). For the reasons set forth below, the motions are granted in part, and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation (“the Corporation”) filed t...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Thompson Sanders has filed a motion for findings of fact pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(3)(D), and for modification of sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I.
Sanders, a former Chicago Board of Trade member, and three co-defendants were charged in an eleven-count superseding indictment, returned on July 5,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The issue before the Court is whether an employee who elects to file an administrative claim for wrongful discharge with the Department of Labor may file a wrongful discharge complaint in court while his administrative claim is pending.
For the following reasons, the court holds that he may not do so, and will therefore grant defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject mat...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In May of 1986 the plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendants to ship her vehicle, a 1988 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera, from Pennsauken, New Jersey, to St. Croix. At the same time she was given a document entitled "Automobile Inspection Record". This document showed the car to be in good physical condition. Additionally, plaintiff testified that when she deliver...
Views: 0
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
The question presented in this case is whether unbuilt and unconveyed condominium units together with their associated percentage interests in the common areas and facilities constitute separate taxable units under the Condominium Act and the Real Property Tax laws of the U.S. Virgin Islands? For the reasons which follow the court answers the question in the affirmative, and w...
Views: 0
Page 9788
ORDER
On 29 May 1992, this Court entered an Order denying plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel the Continued Deposition of Defendant and finding that defendant’s Motion to Continue Deposition was moot. This Order is intended to amplify the Court’s view on the improper conduct of Mr. Charles Watts, who represents plaintiffs, during the deposition of defendant on 11 May 1992.
The nature of thi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
William F. Comly & Son, Inc., brings this appeal, under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), from the February 27, 1992, 137 B.R. 151, Final Order and Judgment of the Bankruptcy Court, seeking commissions and expenses, under 11 U.S.C. 330(a), as a auctioneer appointed
nunc pro tunc.
BACKGROUND
In May-June 1988, Appellant Comly, with the assurance of the bankruptcy Tr...
Views: 1
ORDER
Background
On July 24, 1991, Defendants Little League Baseball, Inc. and its President and Chief Executive Officer Dr. Creighton J. Hale adopted the following policy regarding base coaching:
... (coach in wheel chair) may coach from the dugout, but cannot be in the coachers box. Little League must consider the safety of the youth playing the game, and they should not h...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 22, 1990, Deborah Sue Pagana-Fay, plaintiff herein, filed a
pro se
complaint in this Court seeking relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e,
et seq.
1
Plaintiff is a white female and she has here sued Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (the “WSSC”), her former employer, alleging sex discri...
Views: 0
OPINION
The Court has before it Defendant E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co.’s (“Du Pont”) Motion to Dismiss on the grounds of
forum non conveniens.
BACKGROUND
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss has been before the Court
1
and the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (“Court of-Appeals”) twice and is now back before this Court. This action was brought by Plaintiff Ado...
Views: 0
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant A.J. Equities, Ltd. (“AJ Equities”) to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff George Wainer (“Wainer”), pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion, set for hearing on June 24, 1992, was taken under submission without oral argument.
I.
On September 14, 1973, Wainer entered into a lease (the “Lease”) with Barke...
Views: 0
ORDER The captioned case was removed from the State Court in Forsyth County, Georgia to this court purportedly on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. The court became concerned that the court may not have subject matter jurisdiction when a motion to disregard the citizenship of defendant Judy McElveen appeared on the docket. The court also noted that the plaintiff had not filed a response or a...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the «IBT”) an(j the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provides for th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The defendant’s motion to dismiss Count IY of the plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim and the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of liability upon Count IV of the plaintiff’s complaint were taken under advisement at the conclusion of oral argument on May 20, 1992.
For reasons stated herein, it is the opinion of the Court that the defendant is en...
Views: 0
OPINION Plaintiff, Vera P. Orr, brought this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act (the Act), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary), denying Orr’s application for disability insurance and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits for the period beginning in June of 1989. B...
Views: 0
OPINION The matter before the court is the motion of defendants, Francis Chia, Childbro Toys Ltd., Easebon Services Ltd., Joe Lingg, and Harry Moorhouse (hereinafter, Childbro), for a temporary restraining order (#7-1) and a preliminary injunction as to plaintiff’s misleading and threatening communications to the trade (#7-2). BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Hart Enterprises, Inc. (Hart), of Vancouve...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Stephen Duane Johannsen, brings this action for copyright infringement and unfair competition seeking declaratory, monetary and injunctive relief against defendants, Toni Brown, Les Kippel, Richard Wilson,
1
Relix, Inc., Relix Magazine, Inc., and Rockin’ Relix, Inc. Defendants have asserted a number of affirmative defenses. Kippel has counterclaimed for defam...
Views: 4
OPINION Plaintiff Hartford Fire Insurance Company brings this action for declaratory judgment against defendant N.W. Metal Fabricators, Inc., its insured, seeking a judicial declaration of “no coverage” under an insurance contract. Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on two of defendant’s three counterclaims. Defendant moves for partial summary judgment on one of the counterclaims. I grant pla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER This case is a multi-count criminal prosecution against eighteen individuals, for a continuing criminal enterprise and drug conspiracy. Several firearms violations are also charged. The indictment mentions that defendants, some of which allegedly belong to the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, influenced other motorcycle groups and together distributed large quantities of methamphetam...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF FORFEITURE
This court heard plaintiff’s motion on June 30, 1992. Beverly Wee, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared on behalf of plaintiff; Rodney H.S. Kim, Esq. appeared on behalf of claimant Ki Woon Kim. After reviewing the motion and the supporting and opposing memoranda, the court grants plaintiff’s motion for summary j...
Views: 6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a tort action filed by Dana Marie Boyles (the “Infant Plaintiff”) by her parents and natural guardians, and by each of her parents, Donna and Dennis Boyles, individually, against American Cyanamid Company (“Cyanamid”). Essentially, plaintiffs contend that on October 6, 1984, Donna Boyles was exposed to an allegedly toxic airborne emission that emanated from a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Nester’s Map & Guide Corporation (Nester), a New York Corporation, which sells and publishes a New York City taxi driver’s guide entitled
Official New York Taxi Driver’s Guide
(Nester’s guide), brought this copyright infringement action against Hagstrom Map Company, Inc. (Hagstrom),
*731
a Delaware corporation with its principal place of busine...
Views: 1
*724
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced case, Stanley S. Smilan (“plaintiff” or “Smilan”) has brought suit against United Airlines, Inc. (“defendant” or “United”) for alleged violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
(“ADEA”). In his first cause of action, Smilan claims that, in violation of the ADEA, United improperly de...
Views: 0
RULING FROM THE BENCH 1 THE COURT: Inasmuch as the government does not object to the pre-sentence report and the defendant has withdrawn those objections heretofore filed, the Court will adopt the findings contained in this report. Accordingly, the total offense level is 34, the criminal history category is 1. The guideline range is from 151 months to a maximum of 188 months, but is limited b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a diversity suit for wrongful discharge and defamation. The plaintiff, Barbara Brown, is a former employee of defendant PST Vans, Inc., a Utah corporation. In October, 1990, Ms. Brown was hired in Colorado as an over-the-road truck driver; she was eventually promoted to be an instructor and was allowed to drive a 1992 Freightliner conventional truck.
1
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
The court is in receipt of the Report and Recommendation filed by U.S. Magistrate Judge James F. Cook, who considered Petitioner’s pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and reported that Petitioner was seeking credit for time spent on bond in a halfway house. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal of this petition wit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Greyhound Financial Corporation, has filed this action for breach of an Equipment Lease Agreement against Defendant Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company (Grand Trunk). This opinion constitutes the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court, after trial to the bench.
The lease originated between Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Railroad Company (DTI) and ...
Views: 0
OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. Background.
This is an action brought by a taxpayer, William W. Bussey, Jr. (“plaintiff”) for abatement of a tax assessment and for refund of monies already paid toward the assessment. The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) assessed the penalty tax against plaintiff for employee withholding taxes which a company with which plaintiff was associated coll...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
The above entitled matter came before the Court on May 8, 1992 on a hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
Based upon the arguments of counsel, all facts, files, and records herein, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that:
1) defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and
2) defendant’s request for certification of the issue raised for interlo...
Views: 1
ORDER The captioned matter came before the Court on June 11, 1992, upon the defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants were represented by Pierre N. Regnier and Leonard Schweich. David McKenna and Richard Kyle represented the plaintiffs. The Court having considered said Motion, arguments of counsel, and all of the files...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on City Board’s recent report on the Gateway Elementary and Middle Magnet Schools, G(260)92. The Court has carefully reviewed City Board’s proposed plans, budget and implementation schedule. The Court also has the benefit of Amicus Shu-lamith Simon’s observations conveyed to the Court pursuant to G(283)92, and of the State of Missouri’s response...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
The defendants were tried before a jury pursuant to an indictment alleging against each of them the following three counts: Count One, conspiracy to commit bank robbery or larceny in violation 18 U.S.C. § 371; Count Two, bank larceny in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b); and Count Three, intentional use of a firearm during and in relation to crimes of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant pled guilty to importation of narcotics. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he is not permitted to move for a downward departure from the Guideline range. The court may, however, on its own motion depart downward. United States v. Agu, 763 F.Supp. 703 (E.D.N.Y.1991). A downward departure is required. Defendant was born in 1972 in Puerto Rico, and was eighteen yea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Peace Arize pled guilty to importing heroin into the United States. She was arrested at JFK Airport having swallowed balloons containing heroin prior to boarding the plane in Belgium. Since her arrest she has given birth to a baby boy at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. Defendant did not know that she was pregnant when she swallowed the drugs and traveled to ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a civil action brought by the United States of America under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. (“RICO”). As filed, the complaint sets forth 47 claims for relief against 112 defendants who are alleged to have committed 486 acts of racketeering through 46 separate enterprises. In a transparent endeavor to lay claim...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case arises out of defendant Seattle-First National Bank, N.A.’s (“Sea-First”) refusal to pay plaintiff on certain letters of credit issued on behalf of Eddie Bauer, Inc. (“Eddie Bauer”). This case is before the Court on plaintiffs motion to remand the action to state court. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs motion is denied. BACKGROUND In or ...
Views: 0
*635
OPINION
Appeal from the grant of summary judgment in favor of the debtor, Drexel Burn-ham Lambert Group, Inc. (“Group”), granted by Bankruptcy Judge Francis G. Conrad on a claim against the bankrupt’s estate seeking to establish a constructive trust on a part payment for assets purchased by P.T. Tirtamas Majutama (“Appellant”) from Group prior to the latter’s bankruptcy. The...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I. INTRODUCTION
In this application for a preliminary injunction, plaintiff seeks to enjoin defendants from using plaintiff’s name in a pos-sessory or “based upon” credit in connection with the movie “The Lawnmower Man”. Plaintiff bases his claim for relief on the Lanham Act and similar claims ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO). Upon consideration of the motion, and the oral arguments presented to the Court on July 10, 1992, in support thereof and in opposition thereto, the Court
sua sponte
dismisses the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Facts
Plaintiff Jalil Mutakabbir brings this action o...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The following is before me on appeal from the Magistrate Judge (“Magistrate”): (1) the Magistrate’s denial of the plaintiffs motion to amend his complaint seeking recovery for defamation by adding additional counts of malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and false imprisonment; (2) the recommendation that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment be entered against the p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) has petitioned the Court for expedited summary enforcement of eight subpoenas
duces tecum
served upon Ralph Feffer, Jr., Robert Amos, Leonard Goldman, Edward Janos, Gregory Janos, Lincoln J. Ragsdale, John Schroeder, and Milan Srnka, former directors and officers of Sun State Savings and Loan Association (“Su...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Katrina D. Montgomery filed this action March 24, 1991, alleging handicap discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701-796Í. Defendant Postmaster General Anthony M. Frank filed the instant motion for summary judgment May 20, 1992.
1
Plaintiff Katrina D. Montgomery filed a response June...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS IN LIMINE, DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO ADJOURN, AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
Plaintiffs filed their original complaint in this matter in Wayne County Circuit Court. The matter was removed to federal court February 9, 1987. An amended complaint was filed April 11, 1988. In their five-count amended complaint, plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS This matter is before the Court for consideration of the certification of this case as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(B)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff seeks to represent a class consisting of persons who had silicone gel breast implants placed in their bodies, and the spouses of such persons. Causes of action are asserted against those who manufac...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action arising under the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”), 29 U.S.C.A. § 151
et seq.
(1973). Defendant National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) conducted a representation election on January 28, 1990 in which plaintiff Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers’ International Union, Local 6 (“Union”) lost by one vote.
1
T...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Defendant JWP Credit Corp. (“JWP”) has filed a motion for summary judgment on its counter-claim against individual plaintiffs James Christensen, Stephen Christensen, F. Lavar Christensen, James Hamel, and Jerry Hamel (“Plaintiffs” or “Guarantors”). JWP seeks to enforce the terms of guaranties1 which the Plaintiffs made on a loan and security agreement between co-plaintiff FMG, Inc. (“FM...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Defendants Kualoa Ranch And Activity Club, Inc., John M. Morgan, John Whitty and Kayo Whitty dba My Girl Friday’s (“defendants”) motion for judgment on the pleadings came on for hearing before this court on February 10, 1992. Defendants were represented by John O’Kane, Esq; plaintiff Gregory M. La Voie was rep...
Views: 1
794 F.Supp. 221 (1992)
Dan R. HUBBARD, Plaintiff,
v.
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC., d/b/a ABB Resource Recovery, and Lawrence D. Evans, Jointly and Severally, Defendants.
Civ. No. 92-CV-70822-DT.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
June 2, 1992.
George B. Washington, Detroit, Mich., for plaintiff.
Thomas M.J. Hathaway, Detroit, Mich., for defendants.
OPINION
DUGGAN, District Judge.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On March 4, 1982, the petitioner, Thorn-well Riehburg, was convicted after a trial by jury in New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, of two counts of attempted murder in the first degree, one count of assault in the first degree, one count of assault in the second degree, one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and one count of criminal posse...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced case, Patricia Ljunquist (“movant”) seeks to intervene pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, her motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
In an Order dated June 21, 1990, this Court determined that movant was a tenant-in-common with Josephine Counihan (“plaintiff”), each of whom possessed a one-half undivi...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS FOR RULING
Chrysler Credit Corporation’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Whitney National Bank’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Chrysler Credit Corporation’s Motion to Strike Exhibits and Chrysler Credit Corporation’s Motion to Strike Portions of Whitney’s Motion Papers were decided this date on memoranda.
Chrysler's Motion to Strike Exhibits is DENIED, a...
Views: 0
*602
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 9, 1991, a fire erupted in the engine room of the S/S Stonewall Jackson, killing six of the ship’s crew. The representatives of the deceased crew members filed separate actions in state court and on April 17, 1992, Waterman Steamship Corporation and AmSouth Bank filed this limitation proceeding. Petitioners filed an ad interim stipulation for...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this sex discrimination suit, defendants Forest Electric Corporation (“Forest Electric”) and Forest Datacom Services (“Forest Datacom”) move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Plaintiff Laura Kelber (“Kelber”) opposes the motion and argues that genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion...
Views: 3
Page 9978
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER In 1979, plaintiff Reliability Research Incorporated (“RRI”) entered into a contract with University Computing Company (“UCC”) licensing to the latter certain copyrighted programs collectively referred to as “Reliability Plus.” In 1984, for reasons unknown to the Court, they entered into a new agreement on such licensing. The 1984 agreement included a provision t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Background
On August 13, 1989, plaintiff Salvatore Ercole, a lasher employed by A.G. Ship Maintenance Corp., slipped and fell while working on a hatch cover of the vessel McKinney Maersk, which was docked at Port Newark, New Jersey. The McKinney Maersk is owned by defendant K/S Difko XLIII Kodif XLIII A.p.S., and was bare-boat chartered at that time to defendants S...
Views: 0
The question presented is whether federal subject matter jurisdiction exists over plaintiffs’ claims. Plaintiffs are several individual holders of notes issued by Cross-Land Savings, FSB (CrossLand) who seek to collect two payments due in 1991 but defaulted on by the bank.
Plaintiffs have held IDA Senior Subordinated Capital Notes since they were issued in September 1986 by CrossLand. The ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this civil rights action involving four claims of employment discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, four claims of employment discrimination under New York Human Rights Law Section 296, and two state tort claims, defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) moves, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order gran...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant, the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Uganda to the United Nations, moves to vacate a writ of execution entered against its bank account by the United States Marshal for this District. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is granted. I. On July 28, 1989, plaintiff, then 80 years old, was struck by an automobile owned by defendant and suffered f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff’s motion for relief from final judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is denied. Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). Defendants’ motions for reasonable attorney’s fees and/or costs is denied. Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. BACKGROUND On January 11, 1990, the Court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint and supplemental complaint. See Babigian v. As...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lawrence M. Zinaman (“Zina-man”) brings this action for breach of contract, fraud, and age discrimination under both the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, and New York’s Human Rights Law, N.Y.Exec.Law § 296, against defendants USTS New York, Inc. (“USTS”) and US-Travel Systems, Inc. (“USTravel”).
1
Zina-man seeks...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff International Data Group, Inc. (“IDG”), commenced this action against defendant J&R Electronics, Inc. (“J & R”) alleging: (1) federal trademark infringement, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1058 & 1065; (2) false designation of origin, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (3) unfair competition, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (4) trademark dilution under § 368-d of New York General Business Law; (5) fa...
Views: 0
*187
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Masaki Hamaya, age 31, is a citizen of Japan. He has resided in the United States since 1983, and received permanent resident status here in 1987. In February 1989, Hamaya was convicted in South Carolina of possession of one tablet containing mescaline—a misdemeanor under S.C.Code Ann. § 44-53-370—and received an alternative sentence of two mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs have responded to the Motion. The Court, having considered the Motion and response, along with memoranda of authorities and attachments thereto, is of the opinion that Defendants’ Motion is well taken and should be granted.
1. Facts and Procedural History
This a...
Views: 0
*1292 MEMORANDUM OPINION The Plaintiff has moved in limine for an order excluding certain evidence at trial. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. The primary focus of Plaintiffs motion is the Defendants’ proposed parole evidence concerning the transactions at issue and the prior course of dealings between the parties. Plaintiff contends that mos...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Theresa Boss (“plaintiff-intervenor” or “Boss”) filed an initial sex discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) on January 28, 1987, and filed an additional complaint with the EEOC on March 28, 1988. Boss alleges that the Board of Education, Union Free School District # 6 (“the Board” or “defendant”) violated Title VII of the Ci...
Views: 0
Page 10005
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S' MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff Carl E. Berg moves to remand this action to state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. Moreover, Defendants Hayden Leason, et al., move to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint, contending it is time b...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff William Edwin Van Brunt, III (“Van Brunt”) commenced this action against Defendant Robert Rauschenberg (“Rauschenberg”), a world renown artist, alleging, inter alia, breach of contract and conversion and replevin. Previously, this Court dismissed the complaint with leave to replead. Defendant Rauschenberg now moves, for the second time, for a dismiss...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Lyn Boland has brought this action under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1001
et seq.
(ERISA), contesting defendants’ denial of coverage under an employer’s medical plan. Defendants have filed separate motions for summary judgment, but refer to and incorporate each other’s briefs and affidavits and will be referred ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Marc S. Rubin and Angela Viteritti Sue Tourneau, Inc., their former employer, and Jeffrey L. Gwynne and Associates, Inc. (“Gwynne”), a polygraph testing service, under the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988, 29 U.S.C. § 2001-2009 (1988) (“EPPA”). The case is before the Court on defendant Gwynne’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ “Third Cause of Action” as ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On March 16, 1990, Plaintiff, S. James Cello-Whitney, (Cello-Whitney) signed a “General Release” whereby he agreed to dismiss with prejudice each of his cases pending in Arizona and Washington, concerning matters arising from his incarceration in Arizona, in exchange for his immediate transfer to the custody of the State of Washington. (Exhibit B to Doc. 92.)
*1512
O...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Court has before it the motion of plaintiff Northwest Airlines, Inc. for partial summary judgment and injunctive relief, and the motion of defendant, The Ticket Exchange, Inc., for summary judgment dismissal of all of plaintiffs claims. After full consideration of the facts and arguments presented, the Court grants plaintiffs motion to the extent of declaring defendant to be in ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Barnan Associates brings this claim pursuant to Section 608 of the Condominium and Cooperative Protection and Abuse Relief Act of 1980 (the “Abuse Relief Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 3601
et seq,
seeking equitable relief against defendant 196 Owner’s Corp. Defendant counterclaims pursuant to the Abuse Relief Act and under several state law theories of recovery...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case involves allegations of unlawful tying arrangements and boycotts under the Sherman and Clayton Anti-trust Acts, 15 U.S.C. sections 1 and 14 respectively, and tortious interference with contractual relations under Pennsylvania law. Before this Court are cross motions for summary judgement filed by the plaintiffs and jointly by all the defendants; a separate Motion for Sum...
Views: 1
JUDGMENT This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Pamela A. Tynes for Report and Recommendation. After an independent review of the record, this Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is correct and adopts the findings and conclusions set forth therein. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Secretary’s Motion for Summary Jud...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Barnett Frumkin commenced this action in February 1991. The Complaint, filed on February 1, 1991, alleges violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 (the “ADEA”), as well as New York State laws prohibiting fraud and negligent misrepresentation. Federal subject matter jurisdiction is founded on 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and principles...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. 14, Part 1) and the Defendant City’s Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. 19, Part 1). For the foregoing reasons, both motions are denied, and this case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge.
THE LEGAL STANDARDS
Plaintiff claims that the City violated the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., an...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS BRAKE WORLD AND BRAKE WORLD U.S.A.’S MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants Brake World, Inc. and Brake World U.S.A., Inc. filed a motion for summary judgment April 20, 1992. Plaintiffs filed a response June 15, 1992; and defendants filed a reply June 22, 1992. Pursuant to LR 7.1(e)(2) (Jan. 1, 1992), no oral argument was heard. Although all of the parties refer to the instant moti...
Views: 0
Page 10049
ORDER Before the Court is certain Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. # 24, Part 1). To the extent that the motion addresses Count II of the Second Amended Complaint, the motion is granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff brings Count II under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is an adult male Hispanic who was hired as a Corrections officer by the Illinois Department of Correcti...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above-entitled matter comes before the court upon the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel dated June 26, 1992. In that report and recommendation, the magistrate judge recommended the following with reference to motions filed by defendant Duffy:
1. Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence be GRANTED to the extent that defendant seeks t...
Views: 0
OPINION ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW AND FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Plaintiff commenced this action on March 21, 1989, claiming that defendant’s unauthorized use of the terms SPORT and STICK in the packaging and marketing of its Right Guard deodorant and anti-perspirant products has injured plaintiff’s federally registered trademark SPORTSTICK for lip balm. Plain...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Lucia Eichler, a passenger on an international flight operated by defendant Lufthansa German Airlines (“Lufthansa”), commenced this personal injury action in New York Supreme Court, New York County. Lufthansa removed the case to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. The basis for removal was this Court’s original jurisdiction under the Foreign Sov...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action in May 1990 for damages resulting from injuries
*140
he sustained in a fall during the course of his employment at a worksite at Fort Drum, New York, in July 1988. In November 1990, defendants, Morrison-Knudsen Co. (“M-K”), Martin K. Eby Construction Co. (“Eby”), and Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc. (“...
Views: 0
*911 ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Reversal (Doc. #7, Part 1) and Defendant’s Motion to Affirm (Doc. # 10, Part 1). For the reasons stated below, the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Reversal is denied, and the Defendant’s Motion to Affirm is granted. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On November 30, 1989, Plaintiff Donald Urban applied for a period of disability and disability i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This cause is before this Court on Motion of the defendant, The Crosby Arboretum Foundation, to Deny Jury Trial. The plaintiff, Nancy Wood, demands a jury trial on twelve causes of action for the defendant’s alleged infringement upon the plaintiff’s copyrighted material. The defendant submits that the plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial since the relief she seeks is...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 11, Part 1). For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
*1138
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit pursuant to ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Plaintiffs are participants in the Reporting Services Co. Profit Sharing Plan.
Id.
Defendant R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Steven Andre (“Andre”) suffered a heart attack just after leaving a job at Stepan Company (“Stepan”) for a new job at Salem Technical Services (“Salem”). Both companies denied insurance coverage for that misfortune: Salem because Andre was not yet officially enrolled in its health plan, and Stepan because Andre’s coverage under its plan had lapsed. Andre claim...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment May 15, 1992. Plaintiff was granted leave to file a late response, and defendants filed a reply June 18, 1992. Oral argument was heard June 24, 1992. The court finds that defendants are entitled to summary judgment. BACKGROUND FACTS Defendant Detroit Edison Company (“Edison”) is a privately ow...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Janet Colman filed her complaint in this case June 22, 1990, basing subject matter jurisdiction on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy. Defendant Gatto Machinery Development Corporation [“Gatto”] filed the instant motion for summary judgment April 9, 1992. Plaintiff filed her response April 20, 1992. Pursua...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment May 19, 1992; plaintiff filed a response June 18, 1992; and defendant filed a reply June 25, 1992. Oral argument was heard July 1, 1992. BACKGROUND FACTS Plaintiff Parnell, a civilian employee of the United States Army, filed a complaint alleging that she was not selec...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER (1) REINSTATING CONVICTIONS AGAINST WILKINS AND LUMPKIN AND (2) VACATING THE CONSPIRACY CONVICTIONS OF LARRY CHAMBERS AND BILLY JOE CHAMBERS INTRODUCTION This matter is on remand from the Sixth Circuit’s decision in United States v. Chambers, 944 F.2d 1253 (6th Cir.1991). The Defendants appealed their convictions before the Honorable Richard F. Suhrheinrich for participati...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO USE AND INTERVIEW MARY BAER AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission to Use and Interview Mary Baer and Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order.
The instant issue was first raised by the parties in letters filed with the Court. Oral argument ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action, plaintiff Data-Type International, Inc. (“DataType”) sues to enforce a restrictive covenant contained in an employment agreement with defendant Scott Puzia, a former employee. Plaintiff also seeks compensatory and punitive damages.
Plaintiff moved for preliminary injunctive relief by order to show cause. The Court advanced trial ...
Views: 3
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND
Plaintiff Kevin Gale Thompson (“Thompson”), a citizen of Tennessee, filed this wrongful discharge action in the Circuit Court of Tennessee against Cort Furniture Rental Corp. (“Cort”), a New York corporation with its principal place of business in Virginia. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. Plaintiff contends that under 28 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
The defendants move to dismiss the complaint, which seeks to preclude arbitration before the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) in Nashville, on the bases that: (1) Prudential Securities, Inc. (“PSI”) has waived its right to litigate issues pertaining to the locale of the arbitration proceedings ■ in this matter, and (2) the complaint fails...
Views: 0
Page 10089
OPINION Petitioner Xenia Green (“Green”) has applied for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). For the reasons set forth below, her petition is denied. Background Green operated an establishment at 104 East 40th Street (the “Premises”) where for a $50 to $100 fee she would administer or aid in administering colonics using a device invented by her. The device essentially...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff The Swan Brewery Company Limited (“Swan”) brought this motion pursuant to Rules 15 and 38, Fed.R.Civ.P. for leave to amend and supplement its complaint filed on May 23, 1990 (the “Complaint”) against defendant United States Trust Company of New York (“U.S. Trust”). Based on events taking place after May 23, 1990, the proposed amended and supplemental complaint (the “Amended and ...
Views: 0
On July 7, 1989, Brandon and Ryan Hungerford were passengers in a southbound vehicle which collided with a westbound train operated by defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”) at the Swain Street railroad grade crossing in Ingalls, Indiana, at approximately 6:16 p.m. Both
*701
Brandon and Ryan were killed in this collision.
Plaintiff Leroy H. Reno, Jr., as administr...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the Court are Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment by the parties (# 42-1 and #46-1) and Defendant’s Motion Requesting Court to Take Judicial Notice (# 52). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 46-1) and denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (# 42-1). Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice (# 52) is moot. JURISDICTION This Co...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT On April 24, 1992, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. Plaintiff filed a response May 8, 1992. Pursuant to LR 7.1(e) (E.D.Mich. Jan. 1, 1992), no oral argument was heard. *224 BACKGROUND FACTS The facts under...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND FINAL JUDGMENT
Presently before the Court is the appeal of Yetta Marino of the April 10,1992 Order of the Bankruptcy Court. The debtor has informed the Court that it would not be filing a brief in opposition to the Appeal. For the following reasons, the Appeal is SUSTAINED and the Order of the Bankruptcy Court VACATED. The matter is remanded for further proceedings not inco...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 755 (1992)
Shannon PEASE, et al.
v.
AMERICAN CYANAMID CO.
Civ. No. JFM-91-1654.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
June 18, 1992.
*756 Gary I Strausberg, Baltimore, Md. for plaintiffs.
James Robertson, Juanita A. Crowley, Roger W. Yoerges, Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, Washington, D.C., for defendant.
MOTZ, District Judge.
OPINION
Shannon Pease, a seven year old girl, is m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
The Court has before it Motions to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint filed by all Defendants other than Baltimore Bancorp (“the Bank”) and the materials submitted by the parties relating thereto. The moving Defendants can be placed into three groups: Alex. Brown & Sons, Inc. (“Alex. Brown”), the Management Defendants,
1
and the Outside Directors.
2...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM The parties have stipulated to the following: 1. The identity of the parties is accurately set forth in paragraphs 2 through 4 of the complaint. 2. On August 12, 1991, defendant UNI-COR, Federal Prisons Industries, Inc. (“UNICOR”) issued Invitation for Bids No. 1PI-0010-91 (the “IFB”) requesting bids for the transportation and installation of movable partition panel systems and modular ...
Views: 0
*429
OPINION
Introduction
Presently before us are a number of motions filed on behalf of the defendants, whom we shall refer to as the “County” or “Allegheny County,” and also motions by the plaintiff class of inmates, “the inmates.”
(1) Motion to extend the time for closing the old jail and extending the time for completing the new one filed by the County;
(2)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this consolidated class action, plaintiff Claire E. Wright, Trustee U/A 7-23-81 Claire E. Wright Trust (“Wright”), individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, sues International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) for securities fraud, in violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jay Bush has moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend this court’s decision granting defendant Commonwealth Edison Co.’s (“Edison”) motion for summary judgment. That decision, dated November 25, 1991, disposed of Bush’s Title VII discriminatory discharge claim, his 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (1988) discriminatory failure to promote a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Storck USA, L.P. and August Storck K.G. (“Storck”) have moved for a second preliminary injunction enjoining Farley Candy Co. (“Farley”) from using any trade dress which is confusingly similar to the trade dress of the package and individual-piece wrapper of Storck’s Werther’s Original butter candy.
FACTS
Since 1980, Storck has continuously...
Views: 1
ENTRY DISCUSSING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO RECONSIDER PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Stop-N-Go moved the Court to reconsider three decisions in a prior Order entered in this matter. Each of these challenged decisions is addressed and resolved below.
I. SCOPE OF PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER
Defendants (collectively referred to in the singular as “Stop-N-Go”) requested the Court to make c...
Views: 1
ENTRY GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment require the Court to reach a single conclusion of law: Does a property owner “dispose of waste” in violation of Kentucky Revised Statute § 224.40-100 if portions of its petroleum product inventory leak inadvertently from underground storage tanks into the surrounding soil?...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court
sua sponte
upon the filing of the plaintiffs' complaint.
The plaintiffs allege that this Court has jurisdiction over this action because of the diverse citizenship of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, after a careful examination of the plaintiffs’ complaint,
see Cabalceta v. Standard Fruit Co.,
...
Views: 0
ORDER TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL
This cause is before the Court on the following pleadings: Transamerica Rental Finance Corporation (Transamerica)’s motion to disqualify and request for oral argument (Docket No. 155); Transamerica’s request for judicial notice in relation to the motion to disqualify (Docket No. 156); Transamerica’s memorandum in support of motion to disqualify (Docket No. 157)...
Views: 4
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause came to be heard before the Honorable Charles R. Wilson, United States Magistrate Judge, upon the Defendant’s Amended Motion for Injunctive Relief. Judge Wilson had the authority to hear this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1), and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. After considering the motion, the memoranda, and arg...
Views: 5
ORDER
The above-styled matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s objection to the Magistrate Judge’s order of January 6, 1992 which denied plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint and motion to amend the pretrial order to demand a jury trial and to pray for compensatory and punitive damages as provided for in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
The original complaint in this action al...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff, Lillian Kochin’s (“Koehin”), Post-Trial Motion Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50 and 59, filed February 16, 1990. Being advised in the premises, Kochin’s Motion is hereby DENIED.
BACKGROUND
In this case, Koehin was injured while she was working for her employer, the Packaging Corporation of America, when another employee backed up ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Plaintiff, Angel Lopez (hereinafter “Lopez”), brings this action pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act (hereinafter “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Lopez seeks judicial review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ (hereinafter “Secretary”) final decision that he is not entitled to a period of disability and disability insurance benefits under §§ 216(i) and 223 of the Act,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
On March 9, 1992, a bench trial was had in the above styled civil action which arises from a complaint for declaratory judgment and other relief filed by Coastal Rubber & Gasket Company, Inc. (hereinafter “Coastal”) against the defendant Gulf Insurance Company (hereinafter “Gulf”). Coastal seeks an adjudication that it was an insured of Gulf from December of 1971 until September ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In 1972, as a result of a class-action lawsuit brought on behalf of patients involuntarily committed to the custody and care of the Alabama Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, this court ordered departmental officials to comply with certain minimal constitutional standards in the provision of care to the mentally ill.
See Wyatt v. Stickne...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is plaintiff Irving V. Boberski’s (“Boberski”) motion for a temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement of, and for a stay of, an order by defendant Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”) suspending Boberski from his positions as president and chief executive officer of Avondale Federal Savings Bank of Chicago (“Avondale”). 1 For reasons that follow, the motion is d...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this date came on to be heard Plaintiffs’ Motion for Remand (Instrument # 6), Defendant Brown & Root’s Opposition (Instrument # 13), and Plaintiffs’ Response (Instrument # 14). Plaintiffs are the parents of Otis Ray Benjamin, who was killed when the vessel in which he was a passenger struck a natural gas pipeline and exploded in Texas waters. Plaintiffs filed this case in state c...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on various Motions for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendants. Plaintiff Edward Call-away alleges that his employer, G.S.P., Inc., provided him with medical and life
*134
insurance, but that this insurance coverage was terminated on November 30, 1989 without his knowledge. The Plaintiffs allege that they did not discover the insurance c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On May 22, 1992, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Sanctions against the Defendant, Dan Morales, Attorney General of the State of Texas. According to the Plaintiffs, the Attorney General released to the media a videotaped deposition of Robert G. Tilton in contravention of an express agreement made at the deposition that the videotape deposition would not be released to the...
Views: 0
ORDER On March 18, 1992, the parties above, represented by counsel, appeared before this court during an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of Plaintiff Northwest Healthcare, L.P. D/B/A Bayou Glen-Northwest’s (“Bayou Glen”) Request for a Preliminary and Permanent Injunction to restrain the Defendants from terminating Bayou Glen’s participation in the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs o...
Views: 0
OPINION Currently pending is a motion to dismiss the complaint. The court previously denied plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. BACKGROUND Disappointed by the Mississippi legislature’s enactment of a law providing for legal gaming within the state, plaintiffs, who are concerned citizens organized to more effectively oppose legalized gambling, have come to this court seeking relief. P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs in this case are Glenn D. Thesenvitz, Kenneth L. Wilson, Donald J. Heberlein, James E. Berwick, Ferrin K. Walker, Donald E. Palmer and Norma Stark as the personal representative for the estate of Lawrence R. Stark. The decedent, Lawrence R. Stark, and all of the other Plaintiffs are retired employees of Kaiser Engineers Hanford Company.
1
The Plain...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (“creditors committee”) in this bankruptcy action appeals from an order by the Bankruptcy Court (Lifland, B.J.) granting the motion of Joshua Hedvat, Ye-hiel Hedvat and Status Clothing, Inc. (ap-pellees) for leave to file a late proof of claim and to lift the automatic stay with respect to an adversary action initiated by app...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment August 7, 1991. Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment August 30, 1991. After plaintiffs’ first amended complaint was filed September 9, 1991, the court, in its October 28, 1991 order, dismissed t...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, John Virapen,-alleges that defendants, Eli Lilly Export, S.A. and Eli Lilly Company (both hereinafter referred to as “Lilly”), discharged him in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Local Laws 100 and 80, and Puerto Rico contract law. Presently before the Court are Lilly’s motion for summary judgment and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUN AND ORDER The instant matter has been referred for the conduct of all proceedings, including trial and entry of judgment with direct appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) as to all claims contained in the Plaintiffs’ Complaint. I. INTRODUCTION Plaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The instant matter has been referred for the conduct of all proceedings, including trial and entry of judgment with direct appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). This matter is before the court as an action under § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to review a final decision of the Secreta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs brought an action for breach of contract under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. § 1811
et seq.,
as amended by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), against the defendant Resolution Trust Corporation, as receiver of Great American Savings & Loan Association (RTC). The RTC now moves to dismis...
Views: 2
Page 10198
ORDER
The plaintiff, Deon Thomas, is a student at the University of Illinois and a member of the University of Illinois men’s basketball team. The defendant, Bruce Pearl, is an assistant basketball coach at the University of Iowa who tried to recruit Thomas to attend that school. In connection with the recruitment process, Pearl spoke with Thomas on the telephone and recorded their conver...
Views: 1
*688
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on the following pleadings and papers:
1. the plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint,
2. the defendant’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint,
3. the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Brief and Submission of Materials in Support thereof, Statement of Material Pacts, Proposed Conclusions of Law...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The appellant, John Arenson, appeals the decision of the bankruptcy court1 ruling that the debtor’s tax obligations from 1981, 1982, and 1983 are not dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(l)(B)(i). 134 B.R. 934. The issue on appeal is whether the decision of the bankruptcy court is contrary to fact and to law. On appeal, the bankruptcy court’s legal conclusions are revi...
Views: 0
Page 10205
OPINION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Appellant Communications Satellite Corporation (“COMSAT”) appeals from a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York denying the allowance and immediate payment of an administrative expense. U.S. Bankr., S.D.N.Y. Nos. 89B 10073 (PBA) through 89B 10084 (PBA) inclusive (Prudence Abram, U.S.B.J.). COMSAT requests tha...
Views: 2
OPINION & ORDER
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of LTV Aerospace and Defense Company (the “Aerospace Committee”) filed this appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s November 5, 1991 order. For the reasons stated below, the appeal is dismissed.
I. BACKGROUND
Familiarity with the Byzantine path of this bankruptcy proceeding is assumed. Some background will be discussed, however, in order to...
Views: 4
*178
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Company (“Mt. Vernon”) requests summary judgment in its declaratory judgment action against its insured Creative Housing Ltd. d/b/a Creative Housing Management Co. (“Creative”) and Linnette Hunter (“Hunter”), who has filed a civil suit against Creative in state court. Hunter cross moves for summary judgement. For the reasons d...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
A class of private plaintiffs and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”) brought two civil rights actions in 1973 against the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers’ Union of New York and Vicinity (the “NMDU” or “Union”) and more than fifty publishers and news distributors having collective bargaining agreements with the Union. Both suits charged that the Union,...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action arising from defendants’ alleged failure to properly register one of their hotel’s guests, defendants move, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order dismissing plaintiffs’ negligence and consortium claims. Plaintiffs oppose the motion.
BACKGROUND
1
Plaintiff Marlena Middleton (“M...
Views: 0
REVISED1 ORDER ON OBJECTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The petitioner, Brett C. Kimberlin, with the diligent and extraordinarily skilled assistance of his attorneys, pursues his second application for a writ of habeas corpus in this court. The historical facts surrounding Kimberlin’s attempts prior to this petition to obtain an earlier presumptive parole e...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The indictment in this case charges defendant Dennis Broccolo with six counts of wire fraud (Counts One through Six), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, one count of unauthorized use of an access device with the intent to defraud (Count Seven), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2), and one count of making a false oath in a bankruptcy proceeding (Count Eight),...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendant Penrod Drilling Corp.’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the personal injury plaintiffs’ punitive damages claims. For the reasons that follow, Penrod’s motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
BACKGROUND
These three consolidated cases
1
arise out of a gas explosion aboard the drilling rig Penrod 93.
At about 2:30 a.m...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes on for consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation regarding pending motions in this case which were referred by the District Judge in an order dated March 24, 1992. All parties previously have been furnished copies of the report and recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Section 636(b)(1), Title 28,...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant’s Motion to Suppress (Ct. Rec. 21), heard on June 12, 1992. Assistant United States Attorney Ronald W. Skibbie appeared on behalf of the Government; Defendant was represented by Michael J. Kennedy. Having reviewed the record, heard from counsel, and being fully advised in this matter, this order is inténded to memorialize the court’...
Views: 0
ORDER BEFORE THIS COURT is the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and the Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment based on stipulated facts. Both the Defendant and the Plaintiffs have filed briefs in support and in opposition of Summary Judgment. After consideration of the arguments of all parties, along with applicable case law and statutory authority, the Court finds Defendant’s Motio...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT” or “Union”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent De...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the appeal from an order entered by the Bankruptcy Court finding that Earl Alan Charlton is liable to the United States Internal Revenue Service for certain unpaid trust fund taxes in the amount of $153,861.75 plus interest. It is well settled that the proper standard of review applied to findings of fact in the Bankruptcy Court is the clearly erroneous standard. Matter o...
Views: 0
*1047
OPINION
Plaintiff Sheldon Rabin (“Rabin”) has moved for an order pursuant to § 476 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-242,105 Stat. 2236 (codified at § 27A of the ■ Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-l), reinstating his claims under § 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“§ 10(b)”) against the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Currently pending before this Court are motions arising out of the Class Action Complaint (“Harold Menowitz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. David F. Brown' et ah”) filed in the Southern District of New York on January 25, 1991.
1
The Complaint alleges violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities...
Views: 2
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree’ provide...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiff, Vincent P. Duane, brought this action for discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against the defendants, Government Employees Insurance Company and GEICO General Insurance Company (collectively “GEICO”). Presently before the Court is the motion of the defendants to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
1
...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motions of defendants for partial summary judgment, (Docs. 25, 44), and summary judgment. (Doc. 90).
1
Plaintiff brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged constitutional violations arising out of her arrest by two members of the police department of Phillipsburg, Kansas.
The standards governing summary...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. The court held an evidentiary hearing in the matter on May 29, 1992, has considered the memoranda of the parties, and is now prepared to rule. *1037I. Background, At approximately 2:00 p.m. on November 7, 1991, law enforcement officials from the Sedgwick County sheriffs department and the Drug E...
Views: 0
*292
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendants for transfer to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. In this diversity action, plaintiff alleges injuries resulting from a Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis (“DTP”) vaccine manufactured by defendants.
Plaintiff and his parents reside in Rolla, Missouri nea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for the purpose of determining the amount of damages to be awarded upon entry of judgment, and on the motion of defendant Employers Mutual Casualty Company (“Employers”) for leave to inquire of the jury. (Doc. 43). The underlying facts of this case have previously been set forth. 782 F.Supp. 564; Order of April 1, 1992 (789 F.Supp. 1117...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an appeal from an adversary proceeding in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. This case is now before the court upon the motion to dismiss of the Farm Credit Bank of Wichita. The bankruptcy trustee, Eric Ra-jala, joins in the motion. The court has conducted oral argument on the motion. For the reasons discussed below, the court believes the motion should be granted. This bankruptc...
Views: 0
This case, before a three-judge panel convened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284(a), was filed by the Attorney General of the State of Kansas requesting declaratory and injunctive relief relating to the redistricting of Kansas congressional and state legislative districts for the 1992 elections. The action was filed while the legislature was in extended session and it was not known whether it would ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Modify the Restraining Order entered by the Court on April 20, 1992. Also pending is the Receiver’s Application for Determination of Authority to Pay Legal Expenses.
For the reasons stated below, the Defendant’s motion is denied in part and granted in part. In addition, the Receiver is instructed to not p...
Views: 0
Page 10296
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ complaint and motion to compel arbitration, filed in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, Mecklen-burg County, North Carolina, on March 20, 1992.
The action was removed to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) in that this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, this be...
Views: 0
OPINION
This case stems from an action brought against a savings and loan association which failed while the case was pending. Defendant has moved to substitute parties and to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. For reasons which follow, the motion to substitute parties will be granted and the motion to dismiss will be...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs have brought this suit alleging violations of § 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c (1988), of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and of state laws governing the electoral process. The action arises out of alleged irregularities surrounding the conduct of the November 6, 1990...
Views: 0
OPINION ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1.
Introduction.
Serv-Tech owns United States Patents 4,805,653 and 4,856,545. Stewart & Stevenson sued Serv-Tech to name two Stewart
&
Stevenson employees as co-inventors of the patents. Stewart
&
Stevenson is estopped from asserting its claims; a take nothing judgment will be entered.
2.
Water Blasting Equipment.
...
Views: 0
797 F.Supp. 636 (1992)
Robert MIGUEL and Jean Miguel, Plaintiffs,
v.
Raymond J. BELZESKI, Mark Richardson Bell, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Raymond J. Bell, Deceased, Holly Mills, and Kirk Daniel Bell, Defendants.
No. 90 C 6054.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
July 14, 1992.
*637 Douglas Kent Morrison, Katherine Susan Mix, Morrison & Mix, Joseph Younes...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the court is Plaintiff’s motion in limine (# 110), Defendant’s motion in limine (# 111), Defendant’s second supplemental motion for summary judgment (# 122), and Defendant’s motion for certification pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). For the reasons set forth below, the court grants in part and denies in part Plaintiff’s motion in limine and Defendant’s motion in limine...
Views: 0
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation Regarding Juror Comprehension Studies of Professor Hans Zeisel and Their Application To Grounds for Relief 5, 10 and H Of Petition for Habeas Corpus
Petitioner James Free was convicted on June 22, 1979 in the Circuit Court of Du Page County for the April 24, 1978 murder and attempted rape of Bonnie Serpieo and the attempted murder and attem...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Congregation Beth Judea, Inc. (“Congregation”) seeks to dismiss plaintiff Shula G. Elbaz’ one-count complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Elbaz’ complaint alleges that the Congregation’s failure to renew her employment contract constituted retaliatory discrimination prohibited by Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In this five count action, Plaintiff seeks relief for alleged sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. § 4572, and for breach of contract, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress under the common law of Ma...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
This is an asset forfeiture action brought by the United States of America (“government”) against defendant real property in Truro, Massachusetts on March 20, 1989. In its complaint, the government asserts that the property was used, or intended to be used, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, in that it was used to store, conceal,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND
This action for foreclosure arises from a loan made by Maine National Bank to Defendant Brooks Woolen Company. In January, 1991, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was appointed receiver of Maine National Bank. The FDIC assigned the loan to a bridge bank, New Maine National Bank, which commenced this suit in Maine Superior Court...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 198 (1992)
Eddie Lee RICHARDSON, By and Through His Curatrix, Willie Murl ROGERS, Plaintiff,
v.
SOUTHWEST MISSISSIPPI REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Dr. Frank McDonald, Nurse Jane Doe, and Mississippi Emergency Associates, P.A., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. J89-0024(W).
United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Jackson Division.
March 9, 1992.
*199 Edwin L. Bean, Jr. and Mack Brabham, McCo...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
1
The court grants the motion for the following reasons.
FACTS
In 1977, the State of Illinois adopted the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 24, 1111-74.4-1
et seq.
(the “Act”), to promote redeve...
Views: 0
Memorandum of Opinion
I. Background.
This consolidated appeal arises out of bankruptcy proceedings in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama involving the Chapter Eleven petition of Perdido Motel Group, Inc. (Perdido).
1
After rejecting the debt- or’s first proposed plan for reorganization, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Norther...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff alleges claims of trademark infringement, tradedress infringement, and unfair competition arising from the use of allegedly similar magazine titles.
See
Compl.; 15 U.S.C. § 1114; 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). More particularly, plaintiff contends that defendant’s publication of a magazine under the title “Ladies’ Home Journal Parent’s Digest” infringes rights...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Monica Santiago brought this tort action against several defendants
1
alleging that their manufacture of lead pigment for use in lead paint caused her injury. In an earlier opinion, this court refused to apply market share liability theory
*31
in the context of lead paint poisoning.
Santiago v. Sherwin-Williams Co.,
782 F.Supp. 186 (...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs were forced to vacate their rented housing after the defendants declared the properties unfit for human habitation. Plaintiffs now seek, in their current motion for summary judgment, to have the defendants compensate them for (1) the Fifth Amendment “taking” of their entire property interest, i.e., the leasehold, and (2) relocation benefits as allowed under the Housing a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The issue presented in this appeal from the Bankruptcy Court is whether the Bankruptcy Code excuses Michele Geiger, a debtor in a Chapter 13 proceeding, from paying the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PENNDOT”) a $25.00 fee as a precondition to the restoration of her suspended driver’s license. 1 On or about May 24, 1991, PENNDOT suspended Ms. Geiger’s motor vehicle o...
Views: 0
*559
MEMORANDUM
This action involves claims of misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract, and unfair competition under state law.
Plaintiff, a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business in that state, instituted suit in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, where plaintiff obtained a temporary restraining order against the defendant, a ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff John Williams is a male student at Liberty High School in the Bethlehem School District. In August, 1990, at age 14, John Williams and another male student tried out for the school’s field hockey team, which participates in an interscholastic schedule of games. Williams was selected for the junior varsity squad as a goalie and began practicing with the team. He was issued e...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 142 (1992)
Virginia ELSESSER and Courage Verzicco, co-guardians of the Estate and Person of Carolyn Verzicco, an incompetent,
v.
HOSPITAL OF THE PHILADELPHIA COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE, PARKVIEW DIVISION, a Pennsylvania Corp., et al.
Civ. A. No. 92-3045.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
July 13, 1992.
*143 Gary M. Gusoff, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Gilber...
Views: 0
*29MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and the Defendant’s Cross Motion to Affirm the Decision of the Foreign Service Grievance Board. Because the Foreign Service Grievance Board’s (“Board”) denial of Plaintiff’s grievance was not arbitrary or capricious or in violation of law, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2), that decision must be aff...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BACKGROUND Defendant Norman Vroman was convicted in this Court by a jury on five counts of tax related charges. On November 22, 1991, the Court sentenced Mr. Vroman to a five year term of probation for count one. Mr. Vroman was sentenced to a seventeen month term of imprisonment for counts two through five. The Court ordered the term of probation to run con...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is the motion of the defendant, United Parcel Service, Inc. [hereinafter UPS], for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(c)
1
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Having studied the motion, briefs of the parties, the complaint, affidavits, depositions, and other documents filed, and having heard oral arguments in the matter, this...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
William Pehr (“Pehr”), seeking to act not only individually but also “on behalf of all persons similarly situated,” sues both the University of Chicago (“University”) and its Employee Retirement Income Plan (“ERIP” or “Plan”) for claimed pension plan benefits allegedly withheld by those defendants. Originally Pehr had tendered a pro se Complaint in December 19...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ENTERING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS ON COUNTS I THROUGH V, AND DISMISSING COUNTS VI THROUGH XIV
Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint contains fourteen Counts stating claims for mone
*1457
tary damages for alleged wrongdoing by various combinations of the named Defendants. Defendants’ Motion for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff in this case filed an action under the Freedom of Information Act seeking the disclosure of certain records pertaining to the pavilion at the Paris Air Show sponsored by the Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce voluntarily produced some of the records, and the Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment requiring the Department to tur...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This is an action instituted under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying plaintiff’s application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits. This matter is now before the Court on the cross-motions of the parties for summary judgment. Harold Preston filed his current application ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The defendant, Adebayo Yaya, was arrested on March 31, 1992 and arraigned the same day on a complaint. The arraignment resulted in the detention of the defendant. On May 1, the defendant was charged in a three count indictment. When Yaya was brought before Magistrate Judge Chrein to be arraigned, he sought dismissal of the indictment on the ground that the indictment had been ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendants’ motion to transfer this action to the District of New Jersey at Newark. Defendants move, in the alternative, to stay this
*163
action pending determination of a related action in that court.
For the reasons stated below, the motion to transfer is granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Manufacturer...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before our Court again on remand from the Court of Appeals.
See Daingerfield Island Protective Society v. Lujan,
920 F.2d 32 (D.C.Cir.1990). Now pending are plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment and defendants’ and intervenors’ motions to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, defendants' and ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM This matter originated on behalf of a number of employees of the Executive Office of the President (“EOP”) who were designated for random urine tests as part of a Plan to establish a drug-free federal workplace in that office. It is now before the Court on plaintiffs’ motions for a permanent injunction and cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs contend the entire Plan is invalid...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Massachusetts. This Court has jurisdiction over the appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) (1988). The appellant, Coopers & Lybrand (“Coopers”), argues that the bankruptcy court erred by reducing Coopers’ $550,000 request for professional fees by 42% and awarding only $3...
Views: 1
Page 10444
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case presents an issue as to the freedom of speech of a public employee. Plaintiff, a District of Columbia firefighter, claims to have been punitively reassigned for having criticized a departmental order he regarded as a violation of the First Amendment. The case is presently before the Court upon plaintiff’s application for a preliminary injunction ordering his rei...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs motion to remand this action to state court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). Plaintiff also seeks costs and attorney’s fees incurred as a result of what plaintiff contends is an attempt at improper removal by defendant. The motion has been fully briefed by both parties and is now ripe for ruling.
FACTS
On 31 October 1991, plain...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action arises out of several property insurance policies issued by the Farmer’s Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Salem County (“Defendant Insurance Company”) to the plaintiffs Fred and Virginia Haardt. The court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Presently before the court is the motion of the Defendant Insurance Company for summary judgment.
I. FACTUAL AND P...
Views: 0
Bryant, convicted on April 6, 1978 in the Circuit Court for St. Mary’s County, Maryland, of storehouse breaking, appealed his conviction to Maryland’s intermediate appellate court, the Court of Special Appeals. In that court, Bryant challenged the jurisdiction of the trial court on the ground that the record did not establish when or if the United States had acquired the post office which constitu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the Court on the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings and to dismiss the second amended complaint. Although the defendants raise a number of grounds in support of their motion, it is necessary only to discuss several of them in order to arrive at a dispositive decision on that motion.
The grounds for dismissal on the merits asserted ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On September 30, 1991, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah, the Honorable John. H. Allen presiding, denied a claim filed by Badi Mahmood against the Estate of Triad America Corporation in the amount of $42,000.00. An “Order Denying the Claim of Badi Mah-mood” dated October 16, 1991 was entered October 21, 1991. This appeal is filed by appellan...
Views: 0
Page 10463
ORDER Before the Court are the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Enter Deficiency Judgment, and the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff’s Motion for Deficiency Judgment. The Plaintiff, City Savings, F.S.B., by and through its Receiver, Resolution Trust Corporation, was granted judgment foreclosing its interest in seven separate tracts of real estate owned by the Defendants, Kent L. Welsh and...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the undersigned United States District Court Judge on the following matters: (1) plaintiffs’ renewal of their motion for judgment as a matter of law, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b); (2) plaintiffs’ and defendant’s motions for entry of findings by the trial court on the issues of patent infringement, willfulness, and damages, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 49(a); and (3) ...
Views: 1
ORDER Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, instituted the above-styled civil action pursuant *686 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while incarcerated at the Defendant Huttonsville Correctional Center. Plaintiff alleged in his Complaint that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs; specifically, that Defendants conspired to remove his appendix without cause in order to recei...
Views: 0
by Designation
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on defendant Jesus Santiago's motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 2 V.I. Code Ann. tit. 5, App. V., §§ 16.5 and 16.5A ("Local Rule 16.5") which preserve the pre-guidelines version of Rule 35 of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for consideration of modification of sentences imposed pursuant to Virgin Islands Law. ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND DISMISSAL ORDER Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, submitted this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 to re *680 dress alleged violations of his constitutional rights. Plaintiff also submitted an affidavit of poverty and seeks to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This court GRANTS plaintiffs request to proceed in forma pauperis in this case only and ORDERS the complaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
On June 24, 1992, a hearing was held before the Honorable Dee Benson on Defendant’s Opposition to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate to Grant Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Scott Isaacson represented the plaintiff, Thomas American Stone & Building, Inc. Jeffrey Walker represented the defendant, Richard W. White, et. al.
...
Views: 0
ORDER Petitioner, a state inmate, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This matter is before the court on respondent’s motion for summary judg*174ment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Background of the Case Petitioner Mark Edward Thompson was convicted on October 26, 1989, in North Carolina state court of two counts of first-degree murder, two c...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This application for a preliminary injunction is a quarrel between an international union of musicians and some of its locals over the right to designate the number of local musicians to play on theatrical tours. The following are uncontested: 1. The court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim for breach of the Federation’s Bylaws under section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
I.
Introduction
The government appeals an order of the bankruptcy court which held that the debt- or’s rights in an ERISA qualified pension plan were superior to the government’s. The court below, in a contested proceeding, held that the funds were exempt under federal law and initially ordered the trustee to pay them to the debtor. Upon reconsid...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Presently pending before the Court is plaintiffs motion seeking an order requiring the defendant, CSX Transportation, Inc. (hereinafter “CSX”), to answer interrogatory number 20, an interrogatory which seeks to flesh out details concerning surveillance of plaintiff conducted by CSX or investigators in its employ. The dispute with regard to defendant’s responses to the remaining i...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM July 14, 1992 BACKGROUND On March 20, 1992, Andre Demer filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. Demer contends that his concurrent sentences of thirty months each, handed down by this court on February 8, 1991, on convictions for two counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, are in excess of the maximum sentence authorized by law. At sentencin...
Views: 0
Page 10481
ORDER
The plaintiff seeks judicial review pursuant to § 205(g) of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) finding that plaintiff’s social security retirement insurance benefits were properly reduced pursuant to § 215(a)(7) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 415(a)(7), due to his receipt of a civil service pension on...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION Plaintiff seeks recovery under the Miller Act (40 U.S.C. § 270b) for allegedly unpaid construction material bills. Both plaintiff and defendants now move for summary judgment. The Court heard full argument on the motions at a hearing conducted on July 15, 1992, based on the facts as set forth in the parties’ pleadings and affidavits. The parties agree that there are no ma...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE Petitioner Johnny Lyons, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed a motion to vacate, set *239 aside, or correct his sentence which was based upon 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Respondent filed a response. For the reasons stated in this order, petitioner’s motion is denied. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Lyons was arrested for carrying a co...
Views: 0
Page 10488
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff John Smith brings this action alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2, and Section 6 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 17. Plaintiff’s claims arise out of an alleged conspiracy and collusive effort by the Defendants to diminish Plaintiff’s surgical practice by revoking his staff privileges at Goo...
Views: 2
OPINION AND REASONS
This matter was submitted for trial on the documents. It presents a single question of law: Is the maker of a collateral mortgage and collateral mortgage note personally liable when the collateral mortgage note is pledged as security on behalf of a third party?
Background
The collateral mortgage is a security device peculiar to Louisiana. It operates, mor...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the court are the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, and the plaintiffs’ motion to remand to state court. For reasons that follow, the motions for summary judgment are denied and the motion to remand is denied. FACTS The plaintiffs, five Illinois municipalities — the cities of Ottawa, Marseilles and Streator and the villages of Naplate and Seneca (together the “municipalities”)...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER William Frank Parker was twice tried, convicted, and sentenced to death for murdering James and Sandra Warren, the parents of his ex-wife. He now challenges the constitutionality of his conviction and sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The single issue before the Court on Parker’s motion for partial summary judgment is whether his second trial violated the Double Jeopardy Cla...
Views: 1
794 F.Supp. 321 (1992)
Jacquelyn MORRIS, Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN NATIONAL CAN CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.
No. 87-1161-C(3).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri.
June 5, 1992.
Michael J. Hoare & Associates, P.C., Michael J. Hoare, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Bryan Cave, One Metropolitan Square, St. Louis, Mo., for defendants.
ORDER
HUNGATE, District Judge.
This matter is before...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Pending before the Court in the above styled action is the movant’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The movant, Carl Robert Harris, pleaded guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Harris now argues that his prior felony conviction in state court, which formed the basis f...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER This diversity action began in state court and was removed to federal court by defendant on February 12, 1992. Plaintiff moves to remand the action to state court because the notice of removal was not filed within the thirty-day period from service of the complaint on the defendant as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). The facts are not in dispute. The complaint and summons were pr...
Views: 0
Page 10501
OPINION AND ORDER
On January 23, 1992, Claimant Pauline Rock filed a Motion to Dismiss and for Return of her 1979 Cadillac Sedan Deville (“the vehicle”), which was seized by federal narcotics agents on August 29, 1991. Claimant’s Motion rests on her contention that the Government’s civil complaint against the vehicle was untimely. The Government opposes the motion, insisting that its complaint wa...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This was a lawsuit waiting to happen. The record before this Court reveals a history of political and bureaucratic timidity mixed with well-intentioned blundering in dealing with two of the most charged and significant issues of our time: AIDS and abortion. A well-intentioned effort to except personal use of untested AIDS drugs from the new drug testing requi...
Views: 4
ORDER
Introduction
Mary Jane Rogers, plaintiff, has filed a one-count complaint against Sugar Tree Products, Inc., defendant, alleging that defendant violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Facts
1
Defendant is a Missouri corporat...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on an appeal from an October 21, 1991 ruling of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Queenan, Chief J., which denied Russell Robb, III and Leslie W. Robb’s (“appellants’ ”) motion for release of certain funds from the estate of the debtor, Outdoor Trading Co., Inc. (“debtor”). For the reasons stated below, this Court affirms the Bankruptcy Court’s decis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Erwin Sussman is a citizen of Sweden and a legal permanent resident of the State of California. Plaintiff Ira Guil-den, deceased, was a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of New York. Upon his death in November 1984 Paul Guilden, a United States citizen and a resident of New York, became the personal representative of Ira Guilde...
Views: 3
OPINION
Plaintiff, Tube Forgings of America, Inc., brings an action against defendant, Weldbend Corporation, alleging unfair competition under both state and federal law. (Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125). Plaintiff is incorporated in Oregon, while defendant is a Delaware corporation. Both plaintiff and defendant manufacture and distribute carbon steel pipe fittings. Plaintiff alleges that d...
Views: 0
Page 10523
ORDER
After a de novo review of the record and after hearing extensive oral argument, I adopt in full the recommendation of Magistrate Carter as set out at pages 601-602 of his carefully considered and exhaustive Report and Recommendation dated April 3, 1992.
The Clerk is directed to enter a judgment embodying the foregoing recommendations.
SO ORDERED.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ZACHARY W. CARTER,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. Introduction Matthew E. McGee (“McGee”) and Robert A. Alessandro (“Alessandro”) are two of twenty-six defendants charged in a forty-two count indictment. 1 McGee and Ales-sandro have been charged with substantive offenses involving the possession, importation and distribution of controlled substances and with obstruction of justice. 2 McGee and Alessandro move ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Reinstate Action and supporting memorandum, filed January 31, 1992; Defen
*110
dants’ Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion, filed February 20, 1992; Plaintiffs Reply Memorandum, filed March 2, 1992; Plaintiffs letter to the Court, dated March 5, 1992; Defendants’ letter to the Court, dated March 9,...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The case before the Court involves a constitutional challenge to a provision of the International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 (“International Competition Act”), P.L. 96-192, 94 Stat. 35, 48-49 (1980), that limits airline operations at Love Field, one of the Dallas-area airports. The provision, known as the Wright Amendment, restricts to Texas or its four ...
Views: 0
*1497
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW RE: HOPI CLAIMS
INTRODUCTION
I.
Parties
Plaintiff Vernon Masayesva is the duly authorized Chairman of the Hopi Tribal Council of the Hopi Tribe, and appears herein as representative of the Hopi Tribe and its villages, clans and individual members.
Defendant Peterson Zah is the duly authorized Chairman of the Nav...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending are cross motions for summary judgment. Since the Court concludes that the fire and flood protection fee charged by the City of Huntington is a user fee rather than a tax, the Court essentially GRANTS the motion of the City of Huntington and substantially DENIES the motion of the United States of America. The City of Huntington seeks to collect municipal fire a...
Views: 3
OPINION
On February 6, 1991 the Court denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue. On February 22, 1991, defendant moved for the Court to alter or amend the February 6, 1991 Order. The Court granted the motion for reconsideration on October 1, 1991 and dismissed the case as the Court found the issues presented to be moot and, thus, the Court lacked jur...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this action, plaintiff asserts a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendant Montgomery County Emergency Service, an institution at which she received psychiatric treatment, and against individual defendants who participated in her treatment there. The basis of plaintiffs section 1983 claim is defendants’ disclosure to law enforcement personnel and to plaintiff’s supervisor ...
Views: 1
*149
MEMORANDUM—DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff originally commenced this action in New York State Supreme Court. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 and 36 U.S.C. § 2,
1
defendant American Red Cross (“Red Cross”) removed the action to this court with defendant Albany Medical Center’s (“Hospital”) concurrence. In her complaint, plaintiff alleged that the Hospit...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The claim is that two children are brain damaged because their mother was exposed to a household insecticide while pregnant with them. Relying on state tort law, the parents sue both the manufacturer of the active ingredient and of the final product. Defendants move for summary judgment on the ground that the suit is preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and...
Views: 1
Plaintiff Lone Star Industries, Inc. (Lone Star) moves for partial summary judgment against individual defendants Lome Leibel and William Jahn, the principal officers, stockholders and directors of defendant Chieftain Cement Corp. (Chieftain). Plaintiff seeks to hail the individual defendants into federal court and hold them liable as “guarantors” of Chieftain’s indebtedness to plaintiff. Defen...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This three-judge district court was convened to hear Plaintiffs’ constitutional and statutory challenges to the 1991 Apportionment Plan for the Ohio General Assembly (the Plan). Plaintiff Barney Quilter, a state representative and designee of the Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, and Plaintiff Thomas Ferguson, Ohio’s Auditor, were the Democratic members of the 1991 A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The pro se plaintiff in this action has alleged violations of his constitutional rights. Two of the three defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated below, the motion of those two defendants is granted. FACTS For the purposes of this motion, the facts as alleged in the complaint are assumed to be...
Views: 0
Page 10582
OPINION
While
Roe v. Wade,
410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 705, 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), has been reaffirmed, the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,
— U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 2791, 120 L.Ed.2d 674 (1992), has been simply to shift the battlegrounds for the abortion wars to the states who are now vested with the limited p...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before this Court is defendants' motion and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
The plaintiff, Marilyn Melnyk (“plaintiff”) has filed a three count Complaint alleging wrongful discharge stemming from breach of contract, unlawful sex discrimination and unlawful age discrimination.
This Court has jurisdict...
Views: 2
ORDER
The Court heard arguments on December 15, 1993 on defendant United States’ motion for summary judgment. Richard L. Bowers of The Boccardo Law Firm appeared on behalf of plaintiffs; Steven M. Talson of the United States Department of Justice appeared on behalf of defendants. Having considered the arguments of counsel and the *1448papers submitted, the Court hereby grants defendant’s motion...
Views: 0
DECISION and ORDER
The plaintiff, Trailer Rental Company, is a Georgia corporation in the business of leasing trailers (for over-the-road trucking). The present action was commenced on May 4,1992, with the filing of what the plaintiff titled a “Complaint and Petition/Motion for Injunctive Relief” naming James R. Buchmeier, Gerald R. Buchmeier, and BTI Transportation as defendants. That “hybrid” p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff American Dredging Company (“ADC”) purchased 38,000 gallons of “No. 2 fuel oil” from Plaza Petroleum Inc. (“Plaza”). Plaza, in turn, contacted Royal Petroleum, a division of Kerr McGee Refining Corporation, Inc. (collectively “KMRC”) and purchased 38,000 gallons of fuel from KMRC. Eklof Marine Corp. (“Eklof”) was engaged to transport the fuel. Plaintiff alleg...
Views: 3
OPINION
In these consolidated cases, the Plaintiffs have alleged that Defendant in each case violated the handicap provisions of the Fair Housing Act by refusing to give zoning approval to Smith and Lee to operate an adult foster care home for twelve elderly disabled persons in a house located in a single-family residential area of Taylor.
Basically, Plaintiffs claim that Taylor’s ac...
Views: 0
OPINION
After a prolonged battle between Democrats in Congress and the White House, a legislative armistice entitled the Civil Rights Act of 1991 was finally hammered out and signed by the President. Since its enactment, the Act has been the eye of a storm driven by political impasse and conflicting precedent whose judicial winds have reached gale force. Those winds have now swept this co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This is an employment discrimination case, brought pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.
(“ADEA”). The plaintiff Guy DeMarco (“DeMarco”), alleges that the defendant, Holy Cross High School (“Holy Cross”) discharged him from employment in violation of ADEA. The defendant Holy Cross now moves for summar...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER On November 2,1990, the plaintiff, Bradford National Life Insurance Company, a Kentucky corporation, commenced this action for conversion under Wis.Stats. § 403.-419(l)(c). Specifically, Bradford National Life alleged that the defendant, Union State Bank, a Wisconsin corporation, had converted a negotiable instrument (check), in the amount of $50,000.00, of which Bradford Nat...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This complaint and countersuit concern the amount of premium due on an automobile insurance policy sold to the Handleman Company (“Handleman”) by the Travelers Insurance Company (“Travelers”) on a retrospective premium basis. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff, Handleman, is a music dist...
Views: 0
795 F.Supp. 866 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Donald A. BUSCH and Mitchell H. Busch, Defendants.
No. 92 CR 20012.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, W.D.
July 6, 1992.
*867 James R. Streicker, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Chicago, Ill., for Donald Busch.
Sheldon T. Zenner, Katten, Muchin & Zavis, Chicago, Ill., for Mitchell Busch.
Daniel J. Cain, S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This is an action brought by plaintiff, the Association of Flight Attendants (“AFA”), pursuant to the Railway Labor Act (“RLA”), 45 U.S.C. §§ 151
et seq.,
seeking an injunction to prevent defendant, United Airlines (“United”), from violating the seniority provisions of the collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) between the parties in staffing Unit...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1139 (1992)
Ben MYRICK, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
FRUEHAUF CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 1:91-CV-0465-JOF.
United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.
March 26, 1992.
James Edward Carter, The Carter Firm, Madison, Ga., Charles Allison Mathis, Jr., Mathis, Sands, Jordan & Adams, Milledgeville, Ga., for plaintiffs.
*1140 Benjamin Louis Weinberg, Jr., L...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW
I. INTRODUCTION
The above-captioned matter was commenced by forty four plaintiffs approximately one year ago. The plaintiffs’ complaint alleges failure of defendants to pay special early retirement benefits, and raises claims of breach of contract under the Labor Management Relations Act, breach of fiduciary duty and sundry violations of the Employee Retirem...
Views: 0
BACKGROUND
The background of this case has been set forth previously in this court’s order of September 11, 1989. Item 21. At that time, the court denied defendants’ motions to dismiss and permitted discovery to proceed. Discovery is now complete. Plaintiff has stipulated to the withdrawal of its claims against all defendants except the County of Chautauqua. Items 29, 33, 37. Three causes of actio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The case comes before the court on the defendants’ motion to disqualify the law firm of Hughes, Hubbard & Reed (“HH & R”) from representing any of the plaintiffs in this action. (Dk. 446). On January 27, 1992, HH & R entered its appearance in this case on behalf of the plaintiffs William I. Koch, Oxbow Energy, Inc., Spring Creek Art Foundation, and Northern Trust Co. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this employment discrimination action, fifteen plaintiffs have sued General Motors Corporation (GM) alleging various theories of recovery, including race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2
et seq.,
and under 42 U.S.C. § 1981; sex discrimination under Title VII; age discrimination under the ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the motion of Benjamin F. Woods, Jr., to intervene as a plaintiff in this action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a) (Doc. # 14). Defendants oppose the motion.
Mr. Woods is the individual who filed the charge of employment discrimination based upon an allegedly unlawful discharge against the defendants that led to the initiation of this lawsui...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 13, 1992, this court filed a Memorandum and Order and Notice and Order to Show Cause (Doc # 81) directing the plaintiff in this case to obey the court’s order of February 18,1992, (Doc # 59), and pay the sum of $250.00 to the clerk of this court or show good cause why the order has not been complied with, and also to show good cause as to why he has not cooperated with ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This employment discrimination action was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC” or “Commission”) on behalf of Wilhelmine Bailey and a class of other African-Americans who allegedly were denied permanent employment by the défendant, Gard Corporation (“Gard”), because of their race. The matter is currently before the court on the defendant’s motion to dis...
Views: 0
Page 10706
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case arises out of a police raid on the residence of James King which resulted in the fatal shooting of James King by two police officers. The raid was a joint effort between police officers from Olathe and Kansas City, Kansas. The plaintiff in this case is Vicki King, who was the wife of James King. Plaintiff is asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excess...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 25, 1992, the court filed a Notice and Order to Show Cause, directing the plaintiff to show cause in writing to this court no later than May 26, 1992, at 5:00 *1030p.m. why his Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. # 13) should not be denied and why his complaint should not be dismissed for failure to properly make service of process. That Notice and Order to Show Cause set...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is currently before the court on the Motion to Dismiss/Summary Judgment on Behalf of Tom Dailey (Doc. # 117). This case involves a complaint for damages filed by plaintiff against defendants City of Kansas City, Kansas (the “City”), police officers Richard Hartzfeld, James Porter-field and Patrick Ohler, individually, and Thomas Dailey, individually and in his c...
Views: 0
Page 10712
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted of first degree felony murder on September 6, 1986. On October 20, 1986, petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment. In this action petitioner challenges his conviction and c...
Views: 0
DECISION OF THE COURT Plaintiffs brought this action seeking a refund of taxes paid for the 1980 tax year. Plaintiffs seek a determination that an employee stock option exercised by Robert A. Brooks (Brooks) was a “qualified stock option” within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 422(b)(1). In a previous memorandum and order published at 766 F.Supp. 993, the court granted the United States’ motion for sum...
Views: 0
Page 10720
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant American Telephone & Telegraph Co.’s (“AT & T’s”) motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 190). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.
I. Background.
Plaintiff Universal Money Centers, Inc. (“UMC”), is a Missouri corporation with its principal offices in Shawnee Mission, Kansas. UMC provides elect...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Edward Nichols filed a three-count complaint against defendants while acting
pro se.
Since that time, plaintiff has retained counsel and has withdrawn two of the three theories upon which he claimed the defendants were liable. Remaining in the case is one count of fraud, alleged only against defendant Peter L. Costa, an attorney in New York.
In...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner Jose Delgado was convicted on August 21, 1985, after a jury trial in New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, of Murder in the Second Degree and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree. Delgado was sentenced to twenty-five years to life on the murder conviction and seven and one-half to fifteen years on the weapon charge. The New York Appellate Di...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. Introduction
This is an action wherein plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) seeks subrogation for monies paid on a fire insurance policy. Allstate alleges that the defendants negligently failed to operate and maintain the premises which they leased from Allstate’s insured, Mr. George Ku. Presently before the court ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
The Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) moves for enforcement of two subpoenas
duces tecum
targeted at two former directors or officers of a failed Florida savings and loan. The subpoenas seek tax returns, bank statements, insurance policies, and several other categories of personal financial records reflecting the sources and amount of respondents’ assets. The RTC ...
Views: 3
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification (doc. 267). The defendants opposed the motion (doc. 271), and the plaintiffs replied (doc. 276). The Court conducted a hearing in this matter on June 12, 1992. For the reasons set forth below, the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification i...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, former employees of Kaiser Steel Corporation (“Kaiser Steel”) and participants in its ERISA qualified pension plan filed this action against defendant Hewitt Associates (“Hewitt”) on December 18, 1989, alleging Hewitt’s failure to comply with its “professional obligations” under both ERISA and California common law. On August 9, 1990, this court grante...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
A jury trial in this breach of contract case ended with a $225,000 verdict for plaintiffs, and defendants have filed a Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or in the Alternative a Motion for a New Trial pursuant to Rules 50 and 59, Fed.R.Civ.P. The prayer for relief in defendants’ reply brief adds a second alternative, which we adopt for reasons which follow, of a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS This action arises out of the Springfield Redevelopment Authority’s allegedly wrongful taking of a parcel of real property owned by plaintiff David Buntzman. The history of discovery in this case is not a model of peaceful cooperation by the litigants. On May 23, 1991, I entered a scheduling order requiring plaintiff to furnish the defendants w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”) petitions by order to show cause for withdrawal of the reference of this adversary proceeding to the bankruptcy court. On March 9, 1989, Eastern Airlines, Inc. (“Eastern”) and affiliated companies filed for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s motion to dismiss (doc. 19), the memorandum of
amicus curiae
United States Senate in support of the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (doc. 22), the Plaintiffs’ response (doc. 23), and the Defendant’s reply (doc. 25).
1
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Barbara K. Burch,...
Views: 0
RULING ON APPEAL
In this bankruptcy appeal, the court holds that a health maintenance organization (“HMO”) licensed, regulated, and conducting business in a state as a domestic insurance company, constitutes a domestic insurance company under 11 U.S.C. § 109(b), and is not eligible for bankruptcy protection.
I. BACKGROUND
Debtor Maxicare Health Insurance Company and its 48 affil...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Steven Lynch is before this court for the second time seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Presently, Lynch’s sole contention is that he was denied due process of law because the instructions given to the jury at trial allowed the jury to return a verdict of murder despite findings that should have resulted in a verdict of v...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is a $32 million dollar landlord-tenant dispute involving a newly constructed building at 200 East 87th Street (the “Building”). The plaintiff, 200 East 87th Street Associates (the “Landlord”), seeks a declaratory judgment to enforce a March 17, 1989 agreement (the “Lease”) between its assignor, Zemnor 87 Corp. (“Zemnor”), and defendant MTS, Inc. (“Tower”) one of its tenants....
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL Defendant Roland M. Dumas moves for a new trial on the grounds that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel within the meaning of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Defendant asserts that he was denied counsel as a matter of law because during his representation his attorney was not a member of the bar of t...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the Court is plaintiffs motion to remand this action to the Wayne County Circuit Court. Defendant has filed a response to this motion. For the reasons which follow, this Court shall grant plaintiffs motion.
1
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed suit against defendant in Wayne County Circuit Court on November 15, 1991. Defendant was served with a summon...
Views: 2
809 F.Supp. 643 (1992)
ESTATE OF Albert A. WOLL, by David WOLL Co-Trustee of the Third Restatement of Inter Vivos Revocable Trust for the Benefit of Albert A. Woll, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
No. EV 91-190-C.
United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Evansville Division.
July 2, 1992.
Alan N. Shovers, Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn, Evansville, IN, for Albert A. Woll Estate.
S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Avemco Insurance Company (“Avemco”) brings this declaratory judgment action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, seeking a judgment that Non-Commercial Aircraft Insurance Policy No. NC1-3730082 (the “Policy”) does not give rise to a duty to defend or indemnify Acer Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Acer Construction Company, Inc. (“Acer”) in an underlying lawsuit ar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case is before the Court on a motion for partial summary judgment by the Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), against Defendants Patriot Alcohol Testers, Inc. (“Patriot”) and Anthony J.
*854
Prall (“Prall”)- Specifically, the FTC asserts that it is entitled to summary judgment with respect to the following two issues: first, whether certain represe...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is an appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas disallowing a claim by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for penalties and interest on Andrew and Melinda Clark’s (the debtors) 1984 taxes. This Court affirms. Following the debtors’ filing of their petition under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, the IRS submitted a pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The issue before the Court is whether the Court may order a defendant who has violated conditions of probation to serve a period of supervised release following incarceration. FACTS Defendant Royce J. Clown plead guilty to Sexual Abuse of a Minor and on December 23,1988, was sentenced in this Court to thirty months custody and three years supervised release following incarcerati...
Views: 0
794 F. Supp. 334 (1992)
Naomi DYKES, Administratrix of the Estate of Ian Isadore Knife, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
Civ. No. 90-3032.
United States District Court, D. South Dakota, C.D.
July 10, 1992.
*335 Terry L. Pechota, Kenneth R. Dewell, Viken, Viken, Pechota, Leach & Dewell, Rapid City, S.D., for plaintiff.
Mikal Hanson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of U.S. Atty., Pie...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims after a two-day consolidated class action hearing and non-*219jury trial.1 The Court having considered the pleadings, the testimony of the witnesses, the deposition testimony and the documents in evidence, and being fully advised in the premises, makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law as re...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER “The danger of allowing the government to suppress speech is shown in the case now before [the Court], A grant of plenary power allows the government to tilt the dialogue heard by the public, to exclude many, more marginal voices.” International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee, — U.S. -, -, 112 S.Ct. 2701, 2720, 120 L.Ed.2d 541, 559 (1992) (Kennedy,...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 473 (1992)
Arlene KAHN, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff,
v.
ELEVATOR TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant/Third Party Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 88-828 SSH.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
July 23, 1992.
*474 William F. Mulroney, Ashcraft & Gerel, Washington, D.C., for Arlene Kahn.
Charles L. Hall, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., for the ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS
INTRODUCTION
This Order addresses the merits of motions for summary judgment in the two above-captioned cases.
In the first action, the Golden Gate Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) seeks summary judgment granting injunctive relief against California State Labor Commissioner James Curry and California ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a civil rights action against an individual police officer and the City of Boston for police misconduct. Now before the court are the following: (1) Defendant City of Boston’s Motion to Strike or in the Alternative to Dismiss Count II of the *35Complaint (Docket No. 3, filed March 13, 1992), together with a supporting memorandum (filed March 13, 1992), (2) Plaintiff’s ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before this court are motions for summary judgment from both parties pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
*1076
I. INTRODUCTION
1
Plaintiffs are various environmental organizations that challenge the decision by the Federal Highway Administration and the U.S. Forest Service to rebuild a portion of Highway PR 191 ...
Views: 1
OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Pamela Spears’ motion to remand. The issue presented is whether plaintiff’s race discrimination claim, filed pursuant to the Michigan Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (the “Elliott-Larsen Act”), M.C.L. §§ 37.-2101 et seq., is preempted by the Railway Labor Act (the “RLA”), 45 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq. Upon review of the pleadings submitted in suppor...
Views: 0
OPINION The public debate over abortion that has marched through our streets, preoccupied our legislatures, and intermittently covered the front pages of our newspapers with images of angry confrontation surfaces now even in the smallest and most genteel of our communities. Once the protestors’ shouts have subsided and order has been momentarily restored, courts must often untangle the bitter recr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action was filed by the taxpayer, Joseph M. Pierre, M.D., [hereinafter Pierre] against the respondent, United States of America, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7609(h) 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, to quash an Internal Revenue summons for certain tax documents of the taxpayer’s in the possession of A1 Roberts/Custom Accounting Systems, Inc., of Mississippi, 2 wh...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER The Klinghoffer and Chasser cases were brought in late 1985, following the piratical hijacking of the vessel “Achille Lauro” in the Mediterranean Sea and the murder of Leon Klinghoffer by (plaintiffs claim) members of the Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”) that October. The vessel’s owner moved for dismissal on the basis of forum-selection clauses in the tickets o...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss Count III of the third amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
Defendant Don Cunningham & Associates (“Associates”) employed plaintiff Luke Dallis (“Dallis”) as an independent sales representative from approxim...
Views: 0
793 F. Supp. 1386 (1992)
MAGNOLIA BAR ASSOCIATION, INC., Mississippi State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Rainbow Coalition, Mississippi Association of Black Supervisors, Mississippi Conference of Black Mayors, George Flaggs, Bennie Thompson, Sheila Johnson, and Sam McCray, on Behalf of Themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
Roy...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Cooper Industries, Inc. (“Cooper”) moved for summary judgment on
*874
July 19, 1991. In the motion Cooper asks this court to declare that: a) the registration of Channellock, U.S.Reg. No. 1,535,106 is invalid and unenforceable; b) that the registration be stricken from the Principal Register of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; c) that the def...
Views: 0
Page 10896
ORDER
The matter is before the Court on the parties’ joint motion for approval of the settlement agreements submitted in the above captioned cases. Because these cases involve certified classes, the Court must approve any resolution of the outstanding claims of the plaintiff classes under Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed settlement ag...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter came before the court for court trial June 9-30, 1992. Plaintiffs are the United States of America and the Torres-Martinez Band of Mission Indians; hereinafter the words “band” or “Torres-Martinez” will refer to both the United States and the Torres-Martinez Band of Mission Indians unless otherwise indicated. They were represented by Peter Mon...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner, William George Bonin, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his 1983 convictions in Orange County on four counts of first degree murder and his subsequent death sentence. Prior to standing trial in Orange County, Bonin was convicted of ten counts of first degree murder in Los Angeles and r...
Views: 3
RULING ON PETTIBONE CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISS ON THE BASIS OF PRESCRIPTION The interesting issue presented by this motion is whether a suit filed in violation of an automatic stay issued by a United States Bankruptcy Court interrupts libera-tive prescription under Louisiana law.1 *764The background of this case presents a unique factual scenario which has seen this case travel through one ba...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
With every passing day on this planet, life becomes more perilous due to the reckless and sometimes illegal acts of individuals, agencies, corporations and even nations which fail to realize the importance of the environment to the present and future generations. It is thus not by happenstance that plaintiffs, a coalition of numerous environmental or...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Northwest Airlines, Inc. (Northwest) brought this diversity action against American Airlines, Inc. (American) seeking a declaratory judgment that its “past hiring of ‘terminable-at-will’ employees of American was a proper and lawful part of the competition in the airline industry, and that Northwest has the right to seek to hire other ‘terminable-at-will’ empl...
Views: 0
Page 10936
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 23, 1992, the Court entertained oral argument on the Plaintiff’s Continuing Challenge to the Defendants’ Compliance with this Court’s Orders and the Defendant’s “second stage”1 motion for summary judgment. The Court also inquired as to the status of certain matters pertaining to the Defendant’s “first stage” motion for summary judgment. See Senate of Puerto Ric...
Views: 0
Page 10937
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR AN ORDER QUASHING SERVICE FOR FAILURE TO PROPERLY SERVE UNDER THE HAGUE CONVENTION
INTRODUCTION
On March 9, 1992, the court held a hearing on defendant Kikuchi’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to quash service for failure to properly serve under the Hague Convention filed on January 13,...
Views: 0
ORDER
This order addresses the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) motion to
*642
dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction filed in
Berlandi v. FDIC,
91-321-L.
Background
Plaintiffs, Susan Berlandi and Robert Ferraro, brought suit in Hillsborough County Superior Court on July 29, 1991 against among others, the Hillsborough Bank & Tru...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER I. Introduction This case is before this Court on plaintiff’s counsel’s 1 Application for Attorney Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (1985), requesting an award pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 for services rendered in a disability benefits case brought under authority granted by § 205 of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Charles M. Marshall, Adminis- • trator of the Estate of Raymond G. Percia-valle, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and asserting pendent state law claims for false arrest, wrongful death and survival.
Titl...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs’ counsel in this case, Farm-worker Legal Services of New York (“Le
*1058
gal Services”) submits this application for attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), in the amount of $374,149.74.
1
Defendants maintain that the fee award should be reduced for several reasons, each of which will be discussed ...
Views: 0
Page 10968
ORDER AND OPINION
This is an appeal and cross-appeal from a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Blackshear, J.) dated May 14, 1991; an order entered thereon dated May 16, 1991; and an order dated July 1, 1991, denying the motion for reargument of ap-pellee Ruth Peres (“Peres”). For the reasons stated below, the decision and orders of the B...
Views: 0
Page 10972
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”), com*132menced this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Opportunity Act of 1972, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (“Title VII”), on behalf of Susan Stambules to recover damages against defendant Carlton Cruises, Inc. (the “Company”), a Delaware corporation which operates ...
Views: 0
Page 10975
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This case involves the allegedly negligent advice given to plaintiff, MEI International, Inc. (MEI), by defendant, Schenkers International Forwarders, Inc. (Schenkers), regarding the circumstances which permit an original importer to obtain a duty drawback under United States custom law. This action for damages was tried to the court on December 2, ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”)' and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provides for th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages and injunctive relief alleging employment discrimination in violation of: (1) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l); (2) New York’s Human Rights Law, N.Y.Exec.L. § 296; and (3) the common law of restraint of trade.
Defendant American League of Professional Baseba...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
sitting as a District Court Judge by designation.
INTRODUCTION
Defendants Rebecca Gold Enterprises, Inc. (“Gold Enterprises”), Rebecca Yahou-dai and Hertsel Yahoudai interpose objections pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) seeking modification of Magistrate Judge Kathleen A. Roberts’ report and recommendation for awarding damages, includ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In a Memorandum Opinion and Order dated November 27, 1990, 1990 WL 196013, this Court granted plaintiff Alice Childress summary judgment against defendants Clarice Taylor, Paul B. Berkowsky, The Moms Company and Ben Caldwell on the issue of copyright infringement. That opinion held that a stage play entitled “Moms,” subtitled “The First Lady of Comedy,” infrin...
Views: 0
799 F.Supp. 960 (1992)
Kevin Luke SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
PASLODE CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.
No. 88-2247C(7).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
March 16, 1992.
*961 *962 *963 Drew Baebler, Schlichter Law Associates, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Frank Gundlach Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly, Davis & Dicus, St. Louis, Mo., Brendan Collins, Arnold & Porter, Wash...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the court is an application filed by The Kansas City Star Company (“the Star”) seeking access to an affidavit filed under seal in support of a criminal complaint. Because I find that defendants’ sixth amendment rights to a fair trial outweigh any public right of access, the affidavit will be unsealed in a redacted form until the redacted information is disclosed in some future court p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I
On February 27, 1991, three police officers seized $9000.00 in United States currency from Willie L. Jones at the Nashville International Airport. The currency was subsequently the subject of summary forfeiture proceedings by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) of the United States Department of Justice. In this action, Mr. Jones seeks the return of his currency an...
Views: 0
Page 10997
797 F.Supp. 1488 (1992)
Alvin NASH, Earl Pitts, African American Voting Rights Legal Defense Fund, Inc., Charles Troupe, Theodore Hoskins, Ada Hill, Plaintiffs,
v.
Roy BLUNT, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Missouri, Defendant,
Thomas Stoff, Neil Molloy, Patrick Dougherty, Francis Brady, Henry Bufkins, Matt O'Neill, Gail Chatfield, Charles Dooley, Ron Auer, Melvin W...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION
Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) brings this declaratory relief action seeking a judgment that it is not liable to defend or to cover claims arising from pending litigation in the Superior Court for the County of Alameda against its insureds, defendants Robert S. Vavasour and Susanna Vavasour.
On these motions, Allsta...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant Schlumberger Technologies, Inc. (“STI”) moves pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s Fourth Cause of Action, retaliation in violation of public policy, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
Defendant’s motion to ...
Views: 0
Page 11005
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendant Blecker’s Emergency Motion for Protective Order (doc. 557). The Court, having considered the motion and the responses thereto, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds as follows:
1. The Defendant’s motion for protective order seeks to prevent the Plaintiffs from deposing a representative of the Appraisal Institute (“Institute”),...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff in the above-captioned action seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 2000e (“Title YU”) for, respectively, deprivations of the rights secured to him by federal law and the Constitution, and employment discrimination. The complaint in the instant action contains two claims for relief: one under section 1983, and one under Title VII. Defendants move to dism...
Views: 0
OPINION
The motions before me concern two related civil forfeiture cases, in which the defendants are property of Eileen and Palmer Crowell. Eileen Crowell moves to refer the two cases to the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon. I have heard oral ar
*804
guments and considered the briefs of the parties i
BACKGROUND
Eileen and Palmer Crowell are a married cou...
Views: 0
Page 11025
*385 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, Chesley Lewis, Jr., filed suit on June 12, 1989 against Breaux Bridge Police Officers Melvin Goodie 1 and Anthony DeR-ousselle, and the City of Breaux Bridge alleging causes of action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and Louisiana law. On July 24, 1991, plaintiff filed an amended petition naming George Menard, the Chief o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
After an extensive undercover investigation, government authorities set up a “reverse sting” operation involving Ali Osseir-an. Acting in accordance with a plan agreed to by Osseiran, government agents met Osseiran’s courier, one Michael Haloui, at Logan Airport, matched separate halves of a torn dollar bill, and then turned over to Haloui containers of what purported to be ill...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs are seven milk processors (handlers) who operate, or during the relevant period of September 1984 through February 1985 operated, a total of thirteen milk plants in the states of Georgia, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Louisiana, and were subject to certain federal milk pricing regulations known as Federal Mil...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REINSTATE § 10(b) CLAIMS
BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reinstate § 10(b) Claims (Ct. Rec. 63). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted.
A. BACKGROUND
Marley Orchards Income Fund I Limited Partnership (hereinafter “MOIF”) was created to operate apple orchards in the Yakima Valley. It has two general partners— Marley Orchards Cor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Plaintiff, Pioneer Food and Beverage, Inc., seeks relief, in the nature of certiorari pursuant to Mass.Gen.L. ch. 249, § 4, from the decision of the Defendant, the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Dartmouth, which denied the plaintiffs request to amend its entertainment license to include nude dancing (Count I). The plaintiff further seeks injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 12, 1989, Wayne Byfield (“Byfield”) was charged in a two-count indictment with: 1) possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base on or about August 18, 1989 and/or aiding and abetting in the possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a), 841(b)(l)(A)(iii) and 18 U.S.C. § 2; and 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On July 1, 1991, plaintiffs petitioned the Court for an award of attorneys’ fees, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in connection with their work on five issues in this case, namely: 1) plaintiffs’ motion for a further order enforcing the permanent injunction of December 12, 1988, filed July 12, 1990, heard by the Court on September 21, 199...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This civil action seeking damages for personal injuries was initiated by the filing of a Motion for Judgment on October 11, 1992 in the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News, Virginia, by plaintiff, DAVID LEE ABEL (hereinafter “plaintiff”). The plaintiff named as defendants Montgomery Ward Co., Inc., Montgomery Ward Importing, Inc., (hereinaft...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a criminal action which originated on 16 June 1989 when an indictment (the “Indictment”) was returned. Defendants Richard 0. Bertoli (“Bertoli”), Leo M. Eisenberg (“Eisenberg”) and Richard S. Cannistraro (“Cannistraro”) (collectively the “Defendants”) were named in the Indictment.
1
On 29 September 1989 a six count superseding indictment (the “Superseding Indict...
Views: 2
OPINION Under Rule 29(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Court is obligated to order the entry of judgment of acquittal for offenses charged in an indictment if, after the close of the government’s proof, the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction for such offenses. Yesterday, the government concluded its case-in-chief and the defendant, George H. Foy, moved for judgme...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Loews Theatre Management Corp. (“Loews”) has moved by order to show cause for an order pursuant to DR 5-102(B) of the Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility (“DR 5-102(B)”), 22 N.Y.C.R.R. § 1200.21, disqualifying the firm of Davis
&
Gilbert from representing plaintiff Parke-Hayden, Inc. (“Parke-Hayden”).
The facts of this case have ...
Views: 2
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11076: Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Universal Tool & Stamping Co.
Page 11076
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses pursuant to Section 505(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (“Clean Water Act”) as amended, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(d). The parties have fully briefed this issue, and for the following reasons, the Motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Proced...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Western Federal Savings & Loan Association (“Western Federal”) brings this motion for summary judgment on the first and second causes of action of the complaint. The Court having read and considered the papers submitted by the parties, having heard oral argument, and good cause appearing hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgmen...
Views: 0
ORDER
This tax case is before the court on the parties’ cross motions for partial summary judgment. The material facts relating to these motions are, in large part, undisputed.
*719
Masón-Hall Southwest, Inc. (“Mason-Hall”) was incorporated under the laws of the state of Texas in 1982. Plaintiffs Richard W. Hall (“Hall”) and Francis A. Mason (“Mason”) were each minority shar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) brought this action against sixteen
*1393
defendants associated with Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association (Midwest). The RTC asserts claims of breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, gross negligence and unjust enrichment against the defendant directors and officers. Various defendants have raised...
Views: 2
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11097: Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Vernon Real Estate Investments, Ltd.
Page 11097
OPINION
In recent years, our nation’s banking system has been crumbling under the combined weight of bank failures and a depressed economy, a plight that continues to sap the federal government of much of its scarce resources and ordinary people of their financial security. In the midst of all
*1011
this, courts must continually decide the fate of the latest in an endless lin...
Views: 0
*724
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1
I.
Factual Background
Fishing is a sport for some and a living for others. The proprietors of the plaintiff corporation in this case make their living by fishing in the Indiana waters of Lake Michigan. Plaintiff, however, must share its fishing grounds with a plentitude of sport fisher...
Views: 0
Page 11103
ORDER Before the court is the plaintiff’s motion to vacate the May 8, 1992 dismissal of this action, and the parties’ respective motions for Rule 11 sanctions. For reasons that follow, the motion to vacate is denied and both Rule 11 motions are denied. FACTS Plaintiff National Education Training Group, Inc. (“NETG”) filed its original complaint on March 26, 1992, and an amended complaint on April ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For reasons that follow, plaintiff’s motion is granted and defendant’s motion is denied. FACTS Donald P. DeFrancesco (“DeFrancesco”), a former truck driver suffering from diabetes and heart disease, applied for Social Security disability benefits on October 16, 1985, claiming he was disabled as of February 21, 1984....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff has filed for declaratory relief against defendant alleging that it is not liable to the defendant, as a loss payee under an insurance policy mortgage clause, because the defendant has breached certain policy provisions. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that defendant has failed to allow an inspection of records related to the fire loss in question, its officers have refused t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on two motions for reconsideration by William L. Needier et al., the lawyers for Debtor Theodore V. Olson (Filings No. 35 and 36, respectively, in CV 89-0-554).1 Specifically Needier et al. (“the lawyers” or “the Olson lawyers”) have asked the Court to reconsider its Order dismissing, for lack of jurisdiction, *46their appeal of the Ban...
Views: 3
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Trial of this cause was held by this court without the intervention of a jury on April 21 and April 22, 1992. It was instituted with the filing of a complaint by plaintiff Raymond J. Pesek on May 22, 1991 against defendants the City of Brunswick (hereinafter Brunswick), Robert Trimble, Gregory Crane, and Tex Combs. The complaint seeks recovery pursu...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed this class action complaint on behalf of all persons who purchased common stock of Chittenden Corporation (“Chittenden” or “bank”) from March 29, 1989 through August 15, 1990, claiming that Chittenden and two individuals alleged to be “controlling persons” of the bank committed fraud in violation of §§ 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 193...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of eight separate motions. The Court conducted a hearing on these motions on April 30, 1992.
BACKGROUND
In May, 1987, Mignon Stone became romantically involved with Larry Jones. Ms. Stone and Mr. Jones eventually took up residence together. In April, 1989, they rented two television sets and a video cassette recorder from R...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS SMITH AND OKADA’S MOTION FOR AWARD OF COSTS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES
INTRODUCTION
On March 12, 1992, the court held a hearing on a motion for award of costs and attorneys’ fees filed by defendants HonFed Bank, HFSL Corp., Peter S. Smith, and Glenn K. Okada on January 10, 1992 (the “Private Defendants”).
1
Defendants State of...
Views: 0
Page 11124
OPINION
Plaintiffs in the related actions of
Morin v. Trupin,
No. 88 Civ. 5743, and
Alberti v. Trupin,
No. 90 Civ. 3475, have moved pursuant to § 476 of the FDIC Improvement Act of 1991, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa, to reinstate their claims under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 which were previously dismissed as time-barred by...
Views: 2
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
This antitrust action is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Plaintiffs allege that they were injured by workers’ compensation rate increases approved by the Maine Superintendent of Insurance after the Maine legislature enacted a law in 1987 permitting insurers to apply for rate hikes exceeding ceilings allowed under prior law. ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is the motion of defendant Morency & Associates, Inc., d/b/a Morency, Weible & Sapa (“Morency”) to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). The court denies the motion for the reasons set forth below.
FACTS
On December 22, 1991, the tugboat M/V Dutch Gap sank in the Mississippi River, discharging diesel fuel into t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This federal securities action arises out of the failure of the Matthews & Wright Group, Inc. (“M & W”), an underwriter of tax exempt housing bonds, and plaintiffs’ attempts to recover money invested in M & W.
Several related actions have been brought in this District, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (“S.E.C.”) investigation of M & W.
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A REMAND Plaintiffs commenced this action on May 29, 1992 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. Plaintiffs’ original complaint seeks damages for accountant’s malpractice, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, fraud and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff American Pfauter, Ltd. (“American Pfauter”) seeks to recover damages incurred when its gear-shaping machine fell off a flatbed trailer. In Count I of its second-amended complaint, American Pfauter alleges that defendant Freeman Decorating Company (“Freeman”) negligently loaded the machine onto the flatbed and, as such, is liable for the damages.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Defendant Joan Nigro, the Executrix of the Estate of Peter Nigro (“the Executrix”), moves to dismiss the complaints in the above-entitled actions because the death of Peter Nigro terminated the claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and under the Donnelly Act, § 340 of the New York General Business Law. In the alternative, the Executrix argues that t...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS PARTY PLAINTIFFS AND RICARDO HILBURN AND GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS DOE DEFENDANTS BACKGROUND This medical malpractice action seeks damages for the wrongful death of Dene-sha Rashun Hilburn (“Denesha”), who died on January 18, 1989. Plaintiffs allege that Denesha’s death was caused by the negligent conduct of both Tripler Army Medical Center and David G...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Allen Organ Company (“Allen”) instituted this non-jury action against Defendants General Electro Music Corporation (“GEM USA”), GEM Industry S.p.A. (“GEM Italy”), and Galanti Organ Builders, Inc. (“GOBI”), seeking injunctive and compensatory relief for false advertising pursuant to section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). Allen also sought relief based on...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Chicago Truck Drivers, Helpers and Warehouse Workers Union (Independent) Pension Fund and Paul L. Glover, John R. Johnson, John Broderick and William H. Carpenter, Trustees (collectively, the “Fund”), have sued all the named Defendants under ERISA, as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, for the withdrawal liability of U.S. Bedd...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff, as personal representative of the estate of her deceased father, sued the Perpetual Savings Bank on January 6, 1992, in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action 92-CA00192, alleging that Perpetual negligently allowed the unauthorized withdrawal of some $72,-000 from the decedent’s bank accounts. Four days later, on January 10, 1992, the Office of Thrift Super...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff, in his amended complaint against defendant District of Columbia, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim alleging Fourth Amendment violations. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges an incident in which two District of Columbia police officers intentionally and without authorization assaulted the plaintiff, using unreasonable and excessive force in an effort to detain him. Amended Complaint at Par...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S APPEAL OF HER CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IMPOSED BY THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I. INTRODUCTION
Marlene Tarrant was tried and convicted on five counts of failure to file income tax returns in a December 1989 jury trial conducted (by consent) before Magistrate Judge Virginia Morgan.
1
Following the trial, Magistrate Judge Morgan sentenced Ms. T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION On February 28, 1990, Oak Park-River Forest High School suspended Jamie Sieck for a period of ten days on charges of theft. His parents, William and Mary Sieck, on behalf of their son, are suing the District, the Board of Education, and several school officials. They seek recovery for violations of constitutional and civil rights protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendmen...
Views: 0
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on the 16 day of March, 1992, came on to be heard and considered the above styled and numbered cause, and the Plaintiff appeared by its authorized representative and by and through counsel and the Defendants appeared in person and by and through their counsel of record, and the parties having announced ready for trial, having waived their right to a jury trial, and ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This action was commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York on January 22, 1991 by petitioners, CBS Inc. (“CBS”) and two of its managerial employees, Neal Pilson and Ted Shaker, seeking to stay arbitration proceedings initiated by James “Jimmy the Greek” Snyder pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement between CBS and the American Federation of Television...
Views: 2
Page 11186
ORDER ENTERING FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT CENTRAL STATES
This is an action brought by Plaintiff Salvatore Sclafani (“Sclafani”) against the Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund (“Central States”), pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., to recover pension benefits denied to him by the Board of Tr...
Views: 1
ORDER The debtor appellant, Columbus J. South-erland (Southerland) filed a Chapter 13 action fro se in the Bankruptcy Court of the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division. In a related adversary proceeding, Souther-land named several defendants, including Ann Southerland Laird (Laird) his ex-wife, all of whom are Georgia citizens. At the pre-trial conference before the Bankruptcy Court, ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this civil injunctive action, plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) now moves the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), for a protective order, precluding defendant Anthony M. Morelli (“Morelli”) from conducting a deposition of the SEC pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6). For the following reasons, the motion for a protective order is granted.
BACKGROUND
This is...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff, a white man who has served as an administrator for the University of the District of Columbia and one of its precursor institutions since 1975, brings this employment action under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Fifth and Thirteenth Amendments, and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act
*422
(DCHRA), D.C.Code § 1-2501
et seq.,
for UDC’s failure to make hi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(b). Jurisdiction is based on diversity. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. For the reasons set forth below, we grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
BACKGROUND
On January 31, 1991, plaintiff, Sarah Herriott (“Herriott”), brought a six count complai...
Views: 1
ORDER ENTERING SUMMARY FINAL JUDGMENT FOR VEREX ASSURANCE, INC. AND DENYING SUMMARY FINAL JUDGMENT FOR FDIC This action was brought by Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) against Verex Assurance, Inc. (“Verex”) to recover sums allegedly due and owing under two certificates of insurance issued pursuant to a standard mortgage guaranty insurance policy. Verex counterclaimed seeki...
Views: 0
Pending before the court is a motion by the plaintiff to amend his complaint in this employment discrimination action to request all remedies available under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub.L. No. 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071 (hereinafter “the Act”). More specifically, the plaintiff wishes to reinstate his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, deleted from the original complaint, and seek all possible rem...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. FACTS
This case began in early 1986 with the return of a twenty-eight-count indictment in which more than twenty persons, including petitioner, were charged with various narcotics offenses; petitioner, however, was charged in Counts 1, 2, 3 and 5 of the indictment only.
1
On August 2, 1986, peti
*297
tioner was convicted on all four counts,
2
...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff, a state inmate housed at Curri-tuck Correctional Center (CCC), a prison facility for males in Maple, North Carolina, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Ernest Sutton, superintendent of CCC, as well as Tammy Hibbert, Sarah Johnson, Laura Simons, Debra Nues-meyer and Della Shope, who are female correctional officers at CCC. Defendants were sued in their indiv...
Views: 2
ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion has been fully briefed and several suggestions of subsequently decided authority have been filed by both parties. Now, having heard oral argument on 1 July 1992, the court is ready to rule. FACTS In February 1985, plaintiff John Doe 1 was...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION THIS MATTER came on for consideration of the Defendants’ three pending Motions to Dismiss, all filed on September 25, 1991. The Court has reviewed the motions, the memoranda submitted by the parties and the relevant authorities. The Court finds that the motions are well-taken in part and will be granted in part. When reviewing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the ...
Views: 1
794 F. Supp. 182 (1992)
Arvel R. HARVEY, Plaintiff,
v.
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-0044-R.
United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division.
March 5, 1992.
*183 Ralph Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz, Rafal, Swartz & Gilbert, Russell Nash Brahm III, Norfolk, Va., for plaintiff.
Daniel Reid Warman, Williams, Worrell, Kelly, Greer & Frank, Norfolk, Va., for defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Pittston Company and Clinchfield Coal Company (“Plaintiffs”) initially brought this action seeking a temporary restraining order (“TRO”), preliminary injunction and permanent injunction. The court has previously entered orders granting the TRO and the preliminary injunction. Therefore, the permanent injunction is the only remaining issue. The matter is presently bef...
Views: 0
Page 11232
ORDER Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled civil action on April 14, 1992 alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising from medical treatment furnished by Defendants. A review of the record in this matter demonstrates that all Defendants have filed answers with the Court. All Defendants except Defendants Hibbs and D’Amato have filed dis-positive motions wit...
Views: 0
CORRECTED MEMORANDUM OPINION Pending is the Plaintiffs motion to remand and the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Previously this action was referred to the Honorable Jerry D. Hogg, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) for submission to this Court of his proposed findings of fact and recommendati...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this forfeiture action, the claimant has moved for leave to file a supplemental answer and to file an intervenor complaint on behalf of her minor children; the government has cross-moved to strike the claim already filed by the claimant on behalf of the children. For the reasons set forth below, the motions of the claimant to file a supplemental answer and to file ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Michael and Linda O’Neill moved this court on March 9, 1992, to confirm an arbitration award in the amount of $450,806.26 and to order judgment on that award. Defendant Berkshire Mutual Insurance Company (“Berkshire Mutual”), pursuant to the arbitration clause contained in the policy issued to plaintiff, requested a de novo trial following the arbitrators’ decisio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This case arises out of a dispute over the ownership of nearly two thousand ancient Greek and Lycian silver coins. The Republic of Turkey alleges that the coins were unearthed in Turkey in 1984, and that under Turkish law all such artifacts within Turkey’s borders are the property of Turkey even before they are discovered. The complai...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
This action was filed on October 15, 1991. The Complaint by the Coeur d’Alene Indian Tribe of Idaho and various individual tribe members (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Tribe”) against the State of Idaho and various state officials and agencies, seeks an order from the court quieting title in the Tribe to the beds,...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Burger King Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Counterclaim (all sixteen counts), file dated December 6, 1991.
*686
The Court has considered the Motion, response, reply, affidavits and supplemental written filings, oral ...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 958 (1992)
Carrie MEEK, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants.
No. 86-1820-CIV.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
May 26, 1992.
*959 *960 Thomasina H. Williams, Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A., Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs Packington, Meek Burke and Intervenor Ferguson.
Steven M. Cody, Miami, Fla., for plai...
Views: 0
Page 11255
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Political Contributions Data, Inc. (“PCD”) moves for an order, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A), awarding it $55,022.89 in attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred defending this action in this Court and the Court of Appeals. See Federal Election Com. v. Political Contributions Data, Inc., 753 F.Supp. 1122 (S.D...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 438 (1992)
SEMINOLE PIPELINE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
Carl VOGT, Chairman, National Transportation Safety Bd., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-1731 (CRR).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
July 28, 1992.
*439 Cheryl C. Burke, Sanford M. Sauners, Leslie M. Turner and James C. Osborne of Akin, Gump, Hauer & Feld, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Plaintiff Joseph Agugliaro commenced this action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621-634 (“ADEA”) against defendants Brooks Brothers, Inc., a.k.a. Brooks Specialty, Inc.; Marks & Spencer, U.S.A., Inc., and Andrea Ross, Brian Curry, Erica Pa-sión, and Jan Sixto Sarmiento, all individually and as employees of Brooks Brothers, Inc. Agug...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises from the transfer of plaintiff, a career employee of. the State Insurance Fund (SIF), from his position as Chief of the Finance Division of the Treasury Area, to his current position as Assistant Chief of the Collections and Attachment Division. Plaintiff is a member of the Partido Nuevo Progresista (PNP) who has brought a cause of action alleging that h...
Views: 0
Page 11265
ORDER The plaintiff in the above-captioned action, Washington Properties Limited Partnership, petitions this Court for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction to prevent the defendant Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) from foreclosing on the deed of trust that is the subject of ongoing litigation in this case. In the underlying action, the plaintiff asserts that it is entitled ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On July 24, 1992, the Court held a Hearing on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the above-captioned case for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6)
1
and for failure to plead fraud with particularity as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). Upon consideration of the Defendants’ Motion, the Plaintiff’s opposition thereto, the applicable ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
This case arises from a dispute over the regulation of newsracks in the city of Coral Gables, Florida. After city officials seized its newsracks, Gold Coast Publications, as publisher of a new tabloid newspaper,
Exi-to,
filed suit against the city of Coral Gables and its officials, alleging that the city’s ordinance regulat...
Views: 4
Page 11269
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
Before the Court are the cross-motions for summary judgment of plaintiffs Dr Pepper/Seven-Up Companies, Inc. (“DPSU”) and Harold A. Honickman (“Honickman”), and defendant Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “the Commission”). At issue is whether the FTC’s decision to deny Honickman’s application for prior approval to acquire certain assets of the Seven-Up Brooklyn Bo...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 305 (1992)
Tom SULLIVAN, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
FARAS-RLS GROUP, LTD., et al., Defendants.
No. CIV 91-1507-PHX-EHC.
United States District Court D. Arizona.
July 23, 1992.
John Austin Lauback, Sacks Tierney & Kasen PA, Phoenix, Ariz., William L. Tifft, Globe, Ariz., for plaintiffs.
Diana J. Calais, Globe, Ariz., for defendants.
ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING MOTION TO...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This routine drug case, made entirely by the District of Columbia’s Metropolitan Police Department on the basis of evidence its officers recovered in execution of a D.C. Superior Court search warrant, is a duplicate of scores of others prosecuted as federal crimes in this U.S. district court in recent months. Defendant Frank Dave Clark, a 28-year old high schoo...
Views: 1
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
In this class action challenging the reasonableness of the income eligibility levels
1
set by the Maine Department of Human Services (“DHS”) for the Maine Medicaid program, all parties filed motions for judgment on a stipulated record. The Third-Party Defendant also filed a motion to dismiss the third-party complaint. For the reasons stated below...
Views: 0
Page 11282
*160 MEMORANDUM ORDER Background Plaintiff Allen is on active duty with the U.S. Coast Guard. He was passed over for promotion in 1989 and 1990. On October 26, 1990, Allen filed a complaint with the Coast Guard Board for the Correction of Military Records (“BCMR”). While an officer passed over for promotion twice is subject to discharge, 1 the Coast Guard has agreed to allow the plaintiff...
Views: 3
OPINION
This opinion resolves what I hope is the final leg of a lengthy and bitter litigation between plaintiffs, a cooperative apartment building at 305 East 24th Street in Manhattan and its individual directors (“Owners Corp.”), and defendants, the company and its affiliates and principals who owned the building and sponsored its conversion to a cooperative in 1984. The action involves ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons stated below, the Defendant’s motion is granted and the case is hereby dismissed with prejudice.
BACKGROUND
Stuart Circle Hospital Corporation (“Stuart Circle”) seeks a judgment against the Defendants Aetna Life Insurance Co. and Aetna He...
Views: 0
Page 11297
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the Defendants Motion to Stay this action pending arbitration. Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction is proper pursuant to Rule 9(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 1333. For the reasons stated from the bench and the those set out more fully below, Defendants’ motion is DENIED.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Otto...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This habeas corpus action is before the Court on respondent’s motion for summary judgment. At issue is whether Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989) and its progeny foreclose federal de novo review of petitioner’s claim that his guilty pleas should be vacated because he received constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel in the proce...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
I.
Introduction
This case is before me on Joseph Berres’ (“creditor”) interlocutory appeal from an order of the bankruptcy court dismissing his complaint to determine dischargeability. Count 1 of the complaint alleged that the debtors committed fraud in a fiduciary capacity and that the obligation was not dis-chargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 125) on the basis that the plaintiffs’ claims are now either moot or barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Prior to the filing of defendants’ motion, the court had ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why the action should not be dismissed as moot.
This case initially arose as a challenge to the d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Lake Erie Institute of Rehabilitation (“LEIR”) brought this action seeking compensation for rehabilitative services rendered. Defendant Marion County, West Virginia Board of Education (“the Board”) has filed a motion for summary judgment. LEIR’s theory of recovery is based on contract and promissory estoppel; LEIR contends that the Board either entered into a ...
Views: 0
OPINION
First National Bank & Trust Company of Newtown instituted this suit against its common carrier for damages caused by the carrier’s delay in delivering five shipments of bank documents. Defendant, Purolator Courier Corporation, admits that the delivery was delayed, but claims that its liability is limited to the amount stated on the bills of lading for each shipment. After a two-da...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Willie Anderson, formerly an inmate at Potosí Correctional Center (PCC), brings this civil rights action against Paul K. Delo, warden of PCC; Larry Scott, a functional unit manager at PCC; and Del Casby, a PCC employee. He asserts that defendants deprived him of his due process rights under the Fourtee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs, Michael A. Gaudiello, Jr., a thirteen year old physically disabled child and his parents, Michael A. Gaudiello and Jane Gaudiello, seek in this action to recover damages for alleged violations of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Count 1) and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (Count 2 and 3). Plaintiffs further allege in their complaint, filed on June 13, ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING STAY OF IMPOSITION OF SENTENCE PENDING APPEAL Defendant Floyd Pope seeks a stay of his sentence pending appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b) after being convicted for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute, as well as, possessing with intent to distribute approximately 2500 kilograms of marijuana, in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Generally, a defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Defendants have moved to dismiss counts 32-47 of the indictment on the ground that 18 U.S.C. § 666 does not cover offers of bribes of state officials administering federally aided programs in order to obtain licenses, regardless of the amount of
*530
the bribes offered or the value of the business which could be done under the licenses, because the licenses t...
Views: 0
*1013ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Industrial Indemnity Company’s (“Industrial”) 1 motion for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on July 20,1992. Daniel Chur, Esq., appeared on behalf of plaintiff Lorraine Nakamura (“Nakamura”) and Jodie Roeca, Esq., appeared on behalf of Industrial. The court, having considered the argument...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
This case addresses the constitutionality, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, of a Maine statute prohibiting fund-raising that tangibly benefits law enforcement activities.
1
The statute can be enforced by injunctive relief and civil penalties. I conclude that the injunctive relief amounts to an unconstitutional prior restraint but that otherwise ...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT FLEET BANK OF MAINE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This case arises from the claim for damages of Charles W. Redman, III that, as a former employee of Maine Savings Bank (“MSB”), he is entitled to severance pay under the MSB Financial Security Severance Plan (“Severance Plan” or “Plan”). The Court now has before it Defendant Fleet Bank of Maine’s (“Fleet Bank”) Motion ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW RE: SAN JUAN SOUTHERN PAIUTE CLAIMS INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Vernon Masayesva is the duly authorized Chairman of the Hopi Tribal Council of the Hopi Tribe, and appears herein as representative of the Hopi Tribe and its villages, clans and individual members. Defendant Peterson Zah is the duly authorized Chairman of the Navajo Tribal Council, and appea...
Views: 3
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss dated February 4, 1991, filed by respondent Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc. (hereinafter “Shearson”), which requests that the Court dismiss the Application to Vacate Arbitrators’ Award filed by petitioners Rafael González and German Ramírez de Arellano (“petitioners”) on December 17,1990. For the reasons set forth below, the mot...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss filed by third-party defendant De-sarrollos Metropolitanos, Inc. (hereinafter “Desarrollos”) on March 12, 1992, and the supplemental Motion to Dismiss filed by third-party defendant Victor Torres and Associates (“VTA”) on April 1, 1992. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are hereby GRANTED.
*905
I. Factu...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it defendant’s unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment and/or to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.1 For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is hereby GRANTED.
I. Background
This is a case for damages as a result of an alleged wrongful termination of employment, an alleged libelous and defamatory campaign against plaintiff, and for costs and attorne...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the defendant’s motion for summary judgment based on the Fireman’s Rule
1
and plaintiffs’ opposition thereto.
This suit arises out of the death of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico Police Sergeant Alberto Alvarado (hereafter “Alvarado”) and the subsequent suit brought by his relatives for the alleged negligence of the Veterans Administra...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendants, officials of two labor unions and charged with failure to submit reports required by labor statutes, have filed objections to the U.S. Magistrate Judge’s denial of their petition to suppress evidence. FACTS The United States Department of Labor (DOL) received a complaint on February 19, 1988 from a Mr. José Aguilar Ramos, alleging that “Federació...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves an action for medical malpractice under art. 1802 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R.Laws Ann.Tit. 31
*50
§ 5141 (1956). Plaintiff alleges that decedent was over medicated which caused her death. Pending before the court is a motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Dr. Maria A. López alleging that the cause of action is time-barred ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 296 (1992)
Tibor BATHONY, Plaintiff,
v.
TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
No. J90-019 Civil.
United States District Court, D. Alaska.
April 29, 1992.
*297 Mark Clayton Choate, Juneau, Alaska, for plaintiff.
Paul M. Hoffman, Robertson, Monagle & Eastaugh, Juneau, Alaska, for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
VON DER HEYDT, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION.
...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11350: Aliberti, Larochelle & Hodson Engineering Corp. v. First Meridian Group
Page 11350
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION IN RESPECT TO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Plaintiffs brought this action on July 25, 1989, in Maine Superior Court to enforce their mechanics’ liens. Defendant New Heritage Bank, the Massachusetts bank which had financed the underlying development project, answered, also filing a counterclaim and a third-party complaint against two individuals who are employees of t...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for partial summary judgment on the statute of limitations defense raised as to certain claims, and the plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint in the above-captioned case. The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, and concludes that the plaintiff’s motion t...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiffs Prudential Securities and Prudential-Bache Properties (referred to collectively as “Prudential”) provide securities brokerage services. During 1982, Prudential sold to its customers, the defendants in this suit, limited partnership interests in Archives New York Limited Partnership (“ANY”), which was established to finance the renovation of a New York City warehouse. Pr...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ■
By Memorandum and Order of March 20, 1992, the court dismissed the parties’ motions for summary judgment in this copyright infringement action and invited new motions compatible with rulings therein announced. Each party has renewed its motion for summary judgment and filed further submissions (Docket Nos. 168-190).
*
A hearing on these motions was held o...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before this court is plaintiffs civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendant Thomas A. Coughlin, III, (“Coughlin”), Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services; Stephen Dalsheim (“Dalsheim”), Superintendent at Downstate Correctional Facility (“Downstate”); Donald McLaughlin (“McLaughlin”), First Deputy Superintendent at Downstate...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on South Florida Water Management and John Maloy’s Motion to Dismiss. “[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-6, 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-2, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957) (f...
Views: 0
Page 11369
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This matter was referred to the undersigned on June 23, 1992, by the Honorable Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., U.S. District Judge, for all further proceedings and the entry of judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and upon consent of the parties.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Support Ministries for Persons With Aids, Inc., is a non-profit corporation...
Views: 1
Page 11371
795 F. Supp. 223 (1992)
Walter WIACEK and Bessie Wiacek, Plaintiffs,
v.
EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, a New York corporation, General Growth/Center Companies, Inc., a Delaware corporation; jointly and severally, Defendants.
No. 92-CV-72877-DT.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
July 29, 1992.
*224 John I. Kittel, Richard J. Carolan, Detroit, Mich., for plai...
Views: 1
ORDER ON APPEAL FROM FINAL ORDER OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT
THIS CAUSE is before the court on appellant Metropolitan Dade County’s (“the County”) appeal from the Bankruptcy
*1014
Court’s order denying the County’s motion for rehearing of confirmation of Debtor Kenneth .Ross’s (“Debtor or “Ross”) amended Chapter 13 Plan. After careful review of the County’s Initial Brief, Ross’s ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR REMAND AND MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Petition for Remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). The plaintiff also seeks attorney’s fees, pursuant to Section 1447(c).
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Theodore J. Horne, Jr. filed this action in state court a...
Views: 0
Page 11374
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action involving claims of fraud, conversion, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty, defendants move, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In the alternative, defendants move, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules o...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
Ira Sampson, (“debtor” or “husband”) appeals an order of the bankruptcy court that denied discharge of a debt to his former wife, Katherine Sampson (“creditor” or “wife”) because it was in the “nature of alimony, maintenance or support” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). I conclude that the bankruptcy court applied the wrong legal standard but never...
Views: 2
OPINION
The Court has before it Defendants’ Genetics Institute, Inc. and GI Manufacturing, Inc. (“the Genetics Defendants”) and Defendants’ Wellcome Foundation Ltd., Wellcome Biotechnology Ltd., Burroughs Wellcome Co., BW Manufacturing, Inc. and WelGen Manufacturing Partnership (“the Wellcome Defendants”) Motions for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or, in the Alternative, For New Tri...
Views: 1
Page 11387
OPINION
This is a case born out of the infamous savings and loan crisis and the legislation passed by Congress in the late 1980’s in an attempt to avert it. The plaintiff is Security Savings Bank (“Security”), a relatively successful New Jersey savings and loan institution, which is suing the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”), the federal regulatory agency charged with regulation of th...
Views: 0
ORDER The United States, on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), appeals from an Order of the Bankruptcy Court in which it was determined that the IRS was improperly collecting taxes from the husband of debtor Susan M. Greene in violation of the co-debtor stay, 11 U.S.C. § 1301, and the automatic stay, 11 U.S.C. § 362. That Order makes the IRS’s tax claims contingent, in that the IRS...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Summary Judgment.
1
For the reasons enunciated below, this Court is compelled to conclude that the instant motion is without merit, and as such, must be DENIED.
2
In its reconsideration motion, Defendant Burger King Corporation asks this Court to reverse its earlier decision denyin...
Views: 4
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS On May 11, 1992, defendant filed an Emergency Motion For Writ of Habeas Corpus. On May 18, 1992, this court dismissed the petition because the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) had not yet computed the defendant’s sentence. This court found that it could not calculate the credit, if any, for time served by the defendant in the Miller Hale Halfway House (“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
James Colson (“petitioner”), appearing
pro se,
petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For the reasons set forth below, petitioner’s application is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
On the night of January 21, 1986, a man (later identified as co-defendant, Frank [Fernando] Rivera (“Rivera”)) approached a taxicab parked b...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING APPOINTED COUNSEL The Court has received the motion of counsel for Douglas P. Gustafson “to affirm the status of defense counsel,” at Docket No. 27 in A92-086 (MJ), dated April 7, 1992; the motion of counsel for Peggy Gustafson-Barnett “to affirm status of defense counsel/joinder in motion to confirm status of defense counsel,” at Docket No. 33 in A92-086 (MJ), dated April 8, 19...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 834 (1992)
Allan S. HALEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Defendant.
No. Civ. S-91-1617-WBS.
United States District Court, E.D. California.
July 29, 1992.
*835 Steven T. Spiller, Law Offices of Spiller, McProud, Butz & Kraemer, Nevada City, Cal., for plaintiffs.
George L. O'Connell, U.S. Atty., Yoshinori H.T. Himel, Asst. U.S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., fo...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Kar Nut Products Go. (the “Company”), filed this lawsuit under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185, and the provisions of the United States Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1
et seq.,
seeking to vacate an Arbitrator’s award reinstating Simone Chapman (the “grievant”) to her former position with the Company. De...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 668 (1992)
Roy McINTYRE, Plaintiff,
v.
DIVISION OF YOUTH REHABILITATION SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH AND THEIR FAMILIES, STATE OF DELAWARE, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-125-JLL.
United States District Court, D. Delaware.
July 13, 1992.
*669 *670 Jeffrey M. Weiner of Weiner & Weir, Wilmington, Del., for plaintiff.
W. Michael Tupman of the Delaware Dept. of Jus...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER These cases, each challenging a permit issued by the Secretary of Commerce (“Secretary”) for the importation of certain marine mammals, are before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. In the first case, Animal Protection Institute, et al., v. Franklin, Civil Action No. 89-1696, (the “API Case”), the petitioners, each of whom may be generically described as an ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 973 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
James Joseph SMYTH, Defendant.
No. CR 92-0152 BAC.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
July 24, 1992.
*974 Mark N. Zanides, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff.
Karen Snell, Asst. Federal Public Defender, San Francisco, Cal., for defendant.
ORDER
CAULFIELD, District Judge.
On April 30, 1992, the United St...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Joseph L. Rand, an attorney, filed this action against defendants CF Industries, Inc. (“CF Industries”) and Robert C. Liuzzi, alleging violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) (Count I) and breach of contract (Counts II and III). Defendants have moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. For the r...
Views: 6
795 F. Supp. 56 (1992)
William H. SULLIVAN, Jr., Plaintiff,
v.
Paul TAGLIABUE, et al., Defendants.
Charles W. SULLIVAN, Plaintiff,
v.
Paul TAGLIABUE, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. Nos. 92-10592-H, 92-10915-H.
United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.
July 30, 1992.
*57 Alan R. Hoffman, Lynch, Brewer, Hoffman & Sands, Boston, Mass., Joseph V. Cavanagh, Jr., Blish & Cavanagh, Providence...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The United States of America appeals from the March 30, 1992 Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court granting the Government partial relief from the automatic stay to pursue certain of its claims in the civil proceeding entitled
United States v. Mickman,
No. 89-7826 (E.D.Pa.). Because we find that the Government’s civil proceeding involves claims brought under th...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 171 (1992)
Christopher WOLSKY, Plaintiff,
v.
EASTERN VIRGINIA MEDICAL AUTHORITY, formerly Norfolk Area Medical Center Authority and now Medical College of Hampton Roads, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 2:92cv319.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division.
July 29, 1992.
Gary Clarence Byler, Virginia Beach, Va., for plaintiff.
David Kegebein Sutelan, Norfolk, Va., for defe...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
In this diversity action, plaintiff Videon Chevrolet, Inc. alleges that defendant General Motors Corporation has violated section 9(a)(3) of the Pennsylvania Board of Vehicles Act, Pa.Stat.Ann. tit. 63, § 818.-9(a)(3) (Supp.1992). Plaintiff seeks damages and injunctive relief pursuant to section 818.20 of the same title. Id. § 818.20 (Supp.1992). Defendant now moves for summ...
Views: 0
*1314
OPINION
Our society’s destruction of its own living environment is a problem that we increasingly must confront. For centuries humankind has polluted the Earth’s land, air and waterways with impunity, under the assumptions, now known to be false, that the Earth’s resources are inexhaustible, and that advances in technology would in any event solve our environmental problems...
Views: 3
ORDER
Upon
de novo
review of the file, the Court, having examined the objections filed by defendants Steven H. Leech, M.D., and Medical Center Hospital Pathology Associates, Ltd., to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation filed on May 27,1992, and no oral argument having been requested, the Court adopts and approves in full the findings and recommendations set forth i...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 133 (1992)
Phillip E. DUCKETT, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, Warden Breannon, USP Lewisburg, Respondents.
Civ. A. No. 3:CV-92-181.
United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania.
May 28, 1992.
*134 Phillip E. Duckett, pro se.
Robert J. DeSousa, U.S. Attorney's Office, Lewisburg, Pa., for respondents.
MEMORANDUM
CALDWELL, District Judge.
I. Introduction.
Phillip E. Ducket...
Views: 0
Page 11473
795 F. Supp. 743 (1992)
John R. BOYD, P-8554, Plaintiff,
v.
George PETSOCK, Superintendent, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 89-1949.
United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania.
July 6, 1992.
James M. Girman, Pittsburgh, Pa., for plaintiff.
Dennis Kistler, Pittsburgh, Pa., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LEWIS, District Judge.
By order dated April 7, 1992, the court ordered the parties to file brie...
Views: 0
ORDER ACCEPTING PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW THAT MOTION OF MARIE BOWER TO ABSTAIN FROM EXERCISING JURISDICTION BE SUSTAINED
This is an adversary action in which a Chapter 11 debtor seeks turnover from Marie Bower, as executrix, of a portion of the residuary estate of Mabel Campbell Mason. On January 17,1992, the Bankruptcy Court entered its Memorandum Opinion and Prop...
Views: 0
Page 11487
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT
Plaintiff in this action filed a timely motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend judgment. In his motion, he urges the Court to reconsider its findings that he is not entitled to damages for mental anguish or for the expenses he alleged for repairs of Defendant’s house and as a result of having been locked out of th...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendants have filed a notice of appeal of our denial of the qualified immunity defense in their fourth motion for summary judgment. They have likewise filed a motion for stay of the trial proceedings set for May 27, 1992 due to the appeal they have filed. In their motion for a stay they assert among other things that a properly filed appeal of qualified immunity should produ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I.INTRODUCTION
This non-jury, negligence action was brought by the plaintiff, Christopher L. Phillips, who suffered permanent injuries on June 6, 1985, when the tanker truck he was driving went off Boise National Forest Road 10384, commonly known as “Little Owl Road,” near Lowman, Idaho. On May 15, 1989, the plaintiff filed suit against the Uni...
Views: 0
*498
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Appellant Boockford and Co. (“Boock-ford”) has moved for leave to appeal an interlocutory order entered by the Bankruptcy Court on May 20, 1992. Appellee Pullman Construction Industries, Inc. (“Pullman”) opposes the motion. For the reasons set forth below, we deny Boock-ford leave to appeal.
Pullman filed its Chapter 11 bankruptcy papers on ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In an effort to combat the growing problem of graffiti, on May 20, 1990, the City Council of the City of Chicago enacted four ordinances, Municipal Code §§ 4-132-150, 8-4-130, 8-16-095 and 8-16-096, regulating the sale and possession of paint in spray cans (“spray paint”) and markers containing a non-water soluble fluid and having a writing surface of % of an ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On October 17,1990, Gulf States Utilities Company (“GSU”) filed this action against IMO Industries, Inc. (“IMO”)1 for breach of contract, invoking this Court’s diversity jurisdiction. In this contract, IMO agreed to provide GSU with two standby emergency diesel generator systems (“standby generator systems”). IMO moves for summary judgment on grounds that plaintiff filed its ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This is an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act, (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. section 2671 et seq. The Court now considers the defendant United States’ motion for summary judgment after reviewing the pleadings submitted by both parties, supplemental pleadings as authorized by the Court’s April 20, 1992 Order extending the close of discovery, and hearing oral argument o...
Views: 0
*619OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate, has submitted a pro se complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to redress alleged violations of his constitutional rights.
Defendants’ Response to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint
By order filed March 18, 1992, this court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint to include new counts and join additional defendants. The court directed ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Creekmore alleges that on February 8, 1990, upon entering a Food Lion in Portsmouth, Virginia, the automatic electric doors shut and struck her, causing her personal injuries and damages in the amount of $250,000. On January 30, 1992, Creekmore filed this action in the Circuit Court for the City of Portsmouth, Virginia. Food Lion, Inc. (“Food Lion”) filed a not...
Views: 1
Page 11542
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
The plaintiffs in this matter seek to establish and to maintain a facility in North Bergen for the developmentally disabled. Town officials and residents oppose the proposed use. They have declared their intention to prohibit it and have erected legal barriers to its opening. Confronted with a similar conflict in another case, this court wrote:
[W]hat this m...
Views: 3
OPINION
Introduction
Plaintiffs, students at Rutgers University, representing themselves in a highly competent and thoughtful manner, challenge the collection and use of social security numbers by the university. Although the court determines herein that the university has the right to request and to utilize the social security numbers of its students, there is evidence that the ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 783 (1992)
Paul M. HARMOND, Plaintiff,
v.
TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL NO. 83 OF VIRGINIA HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-475-N.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division.
July 30, 1992.
William D. Breit, Norfolk, Va., for plaintiff.
F. William Kirby, Jr., Richmond, Va., for defendant.
ORDER
KELLAM, District Judge.
This action was initiated by the p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I.
Introduction
Plaintiff, Charter Risk Retention Group Insurance Company, seeks a declaratory judgment that defendants’ enforcement of section 512 of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Code (the Code), 66 Pa.C.S. § 512, and certain regulations of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (the Commission), 52 Pa.Code § 32.11, is unconstitutional and in violation of t...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion to vacate the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order of June 21, 1991, to the extent they addressed the claims asserted in defendant Eastern Pay Phones’ Counterclaim. 767 F.Supp. 1335. (E.D.Va.)
In light of the Court’s stipulated dismissal of the complaint and the counterclaim with prejudice, that portion of the Court’s Memorandum Opini...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Because the Court is faced with a variety of motions, a recitation of the procedural history of this litigation is appropriate.
On or before July 24,1990, Metallgesellschaft AG (“MG”), a body corporate established under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, brought suit against Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation (“FWEC”), a Delaware corporation, and Foster Wh...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is a copyright infringement action. Plaintiff, Hi-Tech Video Productions, Inc. (“Hi-Tech”), alleges that defendant, Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. (“ABC”), committed a willful infringement by using, without permission, portions of Hi-Tech’s copyrighted video in ABC’s “Good Morning America” (“GMA”) program on June 8, 1990. In response, ABC does not dispute the unauthorized use. Rath...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST thomas McKindles and the ROSCOMMON COUNTY SHERIFF’S department and denying motion FOR SANCTIONS This matter is before this Court for consideration of defendant Thomas McKindles’ response to request for default and motion to dismiss and for sanctions (doc. 25). The Court will construe this motion as a motion to vacate the default judgment entered against Mr. McKin...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the court on the Defendant’s, Texaco, Inc. (“Texaco”), Motion to Dismiss (DE 7) and the Defendant’s, Jack M. Hartman (“Hartman”), Amended Motion to Dismiss (DE 11). Having reviewed the record, the memoranda of counsel and relevant authorities, the court enters the following order.
Background
According to the Plaintiffs, Ri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The two above-captioned cases were consolidated with others by the Judicial Panel for Multi-District Litigation before Chief Judge Aubrey E. Robinson, Jr. of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for a consolidated trial on the issue whether the Korean Air Lines Disaster of September 1, 1983 was proximately caused by the “wilful misconduct” of ...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on a motion for summary judgment by defendants IDS Financial Services, Inc., IDS Life Insurance Company and IDS Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to collectively as “IDS”) on the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”)1 claim of plaintiff C. Thomas Turner (“Turner”). Based on a review of the file and record herein, the court denies defendants’...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a securities fraud action to recover damages by investors against their accountant as a result of certain investments in tax shelters.
THE COMPLAINT
The complaint contains two causes of action. The first cause is based on alleged “affirmative misrepresentations and intentional omissions to plaintiffs concerning the advisability of their acquiring the...
Views: 0
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Connie F. Johnson filed this action against Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., her former employer. She alleges that Goodyear violated both the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and its own policies by refusing to allow her to return to her former position after she completed a pregnancy leave; that Goodyear violated RCW 49.60.180(2) by eliminating her position and l...
Views: 0
Page 11591
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an appeal from an Order of the Hon. Prudence B. Abram, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of New York, dated March 19, 1991 (“March 19 Order”), which denied the motion of third-party defendant-appellant the City of New York (the “City”), for an order abstaining from the exercise of jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c), but rather or...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
This is an employment case. Plaintiff, Ronald Rowe (Rowe) was discharged from his employment with Defendant, Voss Steel Corporation (VSC) for violating the company’s drug policy. Rowe grieved his discharge. Pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between VSC and Plaintiff, Voss Steel Employees Union (Union), the grievance was submitted to arbitra...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs in this action are owners and/or operators of a hazardous waste site. Having spent approximately $13 million to clean up the site, plaintiffs seek through this action contribution costs from the 440 users of the site. Over two-hundred of the 440 defendants had previously settled a claim for clean-up costs brought by the federal government. Accordingly, these defendants,...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff, Susan Reynolds, alleges that while she was employed as a deputy municipal court clerk for the Borough of Avalon, New Jersey, she was subject to sexual harassment by co-worker, William Johnson, which ultimately led to her constructive discharge and/or involuntary termination from employment. She brings this action against the Borough of Avalon and a number of individual ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) has filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that there are no genuinely disputed material facts preventing a dispositive decision by this court on the existing record, and that it is entitled to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Edythe Sanders (“Sanders”) had previously filed a motion to dismiss, which she...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is now before us on defendant Lehigh University’s motion for summary judgment. The issue is whether under the law of Pennsylvania a university may be held liable to one of its underage students when, as a result of her own self-indulgent behavior, she becomes inebriated at on-campus fraternity parties and thereafter injures herself in a fall. We are thus herein deciding t...
Views: 0
ORDER Now pending before the court is a motion by plaintiffs for leave to amend their complaint to: (1) substitute Jane Doe, Administratrix of the Estate of John Doe, as plaintiff for John Doe, decedent; (2) assert a claim for wrongful death, pursuant to N.C.Gen.Stat. § 28A-18-2, on behalf of the Estate of John Doe; (3) add allegations of gross negligence; and (4) assert claims for pu...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
This civil rights lawsuit arises out of the fatal shooting of Samuel Agresta, Jr. by Philadelphia Police Officer James Gillespie after a high speed automobile chase through South Philadelphia on December 19, 1985.
Samuel Agresta, Sr. and Tina Agresta, the parents of Samuel Agresta, Jr., sought damages for the termination of their relationship with their married, adult son ...
Views: 0
Page 11622
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By order of court dated July 12, 1989, 101 B.R. 462, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania required appellant K. Lawrence Kemp, Trustee for the Visiting Nurse Association of Western Pennsylvania (“VNA”), and Vanguard Federal Savings Bank (“Vanguard”) to return funds to ap-pellee Otis Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services for...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 816 (1992)
Sylvia Anne du MORTIER and Robert O'Berg, Executors of the Estate of John du Mortier, Deceased, Plaintiffs,
v.
MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; Great Commonwealth Life Insurance Company; Walt Garner Assoc., Inc.; I.C.H. Companies and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.
No. CV 90-4916-RJK.
United States District Court, C.D. California.
February 10, 1992.
...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
Came on to be considered (i) the motion of defendant Delta Air Lines, Inc., (hereinafter “Delta”) for reconsideration of the order signed by the court November 12, 1987, denying Delta’s motion for summary judgment, and (ii) the motion of plaintiff Winston Lee, individually and on behalf of the estate of Alyson Lee, (hereinafter “plaintiff”) for partial summary...
Views: 1
ORDER Defendants (represented by the United States Attorney) move for dismissal of this cause of action.1 The parties agree as to the material facts and agree that the issue before the Court is whether a private trustee is an employee for purposes of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA”). After full consideration of the briefs filed by counsel and the record as...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On July 6, 1992, the Court issued an order granting defendants until July 20, 1992, to file an opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Said deadline has now elapsed and no document(s) have been received. Wherefore, for the reasons fully discussed below, the Court finds that no genuine issue of material fact exists as to the issue of defendants’ liability s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court is the defendant’s Motion to Vacate Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The defendant bases her claim for relief on ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. The Court has carefully considered the submissions of the parties, the arguments of counsel, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, and concludes that the defendant’s motion must be denie...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 300 (1992)
Martin D. VICTOR, III and Patricia Victor, Plaintiffs,
v.
STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant.
No. A91-518 Civil.
United States District Court, D. Alaska.
July 31, 1992.
*301 David A. Reineke of Raymond A. Nesbett, P.C., Anchorage, Alaska, for the Victors.
Joe M. Huddleston of Hughes, Thorsness, Gantz, Powell & Brundin, Anchorage, Alaska, for State Farm.
O...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 353 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
John William DALTON, Defendant.
Crim. A. No. 92-CR-186.
United States District Court, D. Colorado.
July 31, 1992.
Joseph Mackey, Asst. U.S. Atty., Denver, Colo., for plaintiff.
Charles Szekely, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Denver, Colo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BABCOCK, District Judge.
Defendant John William Da...
Views: 0
Page 11669
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, alleging violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2511, prays that the Court issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from disclosing the contents of several recorded telephone conversations between him and defendants to anyone, or to any court or adjudicative body. Plaintiff further prays that the Court order that all tapes, transcripts thereof, and notes or com...
Views: 0
*265 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. On October 9, 1991, the jury returned a verdict finding defendant guilty on five counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876, not guilty on nine counts of mailing threatening communications, and not guilty on two counts of damaging buildings with an explosive device in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). On November 27, 1991...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Joseph F. McMahon and Mary J. McMahon (“Plaintiffs”) move for entry *321 of final judgment of this Court’s Order of May 27, 1992, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). Plaintiffs have filed a two count Complaint, alleging negligence and loss of consortium against Defendants ConAgra, Inc. (“ConAgra”) and Kinsman Lines, Inc. (“Kinsman”). This Court has...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Williams, an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison, filed these two lawsuits challenging conditions of his confinement. In each, Williams has applied to proceed without prepayment of fees or costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The benefit extended to litigants to proceed in forma pauperis under this stat*979ute is a privilege, not a right. Fran...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Charles Stewart (“Stewart”) brings this 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (“Section 1983”) action against various Illinois Department of Corrections (“IDOC”) and Stateville Correctional Center (“Stateville”) officials in both their individual and official capacities. Stewart asserts that he has suffered several constitutional violations during his incarceration at Stateville, ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before thé Court are Plaintiff Addison’s Motion for Remand, filed May 22,1992, and Defendants’ (collectively “Forex”) Opposition thereto, filed June 8, 1992. Addison has filed no reply,
see
Local Rule 5.1(f), and his motion now applies to his cause of action as represented in Plaintiff’s First Amended Original Complaint (“Amended Complaint”), fi...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioners Raymond Joseph Echlin and Ronald Richard Bishop, who are presently confined in Michigan state correctional facilities, have filed petitions for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In 1982, petitioners and one other codefendant were convicted of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder and associated criminal acts.
Petitioners allege that, d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an action for employment discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791, against defendants, United States of America and William Sessions, in his capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (collectively “the Bureau”), arising from the Bureau’s rejection of Lovell’s application for employment based upon Lo-vell’...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for its attorney fees and costs under the citizen suit provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. § 300j — 8(d). The issue is adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid its resolution. Because plaintiff was a substantially prevailing party and its actions precipitated defendants’ decision to enter into a conse...
Views: 0
*308MEMORANDUM OPINION
I
This action was instituted on 15 June 1989 by plaintiffs, husband and wife, seeking damages as a result of injuries received by Donald L. Woodford (Woodford) in an accident which occurred on 20 March 1988 on the waters of Kerr Lake when the boat he was operating ran into an electric transmission tower owned by Carolina Power and Light Company (CP & L). Virginia Electric &...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
This action is brought by the United States against the Board of Education of the Township of Piscataway (“Board”) under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
The United States alleges that the Board discriminated against Sharon Taxman by terminating or laying her off from her position as a school teacher at Piscataway...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case came before the court on a trial by jury. At the close of all the evidence, the court dismissed Defendant Gene R. Carter from the suit and, pursuant to Rule 50(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, granted judgment as a matter of law to the remaining Defendant, the School Board of the City of Norfolk. The reasons for this decision as stated from the bench are now s...
Views: 1
On April 3, 1990, the Government filed a complaint in this Court alleging that defendant, James T. McGrath, was indebted to the United States in the amount of $20,-644.15 and that defendant had failed to repay that debt. Defendant, in a
pro se
response, takes the position that the debt had been discharged in bankruptcy in 1987. On November 27, 1990, the Government filed a Motion for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiff Louella M. Reeder filed this products liability action1 to recover for injuries which she sustained at her place of employment, Furman Foods, Inc. of North-umberland, Pennsylvania, on September 7, 1988, when she was drawn into a machine used to fill containers of canned goods. The machine which allegedly injured her was a Pfaudler Rotary Piston Filler Machine, Model...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the court is a motion brought by plaintiff, James Edwin Glendenning (Glen-denning), to strike the defense of comparative negligence as to defendants W.G.M. Safety Corporation, Inc. (WGM), Miller Equipment Division (Miller) and Economy Forms Corporation (EFCO). Because the court has received and considered material outside the pleadings, the plaintiff’s motion to strike will be trea...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDINGS OF FACT: Defendant Mellon Bank, N.A. (“Mellon” or the “Bank”) is the successor-in-interest to named defendant Mellon Bank (East), N.A., and to Girard Trust Corn Exchange Bank, later named Girard Trust Bank (“Girard”), which Mellon acquired. Mellon is a banking association organized under the laws of the United States with its head office in G...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Gary Haney, Larry Haney and Leon Frayer were charged with, pursuant to a superseding indictment, conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, a Scheduled II controlled substance (Count I) and to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute marijuana, a Scheduled I controlled substance (Count II), in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs, parents of a fourteen year old child with learning disabilities, allege that defendants, Board of Education of the Town of Woodbridge (“Woodbridge”) and nine of its members, violated plaintiffs right to privacy secured by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Count I); released confidential information wit...
Views: 0
*700
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions filed by several of the parties in this multi-plaintiff, multi-defendant lawsuit. Plaintiff Michigan Protection and Advocacy Service
(“MPAS”)
1
,
on behalf of fo...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. This case apparently is a contract dispute, and it was originally brought by the plaintiff in Circuit Court of Livingston County in Michigan. The plaintiff is a Michigan co-partnership, and the defendant is a Pennsylvania corporation. The defendant removed the case to this federal court on the basis of dive...
Views: 4
ORDER Before this Court is the United States’ Motion to Dismiss Cross-Claims for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. Defendants have failed to file a response to the United States’ Motion. Defendant Amerson seeks indemnification or, alternatively, contribution from co-defendants Wilson, Mason, Nash and Farley. Amerson’s cross-claim does not allege any jurisdictional basis. Defendant Wilson’s c...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 332 (1992)
Martha HELTON, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
PHELPS COUNTY REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, et al., Defendants.
No. 4:92CV00883 GFG.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
July 24, 1992.
*333 Robert J. Albair, Clayton, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Mark A. Ludwig, Ronald R. McMillin, Carson and Coil, Jefferson City, Mo., for defendant Phelps County Regional Medical Center.
Cheryl A. Cal...
Views: 5
798 F.Supp. 1419 (1992)
NLC, INC. d/b/a Lenco, Inc. a Missouri Corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
LENCO ELECTRONICS, INC., Defendant.
No. 1:92CV34SNL.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division.
July 23, 1992.
*1420 *1421 David G. Beeson, Buerkle, Beeson & Ludwig, Jackson, Mo., Charles B. Haverstock, Haverstock, Garrett & Roberts, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
J. Michael ...
Views: 0
In this case, plaintiff, Pauline Jih, names as defendants Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc. (Long & Foster), the Manager of Long & Foster’s Frederick office, Yvonne Jernigan, and the Manager of Long & Foster’s New Homes Division, Joseph Rogowski. In her complaint, plaintiff alleges that she introduced Lancaster Craftsman Builders, Inc. to Long & Foster with regard to a subdivision project known a...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiff, proceeding
pro se,
originally filed this complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin seeking monetary relief from defendants Daniel Bertrand and Donald Clu-sen pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
1
Thereafter, plaintiff filed an amended § 1983 complaint in which he only named Daniel Bertrand as defendant, dropping hi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Ct.Rec. 38), heard with telephonic argument on June 19, 1992. The Plaintiff was represented by Kenneth Joel Haber; the Defendant appeared through Assistant United States Attorney Frank A. Wilson, and general counsel for the Department of Health and Hum...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 939 (1992)
Donald G. DIXSON, Plaintiff,
v.
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, a Corporation, Defendant.
No. CV89-L-565.
United States District Court, D. Nebraska.
June 9, 1992.
Michael K. High, Lincoln, Neb., for plaintiff.
Richard Knudsen, Lincoln, Neb., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
URBOM, Senior District Judge.
The plaint...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the increasingly troublesome question of the reasonableness of the fee charged by an adverse expert witness to the opposing party for the expert’s deposition. Plaintiff Jochims retained expert witness, Dr. Andrezj Nalecz, and is seeking compensation for his deposition at an hourly rate of $500.00 from Defendant Isuzu Motors, Ltd.1 I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND. T...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are the City of Seago-ville’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim upon which Relief Can Be Granted, filed December 19, 1991; the Response thereto, filed January 7, 1992 on behalf of Plaintiffs Jimmy Handley, Gerald Handley, April Handley, and Elaine Montes (“the Handleys”); and Seagoville’s Reply, filed January 9, 1992.
Backgro...
Views: 2
ORDER AND REASONS A motion to remand was filed by plaintiff, Deborah Ann Perry, and taken on the papers. Having reviewed the pleadings, memoranda and the relevant papers, the court finds the motion to have merit. The relevant procedural facts are that: (1) Plaintiff, Deborah Ann Perry, filed in Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans against certain Louisiana doctors and a profession...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SunAmerica Realty Partners brings this appeal to challenge three decisions of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California which held that SunAmerica was not entitled to the benefits of a stipulation between Marin Town Center and Resolution Trust Corporation, disallowed SunAmerica’s vote on its $24 million unsecured claim and confirmed Ma...
Views: 3
Page 11745
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF
This matter is before the Court for consideration of cross-motions for summary judgment (doc. 7 and doc. 8). The defendant also filed a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment (doc. 9). For the reasons set forth below, the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is hereby granted. The defendant’s motion for summary judgment is ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 193 (1992)
Terry SHAUGHNESSY d/b/a Hackberry Rod & Gun Club
v.
PPG INDUSTRIES, INC.
Civ. A. No. 90-0384-LC.
United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division.
July 24, 1992.
*194 William Edward Willard, Powers, Vaughn, Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiff.
Bernard H. McLaughlin, Jr., William Edward Shaddock, William B. Monk, Oliver P. Stockwell, H. Alan McCall, Stock...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Plaintiffs, Phyllis Romaguera, Kim Bo-nano, and Tammy Gremillon, all employees of the Clerk of Court, 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging the constitutionality of the plan of the Clerk of Court to institute drug testing procedures and the constitutionality of Louisiana Revise...
Views: 0
Page 11791
ORDER Before the Court is the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand, filed June 23, 1992. Having reviewed and considered this motion, 1 the Court is of the opinion that this motion should be GRANTED. The Defendants have all affirmatively pleaded that they received notice of the state action on April 27, 1992. See Defendants’ Notice of Removal, filed May 28, 1992, at 2. In their Notice of Removal...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the issue of whether an employee of the United States was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident giving rise to this lawsuit. Having reviewed the various pleadings, the deposition testimony, and the applicable caselaw, the Court is of the opinion that the employee was acting within the scope of his employment. Therefore, the plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is the plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand, filed May 28, 1992. Having reviewed this motion and all of the responses and supplemental responses thereto, this Court is of the opinion that this motion should be GRANTED. 1 The Court UN-CONSOLIDATES AND REMANDS both of these actions to state court. I. BACKGROUND Commencing this action in state court, the plaintiffs expressly a...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on a motion to dismiss by Defendant, CORE INTERNATIONAL, (“CORE”). Upon consideration of the motion, memoranda, and the entire record in this cause, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the motion is GRANTED for the reasons set forth in this order.
This litigation arises out of a contract entered between Plaintiff, ARCO ELECTR...
Views: 1
ORDER
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the federal defendants’ Motion To Dismiss, Or In The Alternative, For Summary Judgment.
The plaintiffs are tenants of a privately owned, federally subsidized housing complex. The plaintiffs have brought suit against the partnership which owns the complex, the corporation serving as property manager, the individual on-site property manag...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Tom and Jean Tribble filed this action in federal district court on behalf of their son, Jacob, to appeal the decision of the administrative hearing officer rendered *669 under the authority of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. 1 A trial was held in this cause on July 14, 1992 at which time the Court heard argument...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 184 (1992)
David Leon DUGGER, M.D.
v.
UPLEDGER INST., et al.
Civ. A. No. 90-0829.
United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.
July 31, 1992.
*185 Russell Allen Solomon, Susan DeJean Lavis, William Chad Stelly, Holoway, McQuaig, et al., Metairie, La., for David Leon Dugger, M.D.
H. Martin Hunley, Jr., David M. Whitaker, Lemle & Kelleher, New Orleans, La., Christine B. Roberts, W...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On July 10, 1992 this Court announced its oral bench ruling on the motion by *271Chicago State University and Board of Governors of State Colleges and Universities to dismiss the original Complaint that had been brought by Dr. Jimmy Tomblin (“Tomblin”). Tomblin’s counsel has now filed an Amended Complaint (“AC”), but has not done much better the second time around. Acc...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 869 (1992)
Jeffrey B. SCHWARTZ, Plaintiff,
v.
YO-WHIP, INC., f/k/a Helpful Products, Inc., and Marshall Swerman, Defendants.
No. 92 C 2586.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
July 30, 1992.
Michael Sweig Mendelson, Jay Hilton Mittelstead, Jr., McConnell & Mendelson, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Michael Swerman, Studio City, Cal., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINIO...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is a class action. Each of the plaintiffs subscribes to one of several major medical insurance policies issued by defendant Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield. The complaint alleges that in 1991 Empire changed its geographic formula for computing rates of reimbursement for medical procedures. Plaintiffs claim that this change was a breach of contract, resulting
*765
...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above-entitled matters came on for hearing before this court on July 21, 1992, upon the motions of plaintiffs to remand these matters to state court. Although these matters are not formally consolidated, the remand motions have been heard and considered together because the issues in both motions are identical. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs’ motions to remand will ...
Views: 3
DECISION AND ORDER This diversity action arises from an accident that occurred on October 4, 1990 in Greece, New York, and which resulted in the death of Michael E. Parks. His mother Frances I. Gregory, as personal representative of his estate, brings this action against the Monroe County Water Authority (“MCWA”) and Durocher Dock and Dredge, Inc. (“Durocher”) for the wrongful death of her son. Ms...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (“the SEC”) has moved, pursuant to Rule 12(f), Fed.R.Civ.P., to strike eight of the eleven affirmative defenses asserted by defendant Robert Toomey. For the reasons that follow, plaintiffs motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
Robert Toomey is a former Vice President of The Great Atlantic and Pac...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING THE MOTION - OF THE MOVING PLAINTIFFS FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT OR FOR A NEW TRIAL
Certain plaintiffs in this action (David Day, John Fitzgerald, Herbert Kelly, Hil-lery Webb, William Frey, Ralph Jones, and Julia Sansone
1
) have moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict
2
or, in the alternative, for a new trial (doc. 255). The defen...
Views: 0
Page 11841
OPINION
BACKGROUND
Andre Gilmore began working for Airborne Express, a subsidiary of Airborne Freight Corporation in October 1986 as a driver at the company’s facility in Portches-ter, N.Y. While he was employed at Airborne, he was a member of Local 295, the International Teamster’s Union shop representing Airborne’s drivers.
Procedures for hiring, terminating and disciplining U...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 294 (1992)
Ray P. KOSULANDICH, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
SURVIVAL TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant.
No. 91-2421C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri., E.D.
August 5, 1992.
Charles R. Oldham, Louis Gilden, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Alan I. Berger, Partner, Terry L. Potter, Associate, McMahon and Berger, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
GUNN, District Judge.
This ma...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before this court are (1) Magistrate Judge Aaron E. Goodstein’s recommendation on defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, (2) plaintiffs post-recommendation motions to amend his complaint, and (3) plaintiffs motion for appointment of counsel. For the reasons below, this court adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendation, denies defendants’ motion to dismi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case came on for trial before this Court sitting without a jury on March 23, 1992. The parties, having submitted post-trial briefs in support of their respective positions on the issues, this Court proceeds to enter its findings of fact and conclusions of law. The action is brought for statutory damages arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 197...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case comes before the court on appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court dated January 6, 1992,
*948
135 B.R. 423.
1
In the order, the bankruptcy court denied the debtor’s request to extend the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362 to protect CCDC Financial Corporation’s (“CCDC”) non-debtor president Clifford Roth (“Roth”) and...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 370 (1992)
Kevin D. CHRISTIAN, as Statutory Trustee of Construction Systems, Inc., Plaintiff,
Midland Bank of Overland Park, formerly known as College Boulevard National Bank, Interpleader Plaintiff,
v.
COLLEGE BOULEVARD NATIONAL BANK, a/k/a Midland Bank of Overland Park, Defendant,
Kevin D. Christian, as Statutory Trustee of Construction Systems, Inc., Interpleader Defendant,
United...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On June 15, 1992, Willie Brown filed a Motion For Leave To Appeal In Forma Pauperis, (Doc. 59), asking the court to certify his appeal of the dismissal of Brown v. Matthew, et al., (case # 91-2352-L), 1992 WL 134150. At that time the plaintiff also filed a document titled Affidavit In Support Of Motion To Proceed On Appeal As Indigent Person, (Doc. 60), in which he states the ...
Views: 0
Page 11862
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is currently before the court for consideration of the parties’ responses (Docs. # 54 and 55) to the court’s Order to Show Cause (Doc. # 52) entered on June 16,1992. That order directed the parties to address whether this action should be dismissed based upon the doctrine of witness immunity enunciated by the United States Supreme Court in Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the court on the motion of defendants Max E. Thompson, Glenn Chaloupka and Wayne Pachta to dismiss plaintiffs complaint (Doc. # 13). For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part. Additionally, all parties are ordered to comply with the show cause order which the court is issuing contemporaneously with this opinion....
Views: 1
794 F.Supp. 1066 (1992)
Edward A. MONTGOMERY, Sr., Plaintiff,
v.
Andrew H. CARD, Jr., Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-2352-L.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
July 9, 1992.
Charles A. Dixon, Kansas City, Kan., for plaintiff.
Edward A. Montgomery, Sr., pro se.
Janice M. Karlin, Office of U.S. Atty., Kansas City, Kan., for defendant.
M...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Textron, Inc. filed a Motion to Amend the Pretrial Order (Doc. #78) on June 1, 1992. The pretrial order had been entered by the court on May 26, 1992. Textron asked to amend that order to delete the language contained in plaintiff’s Factual Contentions and Legal Theories which claimed negligence against the defendant “for not manufacturing the chain saw in accordance...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed this employment discrimination action against Gard Corporation (Gard) on behalf of Wilhelmine Bailey and a class of other African-Americans who allegedly were denied permanent employment by Gard because of their race. Gard allegedly discriminated against these individuals, who were temporary employees provided to Gard b...
Views: 0
In his Report and Recommendation, Judge Paul Mannes of the United States Bankruptcy Court recommended that the referral of the within case, by this Court, to the Bankruptcy Court, be withdrawn. This Court, by an Order dated November 9, 1990, withdrew that reference. This case originally involved claims brought by a bankrupt plaintiff-debtor (Jean Mona) and two other non-debtor plaintiffs against d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action in which plaintiff David Booth alleges that his employment was unlawfully terminated by his employer, Electronic Data Systems Corporation (EDS). The plaintiff originally alleged eight state law and two federal law claims arising from his termination.
1
Jurisdiction of the state law claims is premised upon diversity of citizenship. 28 U.S.C...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Consolidation of this action with case No. 91-2351-V, Reeve v. Jefferson, now pending before Judge Van Bebber (Doc. # 107). That motion has been filed in both cases. For the reasons set forth below, his motion is denied. The first reason for which the court denies the motion is its untimeliness. Service of process was obtained over defendant Je...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Ohio Art Company (“Ohio Art”) has sued three defendants — Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. (“Galoob”), GALCO International Toys, N.V. (“GALCO”) and Vaughn Associates, Inc. (“Vaughn”) — in a multi-count Complaint charging defendants with violations of Ohio Art’s intellectual property rights. This Court has conducted an evidentiary hearing occupying several tr...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants have moved to compel further responses by plaintiffs to defendants’ second set of interrogatories, which were served in December 1991. Specifically, they seek more detailed answers to interrogatories 8-13, 16, 17, and 19. They also seek to compel responses to their Third Set of Interrogatories, which were served on May 1, 1992. Interrogatories 8-13 ask, in substance...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On June 10, 1987, Concordia Federal Bank for Savings (“Concordia”) and Unisys Financial Corporation (“Unisys”) entered into a lease agreement pursuant to which Unisys leased data processing equipment to Concordia. Concordia pledged certain securities as security for performance of its obligations under the lease. Unisys subsequently sold and assigned its rights under ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court for consideration of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (doc. 15). The plaintiffs responded in opposition to the motion and filed a cross motion for partial summary judgment (doc. 19), and the defendants replied (doc. 18). For the reasons se...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the court is the Motion of Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the claims of plaintiff, Frank S. Deus (Deus) on the issues of breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress and prescription. We have granted the motion with respect to the breach of contract issue. We now address the issues of intentional inflicti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Brookhaven School District (“School District”). Plaintiff has responded to the Motion. The Court, having considered the Motion and response, along with memoran-da of authorities and attachments thereto, is of the opinion that Defendant’s Motion is well taken and should be granted.
...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court, pursuant to Rule 72(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside Order of the Magistrate, whereby the Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s motion to remand this matter to state court. Defendants have responded to the Motion, and Defendant Larry L. Purvis has filed a Motion to Dismiss and/or for S...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment, and on plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment. The case has been fully briefed and argued in open court.
This case involves the legality of an agreement entered into on December 5,
*1224
1979, between the Small Business Administration ("SBA”) a...
Views: 0
*256FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON DAMAGES
I. Introduction
A bench trial was held in this consolidated action on January 13-15, 27-29, 1992. On June 17, 1992, the court issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, 1992 WL 357416, familiarity with which is presumed. At that time Flexi-Van was directed to provide the court with evidence in the form of charts and/or calculations...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Bugle Boy Industries, Inc. has moved for leave to serve and file an Amended Answer and Counterclaims, as reflected in Exhibit 3 to the February 21, 1992 affidavit of Bugle Boy’s counsel, Edward E. Vassallo, Esq., and in Exhibit D to Mr. Vassallo’s Reply Affidavit, sworn to March 23, 1992. The motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Rule 15(a) of the Federal Ru...
Views: 1
Page 11920
788 F.Supp. 1199 (1992)
Sarah GORIN, Bern Hinckley, Chelsea R. Kesselheim, John M. Faunce, Linda Kirkbride, Jesse Guidry, Verna Crusch, Ernest A. Roybal, Chris Plant, Wayne E. Morrow, Larry W. McGonigal, and Teri J. Royer, Plaintiffs,
Harriett Elizabeth "Liz" Byrd, Edith V. Garcia, Pat Hacker, Fred Harrison, Shirley J. Humphrey, Patrick F. O'Toole, Scott J. Ratliff, Bill Vasey, and Carol Watson, ...
Views: 0
Page 11927
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 15, 1992, 1992 WL 135018, this court issued its Memorandum and Order ruling on the motions to dismiss filed by several of the defendants to this action. Both the plaintiff (Doc. #92) and defendants Rogenia Wilson, Weatherbie, Taylor, Buchman, Roberts, Nichols, Grimes, Fogo, Joeckel, Thompson, Clark, Dawson, Botcher, Bright, Tetwiler, John Wilson, Basgall, Baugher, Ri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is currently before the court on defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doe. # 119). The plaintiffs in this case are Michael Taylor, Sr. and Brenda Taylor as individuals and as parents and guardians of Michael Andrew Taylor and as surviving heirs and co-administrators of the estate of Jessica Taylor. The plaintiffs are residents of the state of Kansas. The def...
Views: 0
Page 11934
OPINION
On December 81, the M/V Vulca (“Vulca”), on sail from New Jersey to South Korea, sank in the Pacific Ocean approximately 700 miles northeast of Hawaii. The sinking resulted in the complete loss of all cargo on the ship, and this cause of action springs from that loss. Currently before the court is a motion by defendant Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. (“Merchant Marine”) for summary ju...
Views: 0
Page 11947
OPINION
I. Introduction
This case is before the Court on plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive and declaratory relief under counts I and III of their complaint. Pursuant to section 404(j) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1344(j), plaintiffs challenge the legality of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to withdraw its longstanding objections to the State ...
Views: 0
ORDER. OF ACQUITTAL Mr. Howard was charged in a one count indictment with theft of government funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641. The trial in this matter commenced on March 25, 1992. At trial, the parties stipulated to the following: (1) Jerold Howard’s mother, Hazel Pe-gan, is a resident of the Madeira Nursing Home; (2) Mr. Howard agreed to be responsible for Mrs. Pegan’s expenses at the n...
Views: 0
ORDER The instant action arises from a dispute between Edward and Jacquelyn Ermler (“the Ermlers” or “plaintiffs”) and the Town of Brookhaven (“the Town” or “defendant”), over the Ermlers’ right to maintain a satellite dish antenna in their backyard. Now before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. I. BACKGROUND After the Town initiated legal...
Views: 0
*875 STATEMENT OF REASONS OF IMPOSING SENTENCE I. Findings of Fact The probation office has conducted an extensive presentence investigation (PSI) in this matter. Rule 32, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C. § 3552. The court has ordered certain amendments to the report because substantial portions of the reported information is, in fact, irrelevant to Jerry Angelí. The court ado...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants moved before the International Trade Commission in a related proceeding in 1991 to compel the plaintiffs in the present case, Golden Trade S.r.L. and Greater Texas Finishing Corporation, to answer an interrogatory seeking the results of a prior-art search conducted on plaintiffs’ behalf in October 1990. That motion was never adjudicated by the ITC, and defendants n...
Views: 3
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is GRANTED. BACKGROUND Raphael Spalieris, a citizen of Greece, was a second mate seaman crew member aboard the M/V Golden Challenger, a Panamanian vessel owned and operated by Golden Challenger Marinera S.A.,...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the application of Plaintiff’s counsel, Green, Hoffmann & Dankenbring, for attorney’s fees and expenses.
District Courts may award reasonable attorney’s fees to prevailing parties in litigation to enforce a provision of section 1983. 42 U.S.C. § 1988. A prevailing party should ordinarily recover an attorney’s fee unless special circumstances make such an a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Jimmie L. Jones filed this action against defendant Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, challenging the denial of his application for Social Security Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) disability benefits. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order, the Secretary’s denial of plaintiff’s application is affirme...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the Motion of Defendants Ronald Rainer, Luther Ashley, Nell Ashley, and Jennifer Ashley for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company has also filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on Remaining Legal Issues. The parties have responded to the opposing Motions resp...
Views: 0
*765
ORDER
Introduction
On March 13, 1992, Douglas Beres, plaintiff, filed a two-count complaint against defendants, the Village of Huntley, Illinois (Village), and James Dhamer, village president, and Richard Rossi, the village chief of police, both in their individual and official capacities, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants violated plaintiffs du...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ENTRY DISCUSSING ORDER DISMISSING CLAIMS AGAINST CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS AND AGAINST PETER A. WYNAL-DA IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND DISCUSSING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PETER A. WYNALDA IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY
Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint purportedly stated claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Indianapolis and one of its police officers. The City argued that Plaintiff f...
Views: 0
Page 12009
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of the defendants for summary judgment.
I.
Background
Plaintiff Kenneth Ray Thacker was employed by the Water Board of the City of Hurricane, West Virginia, from approximately January 1977 until April 10, 1989. On April 20, 1989, he was discharged by defendant R. Douglas Peak (hereinafter, Doug Peak) when he ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are cross motions for summary judgment. The Court partially grants the motions for summary judgment and ORDERS that this case proceed to trial to resolve the remaining issues.
Under Rule 56(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper only:
“[I]f the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with th...
Views: 1
*370 MEMORANDUM ORDER As was noted in the initial Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed herein on January 8, 1992, the Court and counsel were of the view that a finding of coverage under the Fair Labor Standards Act (hereinafter “FLSA”) and violation of the Act by the City of Huntington obviated the need to consider issues arising in Count II of the complaint, the count in which plain...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under Section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act (hereinafter “FLSA” or “the Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1), an employer may not require an employee to work more than forty hours in a workweek 1 unless the employee receives overtime compensation at a rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay. Employers, however, are not required to pay overtim...
Views: 2
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Firefighters employed by the City of Huntington instituted the present action *357alleging violations by the City of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. (hereinafter “the Act” and “FLSA”). Seeking injunctive and monetary relief, plaintiffs contend that the City’s method of paying them over the years, and in particular since the FLSA became...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the pretrial motions of defendant. Three motions are pending: (1) motion to suppress statement; (2) motion to sever counts; and (3) motion for discovery materials. The court held hearings on the motions on June 5 and 22, 1992. The court has considered the evidence and the parties' briefs and is prepared to rule.
Defendant is cha...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12029: Redwine v. Franz Plasser Bahnbaumaschinen Industriegesellschaft, M.B.H.
Page 12029
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action comes before the court on defendant Franz Plasser Bahnbaumaschi-nen Industriegesellschaft’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 42) for lack of personal jurisdiction, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2). Plaintiff brought this action seeking recovery under products liability law and the Federal Employer’s Liability Act. Defendant contends that extending personal jurisdi...
Views: 0
Page 12030
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Henry E. Cahoj, d/b/a Cahoj Agency (“Cahoj”) to remand to state court. (Doc. 4). This action was filed on February 3,1988 in the District Court of Rawlins County, Kansas. Cahoj alleges that defendants Mutual Service Casualty Company (“Mutual”) and Crop Hail Management (“CHM”) received a copy of the initial pleadin...
Views: 0
Page 12031
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on review of a magistrate’s order. (Doc. 839). The court has previously set forth the essential facts of this dispute. 762 F.Supp. 1434, 1437-38 (per Theis, J.).
The court reviews a magistrate’s order under the terms of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). As to nondispositive pretrial matters, the district court reviews the magistrate’s ord...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the application of plaintiff to proceed
in forma pauperis.
The court has reviewed plaintiff’s financial affidavit and finds that plaintiff should be allowed to file this action without the prepayment of costs.
Plaintiff alleges that art work created by him on display at Century II in Wichita was removed and/or stolen ...
Views: 0
Page 12033
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on an appeal by the appellant debtors Max and Sharon Steele, Larry and June Steele, and Steele Farms, a partnership, of an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court captioned “Order on Post Confirmation Motion to Lift Stay”. Steele Cattle Co., also a debtor listed in the bankruptcy court’s order (Case No. 88-40317) has not joined in the app...
Views: 0
ORDER This case comes before the court on defendants Barbara W. Larkins, Elbert Carl Anderson, Jr., and Carl Anderson’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 96), pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. These defendants are officers, directors, and shareholders of Health Care Products, Inc. (HCP), which marketed the dietary supplement Cal-Ban 3000. Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directs ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Ruth M. Blough, has sued defendant, Food Lion, Inc., for physical injuries and emotional distress she suffered when a can fell from a top shelf and struck her hand in a Food Lion’s store on December 7, 1989. Blough filed this action in the Circuit Court for the City of Suffolk on July 17, 1991, and in her first motion for judgment she sought $48,959.78. Upon Blough’s ...
Views: 0
Page 12049
*675RULING ON APPEAL FROM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING IN THE MATTER OF L.G.
This action consists of several challenges to the manner in which the State of Connecticut and certain of its municipal boards of education implement and oversee the mandates of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder which, broadly stated, require state and local education ag...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1112 (1992)
Christina Elisabeth WATCHORN, a Minor, by and through her Mother and Next Friend, Elisabeth CHRISTENSON, and Elisabeth Christenson, Individually, Plaintiffs,
v.
TOWN OF DAVIE, a Florida municipal corporation, Robert A. Banks, Edward G. Kraynak, Jr. and Richard Smith, Defendants.
No. 91-6548-CIV.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
August 7, 1992.
*1113 William R. ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner has filed a petition for an order enforcing administrative subpoenas duces tecum issued to the respondents. A show cause hearing is scheduled for June 4. Respondents have moved to transfer this proceeding to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.1 Neither party disputes that this proceeding could be brought either in the District of Columbia o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. Counsel for the shareholders of Great Northern Nekoosa, Inc. (“Great Northern”), comprised of sixteen law firms (“Plaintiffs’ counsel), seek reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and expenses in the total amount...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff James Laird’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, it is granted.1
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff James Laird was hired as a tool maker by General Motors Corporation (GM) at its Coit Road Plant on January 5, 1960, and upon beginning work, became a member of the United Auto Workers, Local 45. Pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement b...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case came before the Court for a hearing on April 21, 1992, on the issue of damages, attorney fees and costs. Based upon the evidence and argument presented at the hearing, together with such evidence already of record in this case, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. General Environmental Science Corporation (“GE...
Views: 1
Page 12081
ORDER
This class action alleges securities fraud based on Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j. Defendants Redd and Jallow seek to require absent class members to submit a statement of their claims (the Claims Motion), while Jallow moves to bifurcate the trial into a liability phase and a proof-of-claim phase and to reserve the award of damages to the proo...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Having reviewed the pleadings, the applicable law, and having taken evidence and argument at the preliminary injunction hearing held March 27, 1992, we hold, for the reasons detailed below, that Plaintiff is entitled to the preliminary relief he seeks and ...
Views: 3
ORDER
Before the Court are motions for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff United States Lighting Service (U.S. Lighting) and Defendant Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
*1514
(UL). For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied.
1
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On August 3, 1990, the Court denied motions to dismiss filed by the Llerrad Corporation (Llerrad) and...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is the lead case in an action that has been partially consolidated with
Geowaste of Georgia, Inc. v. Tanner,
92-60-VAL(WDO). The question before the court is whether the Georgia statutes and regulations that apply to out-of-state waste, or “special solid waste,” are constitutionally valid under the dormant Commerce Clause. Both sides have moved for summary judgm...
Views: 4
OPINION
Project 74 Allentown, Inc. [“Project 74”] is a corporation formed by, inter alia, Eliyahou Aryeh, Moussa Aryeh, Ouriel Aryeh and Abraham Arab, in order to develop a 74 acre parcel of land on Spring Creek Road in Lower Macungie Township, Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. The property was originally owned by defendants Frost and Reichard. Defendant Moyer introduced the incorporators of the plain...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This appeal presents an unsettled issue of law under § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code: whether attorney fees awarded to the debtor’s former husband in child custody proceedings can be discharged by the debtor in bankruptcy. The appellant, Wed-gle & Shpall, P.C., argues that such fees are in the nature of support, and that the bankruptcy court erred in permit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This appeal was filed by Western Monetary Consultants (“WMC”), a corporation operated by the debtors, William and Deborah Kennedy. It involves a discovery dispute in a § 523 adversary action brought by Ross and Marion Apgar, creditors, against the debtors. WMC appeals the bankruptcy court’s October 8, 1991 order denying its motion to reconsider the court’s Sep...
Views: 0
Page 12098
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL Recently, the United States Supreme Court held that the phrase allowed “se *785 cured claim” in 11 U.S.C. § 506(a) 1 has a very different meaning when used three paragraphs later in 11 U.S.C. § 506(d). 2 The appellants now ask me to extend the Court’s lapinary logic to the facts in this case, thus forcing me to consider anew Humpty Dumpty’s advice on the cons...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This products liability action is before the Court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Both defendants have brought motions for summary judgment. Having heard oral arguments of counsel for the parties, and upon consideration of the parties submissions and applicable law, the Court hereby grants both defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this appeal, the debtor, Western Monetary Consultants, Inc. (WMC), contests the bankruptcy court’s August 20, 1991 judgment denying its objection to Kermit L. Allard’s $18,651.75 administrative claim for accounting fees. WMC argues that the court erred in approving fees exceeding the $10,000.00 cap imposed in the court’s initial order authorizing Allard’s e...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs in this case are airlines that provide domestic air transportation services to United States government personnel. The defendants are the General Services Administration (GSA), which audits the government’s air transportation bills and the United States of America. The case arises out of a dispute over the legality of the post-payment audits...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This case is before the Court on defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of liability for punitive and compensatory damages.
1
After giving careful consideration to the motion, the opposition thereto, and the record in this case, the Court concludes for reasons set out below that the motion must be denied.
Arguments
Defendant contends that ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are the consolidated appeals of Charmaine Elizabeth Chenow-eth, J.C. Smothers, and Scott Chenoweth. The appellants are appealing the bankrupt
*529
cy court’s September 27, 1991, order granting summary judgment in favor of the bankruptcy trustee and against the appellants on the trustee’s complaint to avoid an alleged post-petition transfer and for tur...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Pedro Hernandez brings this habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, seeking to have his New York state murder conviction vacated. For the reasons set forth below, his petition is denied.
On June 23, 1987, petitioner was convicted on two counts of second-degree murder (New York Penal Law §§ 125.25[1], [3]) following a jury trial. He thereafter received a sent...
Views: 0
Page 12111
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs, Eula King, Eddie King, and Nancy King, instituted this action on September 12, 1991, seeking to hold the defendants liable for the alleged medical malpractice of Dr. Robert Ahrens. As filed, the complaint alleges two causes of action: one under state law for medical malpractice and one for “patient dumping” under 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd. This action is th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
The plaintiffs claim that Arthur Krasnopolsky’s medically supervised ingestion of the drug Meclomen, an anti-inflammatory medication manufactured by the defendant Warner-Lambert Company, over a three-year period, caused him to suffer a kidney ailment known as “nephrotic syndrome”. The plaintiffs seek damages from Warner-Lambert Company on theories of negligen...
Views: 2
*626
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The
qui tam
plaintiffs, Neil F. Hartigan, former Attorney General for the State of Illinois and the State of Illinois (the “plaintiffs” or “Illinois”), filed a fifteen-count complaint against twenty-eight individuals and entities involved in the construction industry in the Midwest (the “defendants”). The complaint was filed pursuant t...
Views: 2
*382MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION After defendants conducted the public auction of a debtor’s assets, plaintiff SECA Leasing Limited Partnership (“SECA”) charged defendants with breach of contract, negligence, breach of the fiduciary duty of an escrowee, breach of the fiduciary duty of a trustee, breach of a resulting trust, conversion, and intentional misrepresentation. SECA asks f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.
Factual Background and Procedural History of These Actions
Plaintiff Frankie McConnell worked full-time as chief photographer for the
Marshall News Messenger,
until he was discharged on January 2, 1990, at age fifty. He had worked for the
Marshall News Messenger
since March 24, 1986. McConnell previously had been employed by the pap...
Views: 4
Page 12135
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
News Group Boston, Inc., publisher of the Boston Herald (“Boston Herald”), filed this suit for injunctive relief against the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”), requesting that certain information be made available to it pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552,
et seq.
The Boston Herald and Amtrak have filed cross...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I.
Introduction
Plaintiff Janice James’ complaint alleges a claim for relief under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. Sections 1001 and 1132(a)(1)(B). Plaintiff alleges that defendant Equicor Inc. improperly terminated benefits due her under an employee benefits plan established under ERISA. ...
Views: 2
*540 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this suit challenging the results of the 1990 decennial census, the Court grants the defendants’ motions for summary judgment for three independent reasons. First, the plaintiffs lack standing to sue because there is no causal link between their claimed injuries and the challenged conduct. Second, the plaintiffs lack standing to sue because they fail to ci...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The issue in this bankruptcy appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in reducing the fees and costs requested by debtor’s counsel, Rubner & Kutner, P.C. (“R & K”), by approximately sixty-six percent. R & K argues: (1) the court ignored the proper legal standards in considering the fee application, (2) the court abused its discretion in mandating a twenty-...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
After hearing evidence and argument during a non-jury trial in the above-captioned case, and after having reviewed and considered the parties’ post-trial submissions, the court enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Defendant Port Authority of Allegheny County (“PAT”) is a body corporate and politic organized and e...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case involves RICO and antitrust claims against several defendants, one of whom is in bankruptcy. Plaintiff moves to sever its claims against the bankrupt from its claims against the other defendants so it can:proceed to trial against them. Prior to May 1990, Rudolph J. Capri owned 50 percent of Dental Benefit Management, Inc. (DBMI), a company that administers denta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Remington Arms Company (“Remington”) instituted this declaratory judgment action alleging that Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) has a duty to defend and indemnify Remington for environmental damage arising out of Remington’s operations at three Connecticut locations. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 1.) The parties have previously stipulated that Connecticut law...
Views: 0
Page 12163
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Currently before the court is defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on May 14, 1992, and plaintiff’s cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on May 15, 1992. The motions have been fully briefed, and the court heard oral argument on July 22,1992. Accordingly, the motions are ripe for review.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
F...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Factual and Procedural Background This case has a long frustrating history in this Court as well as the Federal Circuit Appeals Court. The litigation arises out of a 1959 agreement between the United States and New England Tank for the construction and operation of a fuels storage facility along the Piscataqua River at a tank farm in Newington, New Hampshire....
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently pending before the court in the above-captioned cause are cross motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs and defendants pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiffs are a group of 43 retirees formerly employed by defendant Teledyne, Inc. (hereinafter Teledyne) who instituted this cause with the filing of a complaint on August 27, 1991. Plaintiffs subsequently filed an amended c...
Views: 0
Page 12168
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This court granted summary judgment to defendants on plaintiffs’ federal claims and, by clarification, dismissed the pendent state claims without prejudice. The American National Bank (ANB) now moves for reconsideration of those dismissals, pointing out that this case has entailed an enormous amount of effort and that, at this juncture, it makes little sense to force the parti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Background
This action is brought by Steven S. Scholes (“Scholes”), not individually but solely as Receiver for D & S Trading Group, Ltd. (“D & S”), Analytic Trading Systems, Inc. (“AT Systems”), Analytic Trading Service, Inc. (“AT Service”), and by John and Pamela LaVinka (the “LaVinkas”), individually and on behalf of a putative class of investors in D & S, AT Sy...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this diversity personal injury case regulated by New York Law, plaintiff has discontinued voluntarily as against all defendants except Ski Windham Operating Corp. The sole remaining defendant now moves for summary judgment in its favor pursuant Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 on the ground that the action is barred by the statute of limitations. Alternative relief which need not concern us...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, Antoinette H. Coughlin, has filed a motion for reconsideration of this court’s order of July 8, 1992, granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s age discrimination and relinquishing jurisdiction over the pendent state law breach of contract claim. Plaintiff has also filed a motion for leave to file a memorandum in support of her motion f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The United States, on behalf of the government of Mexico, seeks the extradition of David Montiel Garcia (“Montiel”) to answer charges of indecently assaulting and corrupting a minor in violation of Articles 284 and 179 of the Mexican Penal Code.
1
Mon-tiel concedes this court’s personal jurisdiction over him, as well as its authority to order his extraditio...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
These cases concern a Medicare regulation that implements a new statutory payment methodology for graduate medical education (“GME”) costs borne by teaching hospitals. The regulation in question is a retroactive rule published in late 1989 that permits the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) to reaudit hospitals’ 1984 graduate medical education costs. P...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE SHOW CAUSE ORDER
This matter is before the court on the defendant Matthew Myers’ motion to vacate an order to show cause why his probation should not be revoked. The court held a hearing on the defendant’s motion on May 8, 1992. For the reasons which follow, defendant’s motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
On. July 27, 1987, defendant Matthew Myers was se...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on January 31, 1992. The Defendants request summary judgment based upon the affirmative defense of misrepresentations by the deceased, Dale Bettis, in his initial application for coverage. On July 29, 1992, this Court held a hearing on this matter. Having reviewed and considered this motion, the responses, the furthe...
Views: 2
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Milstead Supply Company’s Motion to Remand, filed June 19,1992. On July 30,1992, this Court held a hearing to consider this motion and the related issues. Having reviewed and considered this motion, the responses, the supplemental pleadings, and the argument of counsel presented at the hearing, this Court is of the opinion that this motion should be DEN...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 23, 1992, the court reopened the sentencing hearings for the above named defendants. Newell’s sentence was modified to require drug testing during supervised release. This memorandum memorializes the oral statement of reasons for departure from the guidelines for Lane.
1
Lane is the mother of six children, the oldest of whom is thirteen years old. ...
Views: 0
ORDER REVOKING DETENTION ORDER AND SETTING CONDITIONS OF RELEASE
BEFORE THE COURT is defendant’s motion to revoke the magistrate’s order of detention. The order was filed on April 10, 1992, and defendant filed the motion on April 17, 1992. The court has reviewed the tape recording of the hearing held before the magistrate, the magistrate’s order, and the pretrial services report.
The...
Views: 0
Page 12193
ORDER
The thorough and reasoned recommendation of Magistrate Ross is adopted and petitioner’s application for provisional relief by issuance of a “warrant” is denied. The “adoption of this report and recommendation would deny solely petitioner’s request for interim relief, thus permitting him to effect proper service of the petition and proceed with his suit under ICARA____” Report & Reco...
Views: 1
*30
ORDER
Before the Court are the Government’s motion and supplemental motion to consolidate indictments and trials. On consideration of the motions and the defendants’ oppositions, the Court consolidates trial of these cases pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 13. The Court soon will issue an Opinion setting forth the reasons for its decision, but issues this Order now for the parties’ i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Based on intimations in Supreme Court and Court of Appeals decisions, claimant moves to dismiss this civil forfeiture proceeding on the grounds of double jeopardy and excessive punishment. He has already been convicted and punished for failing to declare over $10,000 in cash he was taking from the country. The government now seeks to keep all the cash claimant was the...
Views: 0
ORDER Now before the court is the government’s notice of intention to introduce “other acts” evidence against defendants Gus Alex (“Alex”) and Nicholas Gio (“Gio”) pursuant to Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The government’s proffered “other acts” evidence is admissible against Gio pursuant to Rule 404(b). On the other hand, the government’s proferred “other acts” evidence against...
Views: 0
ORDER On April 10, 1992, the Government’s motion for an order directing defendant Gus Alex to submit to physical, neurological and psychological evaluations was .granted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a). The Government’s motion was filed after one of Alex’s attorneys, Carl M. Walsh, raised the issue of Alex’s competency to stand trial. Alex has submitted under seal the reports of Dr. Jack Arbit, a ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the Motion for Sanctions of defendant Iowa Marine Repair Corp. After notice, briefing, testimony, and argument on the motion, as well as supplemental briefing and further supplementation of the record with respect to certain discovery matters, the Court finds the motion to be well taken, though not for the reasons given by the movant. The Court therefore gran...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The defendant, a postal employee, pled guilty to one count of knowingly and intentionally stealing from the United State.s Mail a first class letter containing U.S.D.A. food stamps. In calculating the appropriate sentence under the sentencing guidelines, the probation officer applied section 2B1.1 for theft, which required a base offense level of four. The base leve...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
By motion fully submitted on April 21, 1992, applicant Adolf Horler moves to compel two New York attorneys to produce certain documents in connection with a foreign probate proceeding. The Court will briefly summarize the tangled history of this litigation, which, the reader is warned, in some respects resembles the plot of a “Dynasty” episode; in others, regrettably, i...
Views: 0
Defendants have moved to compel the production by plaintiffs of two categories of documents. First, defendants seek documents now in plaintiffs’ possession that reflect communications between various foreign patent agents and an Italian corporation known as Istituto Guido Donegani S.p.A. (“IGD”), which is the licensee and sub-licensor of the patent at issue in this case. Plaintiffs resist disclosu...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this diversity case defendants move for an order,
in limine,
determining that the provisions of N.J.S.A. 39:6A-12 should be applied to bar the plaintiff from introducing at trial evidence of her medical expenses, notwithstanding that her insurance carrier has paid only $10,000 of these expenses. Resolution of this issue depends on a determination of whether N.J.S.A. ...
Views: 0
Page 12218
MEMORANDUM
Before the court are separate motions to dismiss submitted by the federal defendants, Gettysburg College, and Gettysburg Railroad. All motions have been briefed and are ripe for consideration. Prior to examining the merits, the court will discuss the factual background of the action and the standard utilized in examining such motions.
*1574
Background
I. ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs Arthur B. Still and Beatrice Still, husband and wife, bring this action for nuisance as a result of Defendants’ use of a radio transmitter (“ham” radio). Named as Defendants are Joseph Michaels, III and Miriam R. Michaels, husband and wife, and the Federal Communications Commission. Upon motion of Plaintiffs, the FCC was dismissed from this action.
See Still v. Mich...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs, Natural Resources Defense Council (“NRDC”) and Delaware Audubon Society, brought a citizen suit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the “Clean Water Act” or the “Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251
et seq.,
against Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. (“Texaco”), for alleged violations of a state-issued permit limiting effluent discharge from Defendant’s Delawa...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Introduction
This case raises an important question, novel in this circuit, concerning resident alien eligibility for certain welfare benefits. At issue specifically is the correct interpretation of the phrase “entry into the United States” in two nearly identical statutory provisions, one in the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 615(a) (1991), and the other in ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move for summary judgment contending that there are no genuine disputes of material fact and they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid in their resolution. For the reasons set out below, the
*464
motion is granted in part and denied in part.
This di...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Vitor Manuel DeSena Gouveia, a naturalized American citizen, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus to prevent his extradition to Portugal to serve a three year, nine month sentence that was imposed upon him
in absentia.
In his application for the writ, Mr. Gouveia has raised a serious constitutional question about a provision in the International Narco...
Views: 1
ORDER
The Court is prepared to file its opinion on the Government’s motion to disqualify counsel, Docket Item (“D.I.”) 1. The Government and Duane, Morris and Hecksher (“the Firm”) have orally requested that the opinion be sealed. Gannett Co., Inc. has filed a motion to intervene, D.I. 7, as well as a motion to unseal the record, D.I. 8.
Accordingly, the Court held a hearing on Wedne...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT DUWAMISH SHIPYARD’S MOTION IN LIMINE DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S N ON-PECUNIARY DAMAGE CLAIMS
THIS MATTER comes before the court on defendant Duwamish Shipyard’s motion in limine for partial summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claim for non-pecuniary damages. Having reviewed the matter, together with all documents in support
*456
and in opposition, and ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 20, Part # 1]. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff was a Part-Time Flexible (PTF) employee and trainee for the position of letter sorting machine (LSM) operator at the Rock Island, Illinois, Post Office. Plaintiff had experienced problems w...
Views: 0
BACKGROUND On March 9, 1988, plaintiff 0. Rodriguez, while an inmate at the Orleans Correctional Facility, filed this complaint pro se, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated by being subjected to urinalysis testing and a search of his prison cell. This court appointed counsel to represent plaintiff, and plaintiff filed an amended complaint contain...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Before the court is the motion of the defendant, Lakeland Lounge of Jackson, Inc., seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to prohibit the City of Jackson, Mississippi, from continuing a pattern and course of conduct which interferes with the (defendant’s) free exercise of a right protected by the First Amendment to the United ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND This tort action arises out of a November 26, 1986, airplane crash in North Carolina in which four members of the Robert C. Gross family, all New York residents, died. Plaintiffs allege that the crash was caused by the failure of an aircraft engine designed and manufactured by defendant Tel-edyne Continental Motors Aircraft Products (“TCM”). The amended complai...
Views: 1
BACKGROUND
This case stems from a dispute over the amount of payments due under a Housing Assistance Payments (“HAP”) contract between plaintiff, Jackson Square Associates (“Jackson Square”), and defendant, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). Several motions are pending. First, plaintiff has moved to strike several affirmative defenses offered by defendan...
Views: 0
OPINION DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. Introduction. The State of Michigan and the Michigan Education Trust (the “Trust” or the “MET”) have sued the United States for refund of taxes assessed against income earned by the Trust. They seek the refund under several theories: (1) The Internal Revenue Code (“the Code”) does not ap...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case reveals the sophisticated financial operations of an international criminal syndicate. It involves more than ten million dollars in wire transfers and deposited funds seized by the government as the traceable proceeds of illegal money-laundering and narcotics transactions. The moneys were alleged by the government to be subject to forfeiture under 21 U.S.C. ...
Views: 2
Page 12264
*944
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The two cases treated in this opinion represent what remains of a trial that began with 48 plaintiffs and multiple direct and third-party defendants. This opinion sets forth the basis for the Court’s reduction of the jury verdicts in those two cases to final judgments, which are filed simultaneously with this opinion.
Faced with a torrent of persona...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendants Deloitte & Touche (“D & T”), Winfried Schuberth (“Schuberth”) and David Randall (“Randall”) have moved for an order dismissing the amended complaint against them pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 9(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.
1
For the following reasons, the motion is denied.
The Parties
The plaintiffs in this action
2
(the “Investors”) are a numbe...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff in this Lanham Act case has already been awarded damages against defendant Wilkinson Sword, Inc.
The Gillette Co. v. Wilkinson Sword, Inc. and Friedman Benjamin, Inc.,
No. 89 Civ. 3586, slip op., 1992 WL 30938 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 1992). Plaintiff now moves for an award of damages against defendant Friedman Benjamin, Inc. For the reasons sta...
Views: 0
Page 12285
OPINION AND ORDER
This civil rights action, brought by plaintiff, Edward 25X King (“King”),
1
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was tried to a jury on May 12-15, 1992. Defendants Michael Macri (“Macri”) and Edward Kondek (“Kondek”) now move the Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) and 59(a), for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial or a remittitur of the damages award. For the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
These actions were the subject of Memoranda and Orders dated August 16, 1990 (the 1990 Order), 1990 WL 127697, July 11, 1991 (the 1991 Order),1991 WL 150856, and March 5, 1992 (the 1992 Order), familiarity with which is assumed. Defendant Leon J. Levitz objects in part to the 1992 Order vacating the judgments as to damages against him and referring the action to Magis...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant SSC & B Lintas, New York (“Lintas”) moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P. dismissing plaintiff Roberto E. Mendoza’s (“Mendoza”) national origin discrimination claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, asserted in Counts II and V of the complaint, on the grounds that they are barred by the doctrine of res
judicata
and for an order pursuant to Rule 1...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING PARTY FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
This case presents the novel question whether personal jurisdiction exists over a non-forum bank which participated in transactions with a forum bank through a national electronic fund clearinghouse system. The court concludes this is an insufficient “minimum contact,” and dismisses the non-forum bank for lack of jurisdiction.
I. BACKGR...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Windsor, Inc. (“Windsor”), owner of the trademark INTRAV, brings this suit to enjoin defendant Intravco Travel Centers, Inc. (“ITC”) from operating its business under that name. Plaintiff alleges that by using the name Intravco Travel Centers, Inc., defendant infringes plaintiff’s trademark in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114, 1125(a), dilutes its trademar...
Views: 0
ORDER This case came before the Court on April 10,1992, for hearing on all pending pretrial motions. The motion of Defendant Leone Legan to compel discovery was denied at that time. Defendant’s Motion for Bill of Particulars and Motion to Sever were taken under advisement. Having considered the response of the Government, IT IS NOW ORDERED that the Motion for Bill of Particulars is denied except t...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is back before the Court on remand for resentencing. On July 16, 1990, Judge Richard Mills sentenced the defendant to 240 months imprisonment having decided an upward departure was warranted. The trial court initially determined an adjusted offense level of 24 (26 minus 2 for acceptance of responsibility) and a criminal history category of V, yielding a guideline sentencing range o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER This matter comes before me on the trustee’s motions to reconsider my order of July 27, 1992, and to file a memorandum brief in support of the motion. The order of July 27 dismissed the trustee's appeal because she had failed to file timely her notice of appeal. I deny both the motion for reconsideration and the motion to file a brief. The trustee’s motion for reconsideration is p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This case came on regularly for hearing before the court on July 30, 1992 on various motions filed by both parties. The plaintiff
1
was represented by William H. Pratt and Gary F. Bendinger. The defendant was represented by M. Laurence Po-pofsky, Stephen V. Bomse, Dale A. Kim-ball, Clark Waddoups and Renata M. Sos.
The court heard argument on ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Court has before it the motion for summary judgment of the defendant, Nashville Banner Publishing Co., Inc. (filed January 7, 1992; Docket Entry No. 7), and the response thereto by the plaintiff Christine McKennon (filed March 16, 1992; Docket Entry No. 25). For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants the motion for summary judgment of the Banner. I. Mrs. McKennon was e...
Views: 5
795 F. Supp. 1057 (1992)
In re GRAND JURY NO. 91-1; GRAND JURY SUBPOENA NO. 16320CR.
Civ. A. No. 92-Y-127.
United States District Court, D. Colorado.
August 12, 1992.
*1058 Gerald J. Rafferty, Asst. U.S. Atty., Denver, Colo., for petitioner.
James J. Zak, Zak, Fox, Pehr and Fuller, P.C., Westminster, Colo., for respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BABCOCK, District Judge.
Petitioner Mental H...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This maritime action arises out of the collision of the tug and barge Independence/Ocean 192 with the tanker vessel M/T Faith I at about 12:36 a.m. on August 19, 1990 approximately one-half mile south of the entrance to the Delaware Bay for deep draft vessels. A bench trial on the issue of liability was held on February 18-19, 1992 and on May 4-5, 1...
Views: 1
*94MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before this Court is the Motion of Defendants to Compel Plaintiffs to Respond to Discovery Requests which were filed on June 17, 1992. In this action brought alleging violations of sections 10(b) and 20 of the Exchange Act, Rule 10b-5 and Pennsylvania common law1, Defendants seek to compel answers to a First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Produc*95tion of...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss (Doc. # 8, Part # 1). For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. Background Plaintiff brings this Section 1983 action for monetary relief against the Defendant Mercer County and one of its officials, James Earl, alleging that Defendants deprived him of his Constitutional rights under color of state law. Plaintiff also brings ...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM The defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment is currently before this Court. For the reasons described below, defendant’s motion *988will be treated as a Motion to Dismiss, and as such will be granted. FACTS Plaintiffs purchased two food stores in 1986, unaware of the previous owner’s sales and use tax delinquencies of $36,-593.27. During the ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER The premises of Wag-Aero Inc. were searched on June 4, 1992, pursuant to a search warrant issued by magistrate judge Robert L. Bittner. The government submitted an ex parte application to the magistrate judge to cause the relevant documents (the search warrant, etc.) placed under seal. That application was granted upon the magistrate judge’s finding that disclosure “would adv...
Views: 1
OPINION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The dispute in this case concerns an agreement entered into between plaintiff CAUFF, LIPPMAN & CO. (“CAUFF, LIPPMAN”) and defendant THE APOGEE FINANCE GROUP, INC. (“APOGEE”) on January 9, 1990, and APOGEE’S alleged failure to perform under this agreement. CAUFF, LIPPMAN seeks $1,999,998.00 in compensatory damages resulting from APOGEE’s...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 38, Part # 1] and Defendants’ Motion to Strike [Doc. # 57, Part # 1], For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied as to Plaintiff's procedural due process claim, and continued as to Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims to allow Plaintiff to supplement the record. Defendants’ Motion to Strike i...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; OPINION; JUDGMENT TO BE ENTERED IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS; THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS ENJOINED FROM MAINTAINING STORAGE SHED, OR ANY SIMILAR STRUCTURE, WITHIN SUBJECT EASEMENT; STORAGE SHED TO BE REMOVED BY DATE CERTAIN; TERMINATION ENTRY
This declaratory judgment action was origina...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I.
Introduction
This case is brought by plaintiff auto dealership and its principals and guarantors against defendant credit corporation, plaintiff’s inventory financer, for breach of contract to make a capital loan (Count I), breach of fiduciary duty and covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Count II), violation of Mass.Gen.Laws ch. 93A, § 11 (Count I...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Arnold Weiss contends Defendant Amoco Oil Company’s discharge of him, after co-employee Angel Streebin made allegations of sexual harassment against Weiss, constitutes wrongful termination. The matter is before the court on the motion of non-party witness Streebin for a protective order filed on February 11, 1992. Streebin seeks to prohibit Weiss’s discovery of her...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is a motion by the defendant retrocessionaires to be relieved of the requirement that they post pre-answer security pursuant to N.Y. Ins. Law § 1213(c)(1).
For the reasons set forth below this motion is denied except as to defendants Ban-co de Seguros del Estados; Instituto De Resseguros Do Brasil; and Grupo de Empresas Seguradoras Brasileiras. The mot...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This matter comes before the court on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, Without Prejudice, for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, or, in the Alternative for Stay of Action and All Associated Proceedings (DE 5). Having reviewed the record and relevant authorities, the court enters the following order.
Who Killed Southeast Bank?
In August of 1991,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Michael Collins (“Collins”), has brought this action against defendant, Outboard Marine Corporation (“OMC”), pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.,
alleging that he was terminated as vice president of OMC’s European Operations because of his age. The parties are now before the court on defe...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity case, brought under New York’s Human Rights Law, N.Y.Exec.Law § 296 (McKinney 1982 & Supp.1992), involves a claim of employment discrimination on the basis of race and/or national origin. It was tried before a jury which found in favor of the defendant Generale Bank on plaintiffs claim of wrongful termination, but found in favor of the plaintiff Alazar Des...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant New York Life Insurance Company’s remaining motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
1
The motion is addressed to plaintiff’s eighth cause of action alleging a violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962-68. For the reasons stated below, the motion to dismiss i...
Views: 2
Page 12389
ORDER
The Honorable John Jelderks, United States Magistrate Judge, filed Findings and Recommendation on December 27, 1991. The plaintiffs filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation. When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a
de novo
determination of that portion of the magistrate’s repor...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the court for consideration of plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment filed on January 26, 1992, and defendant Allied Products Corporation’s motion for judgment on the pleadings filed on January 27, 1992. Based on the court’s review of the parties’ submissions on the
*1138
pending motions, the court finds that the motion for judgment on the pleadin...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Thomas (“Thomas”) appeals the final decision of Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan (“Secretary”) denying his claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423(d). 1 Each of Thomas and Secretary has filed a motion for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56. For the reasons stated in this...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action arises out of plaintiffs’ purchases of interests in several oil and gas drilling ventures. Plaintiffs allege causes of action under the federal securities laws, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Or
*1531
ganizations Act (RICO), and several state law theories. Plaintiffs claim,
inter alia,
that defendants made material misrepresentations and o...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed January 31, 1985; the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 4, 1985; and the Defendants’ Motion to Strike, filed April 4, 1985. For the reasons set forth herein, the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED; the Defendants’ Motion for S...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 570 (1992)
Edward A. KLOSTERMAN and Debbie A. Klosterman, Plaintiffs,
v.
WESTERN GENERAL MANAGEMENT, INC., a Delaware corporation and Guarantee Mutual Life Company, Nebraska corporation, Defendants.
No. 91 C 5015.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
August 14, 1992.
*571 John Robert Doyle, Michael David Phillips, McDermott, Will & Emery, P.C., Chicago, Ill., for Edw...
Views: 1
*386
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Oxford Organisation, Ltd. (“Oxford”) seeks a constructive trust over certain funds held by defendant Ronald R. Peterson, trustee in bankruptcy of Stotler and Co. (“Stotler”). Oxford contends that the commodities futures trading regulations create a fiduciary relationship between Stotler and Oxford justifying a constructive trust. We hav...
Views: 2
DECISION and ORDER
On March 27, 1992, the plaintiffs, Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. and Tacoma Boat-building Co., commenced this action against the defendant, Northwest Airlines, Inc., in the circuit court for Milwaukee county. The plaintiffs alleged that certain of their machinery components — “speed reducers” — were damaged as a result of the defendant’s negligence during the air transp...
Views: 1
795 F. Supp. 899 (1992)
NALCO CHEMICAL COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
HYDRO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Daniel H. Girmscheid and Thomas S. Broge, Defendants.
No. 92-C-0412.
United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.
July 30, 1992.
Piette & Jacobson by Ronald L. Piette Herbach, Milwaukee, Wis., for plaintiff.
Quarles & Brady by John A. Rothstein, Milwaukee, Wis., for defendants.
*900 DECISION AND ORD...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Coors Brewing Company, sues Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. and
*967
D’Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles, Anheu-ser-Busch’s advertising agency, claiming that Anheuser-Busch’s recent promotional campaign violates § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, New York unfair competition law, and §§ 349 and 350 of New York General Business Law. Plaintiff has sought a prelimin...
Views: 2
Page 12433
*215
DECISION and ORDER
On May 20, 1992, the petitioner, Boni Honoré Daniel Dibi, commenced the above-captioned action with the filing of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and § 106(a)(10) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [the Act], 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(10). By order dated May 21,1992, the court ordered that the respondent, A.D. Moyer, the D...
Views: 2
This is a criminal action which originated on 16 June 1989 when an indictment (the “Indictment”) was returned. Defendants Richard O. Bertoli (“Bertoli”), Leo M. Eisenberg (“Eisenberg”) and Richard S. Cannistraro (“Cannistraro”) were named in the Indictment.
1
On 29 September 1989 a six count superseding indictment (the “Superseding Indictment”)
2
was returned against Berto...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
David B. Lilly Company, Inc. (“plaintiff” or “Lilly Co.”) filed suit against the law firm Smith, Gill, Fisher and Butts (“SGF & B”) and one of the firm’s partners, G. Robert Fisher (“Fisher”), alleging malpractice arising from a corporate acquisition. Plaintiff contends that, because of the malpractice, the transaction was improperly structured. As a result, plaintiff a...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, SANCTIONS AND PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff Linda L. Beckner, a former employee of the federal government, commenced this mandamus action on June 22, 1992. She moved separately for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. Beckner alleges that she requires immediate medical treatment for a condition known as reflex symp...
Views: 0
Page 12451
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Equitable Life Assurance Society’s (“Equitable”) June 15, 1990 motion to dismiss Defendant W.E.K. Drilling Co.’s (“WEK”) first amended crossclaim for indemnification and damages for failure to state claims upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For purposes of discussi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (“Nationwide”) has brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment of its legal obligations under the uninsured/underinsured motorist endorsement to an automobile insurance policy which it issued to An
*202
drew Allison Wendler. Nationwide has named as defendants Wendler and Lawrence M. Kownacki, both in his individual capacit...
Views: 1
OPINION
Presently before the Court is an appeal by The Travelers Insurance Company (“Travelers”), pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 8001(a), from the bankruptcy court’s
*838
Order of October 28, 1991, determining the rights between Travelers and Chapter 11 debtor Coventry Commons Associates (“Coventry”) as to the rents in a shopping center. This Court has jurisdiction of this matte...
Views: 0
ORDER This case represents an appeal from an order granting Trustee’s fees in the amount of $272.88 and expenses in the amount of $360.53 for a total of fees and expenses in the amount of $632.81. Bankruptcy Judge William Greendyke entered the order in bankruptcy proceedings styled In re Earl Rhea, Case No. 90-08807-H4-11. Appellant submits the following four issues for this Court’s review on appe...
Views: 0
The plaintiff moves for a new trial, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), based on newly discovered evidence, misconduct, and “fraud on the court.”
See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(2), 60(b)(3), 60(b)(6). The motion is denied in all respects.
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1
The plaintiffs product liability claim arises from her husband’s fatal accident at the control...
Views: 1
*239
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are: Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, filed May 1, 1992; Response by Defendants Phillips and Friedman, filed May 15, 1992; Plaintiffs Reply, filed June 1, 1992; and Sur-Reply of Phillips and Friedman, filed June 8, 1992.
BACKGROUND
This suit arises from the default by Defendant 1601 Partners, Ltd. on certain paym...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss on Eleventh Amendment Grounds, filed December 16, 1991. For the following reasons, the motion is Denied. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, the Seminole Tribe of Florida (the “Tribe”) is a federally recognized Indian tribe whose headquarters are located in Broward County, Florida. The Tribe commenced this action pursuant to the Ind...
Views: 1
ORDER
Currently pending before the court in the above-captioned matter are cross motions for summary judgment filed by the adversaries to this cause pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiffs Joseph Cairns, Tom Salisbury, Robert Lyman Smith, Martha Nelson, and John Jarema instituted this action on August 7, 1991 with the filing of a four-count complaint against defendants Bridgestone/Firest...
Views: 1
ORDER On July 5, 1991, Defendants filed a Motion to Suppress (# 34), a Supplement (# 46) and Amended Supplement thereto on August 20 and 21, 1991, respectively. The Government filed a Response to Defendants’ Motion (# 42) on July 5, 1991. On December 31, 1991, Magistrate Judge Leavitt entered a Report and Recommendation (# 68) recommending the denial of Defendants’ above-referenced Motion. Afte...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Bruce Cummings, formerly an inmate at Missouri Eastern Correctional Center (MECC), now incarcerated at Potosí Correctional Center, alleges that defendants, MECC prison officials, denied him due process in certain disciplinary proceedings, subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment and refused him me...
Views: 0
ORDER Plaintiff Raymond Gawloski, a former inmate at the Lebanon Correctional Institution (LCI) and a present inmate at the Grafton Correctional Institution, brings these consolidated actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 challenging the constitutionality of the conditions he endured while incarcerated in LCI’s protective custody unit. Plaintiff alleges that the conditions violated his rights under th...
Views: 2
Page 12476
ORDER
This controversy involves two medical equipment companies battling for greater shares of the market for their medical products. Each party seeks preliminary injunctive relief preventing the other from disseminating false, misleading, inaccurate, or disparaging information to their customers.
Plaintiff Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, Inc. (CSZ), an Ohio corporation with its princi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case came on for trial to the Court. Upon the evidence received at trial, and on the law briefs filed, this memorandum is filed as the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court.
I. Facts
Defendant operates an auto repair business in Watertown, South Dakota under the name, Bernie’s Body Shop. In 1965, at age 21 years, plaintiff began employment ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER The federal defendant in the above-captioned case has filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Request for Stay Pending Reconsideration. Federal defendant strongly opposes this Court’s order filed March 27, 1992, in which the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was ordered to negotiate directly with the nine tribes located in South Dakota and to propose to them the poss...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment in the above-captioned case. In addition, the Court has received supplemental briefs from two groups serving as
amicus curiae,
namely the Associated General Contractors of America, Inc., in support of the plaintiff, and the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO in support of the defendan...
Views: 0
OPINION The case is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss or for summary judgment and plaintiff’s opposition thereto. On consideration of the entire record and for the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. This case concerns allegations of fraud and undue influence, breach of the warranty of habitability, breach of the duty to repair, breach of...
Views: 0
OPINION Claimant, Gerald Hodge, brings this action pursuant to the Social Security Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to obtain judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary). Hodge contests the Secretary’s decision to reduce his social security benefits because of his receipt of certain Oregon workers’ compensation benefits. For the reasons se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff commenced this action in New York State Supreme Court, Albany County, in November, 1991, alleging breach of a
*675
guaranty agreement. Defendants removed the ease to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 (1988 & West Supp.1992). Jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (1988 & West Supp.1992). On July 7, 1...
Views: 1
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, Mary P. Dahl-Eimers, initiated this litigation for declaratory judgment, for injunctive relief, and for damages, against defendant, Mutual of Omaha Life Insurance Company. The plaintiff is insured under a policy of major medical expense coverage issued by the defendant. The plaintiff has Stage IV breast cancer, and desires to undergo a procedure identifie...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed with the Court on September 5, 1991. Plaintiff opposed the motion and submitted its own request to take discovery. Defendants’ motion came on for oral argument on November 18, 1991. At that hearing, the Court ordered further briefing as to which
Vaughn
indexes and/or documents pla...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On April 6-7, 1992, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on the Motion of the Dallas Independent School District (“DISD”) to Relocate Montessori I at G.B. Dealey in 1992-93, and related pleadings and briefs. 1 The School District asks the Court to relocate the Montessori Academy now at Hotchkiss to G.B. Dealey in order to relieve overcrowding at Kramer, Preston H...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Timothy J. Ziolkowski commenced the above-captioned case against Caterpillar, Inc., his former employer, seeking compensatory damages, restitution and restoration of benefits on account of the breach of an oral employment agreement and for relief under the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel. The Defendant removed this case from the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County (Wi...
Views: 1
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION TO STRIKE, AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
I.
INTRODUCTION
On March 7, 1991, this court entered an order in
Seattle Audubon Society v. Evans,
771 F.Supp. 1081, declaring unlawful a proposal of the United States Forest Service to sell logging rights in national forest habitat areas of the northern spotted owl wi...
Views: 3
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the motion of the defendant, the United States of America, for partial summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the defendant’s motion.
Plaintiff, Andre Hyman, alleges he was injured in an automobile accident which occurred on April 12, 1990 inside the Norfo...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before us for a non-jury trial. Defendant Connecticut General Life Insurance Company has moved for judg
*184
ment on partial findings of fact pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(c). By way of background, we briefly describe the procedural history of this action, now in its fifth year of litigation.
This ERISA
1
case involves the 1984 t...
Views: 1
Page 12506
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
[T]he profession of the law, in its nature the noblest and most beneficial to mankind, is in its abuse and abasement the most sordid and
pernicious,
1
Law evolves with the collective experience of a society’s efforts to peaceably resolve human conflict. Hence, law is not stagnant. Lawyers, in our adversary system, breathe life into its word...
Views: 2
OPINION
This action arises under an agreement between the City of Baltimore (“the City”) and the Baltimore City Composting Partnership (“BCCP”) for the processing and disposal of sewage sludge.1 BCCP claims that it is entitled to be compensated for certain costs which it allegedly has incurred or will incur as a result of the occurrence of several “uncontrollable circumstances” as defined in the ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
(1) This is a civil action for declaratory and injunctive relief filed by The Pittsburgh Press Company against Ernest D. Preate, Jr., in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Robert E. Colville, in his official capacity as the District Attorney of the County of Allegheny, Pennsylvania. Jurisdiction is...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
For reasons stated, the court will deny the post-trial motion of defendant Bostitch, a division of Textron, Inc.
Plaintiff brings this product liability case because of injury suffered when a pneumatic nailer (often called a nail-gun) fired a nail into his head, causing brain damage, while plaintiff was a member of a two-man carpentry crew. Plaintiffs companion o...
Views: 0
ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO LIABILITY
Plaintiffs brought this action seeking to challenge the constitutionality of Defendants’ procedure for awarding municipal construction contracts. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants’ affirmative action plan unlawfully denied Plaintiffs equal protection of the laws in v...
Views: 0
ORDER An indictment filed April 30, 1992, charged the defendant, Sharon Reed, with distribution of .123 grams of crack cocaine, and along with her two brothers, Kevin Reed and Keith Reed, and Monique Nichols, the “girl friend” of one of them, with possession with intent to distribute over 18 grams of that substance. The trial for Sharon Reed and her brothers was convened on July 27, 1992. Prior to...
Views: 0
*168
MEMORANDUM
The complaint
1
in this case challenges defendants’ use in their movie “The Commitments” of a 27-second “clip” of plaintiff’s performance on a 1965 television show. The complaint alleges violations of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101
et seq.,
the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051
et seq.,
as well as several common-law causes of action...
Views: 2
OPINION
This matter, which concerns an arbitrator’s award under a collective bargaining agreement, is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this matter under § 301 of the Taft-Hartley Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185.1
*575Plaintiff filed this action, requesting that the Court vacate an arbitration award and order a rehearing. Plaintiff contends that the a...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs brought this action alleging that defendant’s zoning ordinances violated their rights under the first and fourteenth amendments of the United States Constitution. They seek injunctive relief and damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
This case raises important issues relating to constitutionally protected rights of free...
Views: 0
ORDER On July 27, 1992, defendant filed a motion to declare the penalty scheme of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(l)(A)(vii) and the related sentencing guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c), unconstitutional. A hearing on the matter was held on August 3, 1992. For reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND On December 6, 1992, a jury convicted defendant of manufacturing marijuana, possessing marij...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The case sub judice contains several matters requiring the attention of the court before trial. 1 These matters include defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to the claims of each of the individual plaintiffs, defendants’ motion to strike plaintiffs’ claim for hedonic damages or, in the alternative, to strike the testimony of Stan Smith, and defendants’ motion for se...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff, Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation, seeks to vacate an award by an arbitrator of a dispute arising out of a collective bargaining agreement. The defendant, the United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO (“the union”), has counterclaimed for breach of the collective bargaining agreement.
1
This matter is before the court on cross-motions for summary judgm...
Views: 1
ORDER
On December 6, 1991, defendant John W.S. McCormick filed a motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds. A hearing on the matter was held on July 17,1992.
1
For the reasons stated herein, defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Background
On February 7, 1991, defendant was charged in the District of Connecticut in a 31-count indictment with...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OVERVIEW Plaintiff Frank Buttino brought this lawsuit to challenge the revocation of his secu *300 rity clearance and the termination of his employment as a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (the “FBI”). Plaintiff claims that he was deprived of his right to due process under the Fifth Ame...
Views: 0
*266
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Plaintiffs have brought this class action against Lucky Stores, Inc. on behalf of Black and female employees working in retail stores within Lucky’s Northern California Food Division. Plaintiffs allege discrimination on the basis of race and sex in initial job placement, allocation of work hours, movement of part-time employees to full...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
I
BACKGROUND
On October 10, 1989, plaintiffs Laura Autrey (“Autrey”) and Rita Schroeder (“Schroeder”) filed a gender discrimination action against defendant Potlatch Corporation (“Potlatch”) pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as California Government Code § 12940 et seq., Article I, Secti...
Views: 0
*694 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a defamation case against a bankrupt corporation and its president. The corporation moves to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the automatic stay precludes plaintiff’s efforts to interfere with corporate property rights. The individual defendant contends there is no personal jurisdiction over him. Plaintiff, Amplifier Research Corporation, manufactur...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for statutory benefits under the Pennsylvania Insurance Guaranty Association Act, 40 P.S. § 1701.101
et seq.
Plaintiff, T & N pic (“T & N”) has filed a three count complaint against Defendant Pennsylvania Insurance Guaranty Association (“PIGA”) which is an unincorporated association of insurers created by statute to provide insolvency insuran...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On December 6, 1989, defendant Vincent Burnom was charged in a three-count indictment with violations of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) (failure to register a firearm). On August 7, 1990, the defendant entered a conditional plea of guilty to Count I of the indictment, pursuant to a plea agreement with the government. Un...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The government charged Aurelio Vieira-Candelario with violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326— unlawful reentry into the United States after a prior order of deportation without first seeking the permission of the Attor*118ney General of the United States.1 The defendant filed two motions with the Court asking for essentially the same relief: a motion to quash the indictment and a motion t...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Westinghouse Credit Corporation (“WCC”) filed this instant diversity action in an effort to enforce a personal guaranty agreement. Presently before the Court is WCC’s motion for summary judgment against defendants, alleging payment due as a matter of law. Defendants counter the motion with four arguments. First, defendants contend that the guaranty agreement...
Views: 6
Page 12573
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
THIS MATTER comes before the court on plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Having reviewed the motion together with all documents filed in support and in opposition, and being fully advised, the court finds and rules as follows:
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs seek certification as a class all those who, on December 31, 1985, held General ...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL Defendants James R. Moseley, et al. (“Forest Service”) and defendants-interve-nors Washington Contract Loggers Association, et al. (“WCLA”) have filed notices of appeal from the Memorandum Decision and Injunction of July 2, 1992 (“July 2 decision”) (Dkt. # 181), and from the Order on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, etc. (“May 28 order”) (Dkt. # 138)....
Views: 0
Page 12575
OPINION AND ORDER
This case concerns a real estate transaction between the buyer-plaintiff, John H. French, II, and the sellers-defendants, John T. Isham and Margaret Frazer. The centerpiece of the lawsuit is a large Newport estate known as “Oakwood.” Having purchased Oakwood, plaintiff has brought this action seeking damages for (1) defendants’ alleged breach of an express warranty of
...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Zapata Off-Shore Company’s (“Zapata”) Motion
*1016
for Partial Summary Judgment. For the reasons stated below, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be GRANTED.
I.
Plaintiffs initiated this action in this Court on June 17, 1992. Plaintiff Charles W. Reynolds seeks damages for injuries he allegedly sustained while work...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On July 28, 1989, Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) agents, during an ongoing drug investigation, seized $41,448.00 from plaintiffs’ home. On November 2, 1989, this money was administratively forfeited. Plaintiffs, through this action, seek the return of their money. As the Court lacks jurisdiction over the action, it is dismissed. I This case has traveled to its ...
Views: 1
Page 12583
MEMORANDUM DECISION
By motions fully submitted on June 4, 1992, plaintiff United Paperworkers International Union and defendant International Paper Company (“the Company”) each have moved for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Jurisdiction is based on the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa (Supp.1992), and on 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (Supp.1992). There is no genuine d...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Narragansett Indian Tribe (“Tribe”) moves this Court to dismiss the above-captioned case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the Tribe has limited sovereign immunity as a federally acknowledged and recognized Indian tribe, the Court grants its motion and dismisses the action.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Maynard owns land in Charles-town,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
These cases were filed by two candidates for judicial office in the State of Illinois. The cases were consolidated because both plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Rule 67(B)(1)(c) (“Rule 67(B)(1)(c)” or the “Rule”) of the Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct (the “Code”). Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 110A, fi 67(B)(1)(c).
1
Plaintiff Robert C. Buckley ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on defendant United Airline’s motion for summary judgment on two issues: (1) whether the Railway Labor Act (“RLA”), 45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., preempts plaintiff’s claim alleging race discrimination in violation of California public policy; and (2) assuming that plaintiff’s claim is not preempted, whether defendant United Airlines (“de...
Views: 0
*82DECISION and ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Sections 206(d), 215, and 216, and 42 U.S.C. Section 2000(e) et seq. Her complaint alleges that the defendant practiced willful discrimination on the basis of sex and marital status by questioning her about her sexual orientation, by promoting a white male ahead of her despite her seniority, by paying her les...
Views: 0
*258 ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs emergency motion for relief and Defendants’ motions to dismiss. After review of the pleadings and case law the Court finds that Plaintiff’s motion must be denied and this case dismissed. Plaintiff bid on a piece of surplus government property known as the Katy Plaza Office Building. The property is currently held by the Resolution Trust Corp...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Washington International Insurance Company’s (“Washington”) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). The motion is denied for the following reasons.
FACTS
The present controversy arises from restoration work performed on the Great Lakes Clock Tower at the Naval Training Center in Great Lakes,...
Views: 2
OPINION
This case, involving allegations of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty under New York law in connection with a loan from defendants to plaintiffs, was filed in New York Supreme Court in September, 199T. After certain preliminary motions and discovery disputes in. the state forum, defendants removed to this court on July 7,1992. Now before the court is plaintiffs motion to remand t...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action, plaintiff, Jesse Wachtel, sues defendant, Karl Storm, for defamation. Defendant moves to dismiss the action for improper venue pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) and for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is denied.
I.
Plaintiff, a citizen of Florida, “is a gia...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court are the objections of plaintiffs’ counsel, Marvin A. Miller, Pat*673rick Cafferty, and Stanley R. Wolfe (collectively “plaintiffs’ counsel”), to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”) recommending Rule 11 sanctions. For reasons stated below, the court rejects the recommendation and denies defendants’ motion for sanctions.
FACTS
Plaintiffs Harlyn Sales C...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT This matter comes to be heard on the Plaintiff’s, Tom Greenwald (“Greenwald”), Motion to Remand Action to State Court (DE 11). Having reviewed the file and relevant authorities, the court enters the following order. Placing Their Bets On April 9, 1992, the Plaintiff commenced this action in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit...
Views: 0
*1118
RULING ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is a suit for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692
et seq.
(the Act). The court has jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The parties have consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Both parties have moved for summary judgment. We briefly reca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND INJUNCTION
I.
INTRODUCTION
This order follows the order on cross-motions for summary judgment entered on
*1487
May 28, 1992 (“May 28 order”) (Dkt. # 138). The present case is a sequel to
Seattle Audubon Society v. Evans,
771 F.Supp. 1081 (W.D.Wash.1991),
aff'd,
952 F.2d 297 (9th Cir.1991). The
Evans
decision r...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the parties’ cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, filed January 30,1992, and March 23, 1992. Both motions concern plaintiff’s administrative appeal of several actions taken by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) with regard to the fill of .41 acres of wetland on plaintiff’s property. First, the Corps required plaintiff to apply for a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I.
Background
In 1984, the plaintiff, Richard Roe,
1
underwent a surgical procedure at the Little Company of Mary Hospital for treatment and removal of an enlarged spleen. Prior to and subsequent to the splenectomy, Roe received transfusions of multiple units of blood, apparently some of which was contaminated with the Human Immunodefic...
Views: 0
OPINION
In the past few months the parties to this action have met with this Court several times in an effort to resolve their disputes and to pursue settlement of this action. The defendants have proposed a settlement of this action that involves the resolution of the class members tax dispute with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). The unique nature of the proposed settlement, time pressures...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 1074 (1992)
UTAH POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
The BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY, Defendant.
Civ. No. 88-C-789B.
United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D.
August 14, 1992.
Stanford Owen, P. Bruce Badger, Salt Lake City, Utah, Samuel F. Chamberlain, *1075 Bountiful, Utah, David A. Westerby, Salt Lake City, Utah, for plaintiff.
Ray R. Christensen, Russell G. Workman, Philli...
Views: 0
OPINION
On July 8, 1992 this Court held a hearing to approve a class action settlement proposal. We decided to hold this hearing after protracted negotiations between class counsel and defense counsel had resulted in a stalemate. At the hearing we approved the settlement proposal over the objections of class counsel and, consistent with Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Before the court are defendants Theodore Joseph and Leroy Davis' Motions for a Judgment of Acquittal or in the alternative for a New Trial. This case involved the surveillance and subsequent raid of a suspected drug-dealing location. On September 6, 1989, agents and officers from the Virgin Islands Narcotics Strike Force ("Strike Force") and the Virgin Islan...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Lynda Lontz (“Lontz”) brings this action on behalf of herself and her minor child Kenneth Corson (“Corson”) against Bruno (“Bruno”) and Carolyn (“Carolyn”)
1
Kosin-ski (collectively “Kosinskis”), seeking damages for injuries that Corson sustained when he fell from the roof of Kosinskis’ apartment building. Kosinskis now move for summary judgment und...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff Jean Adams Lindner’s (“Lindner”) application for attorney’s fees. For reasons that follow, Lindner is awarded $32,787.50 in fees, $1,713 in expenses and $60 in costs.
BACKGROUND
This case involves lengthy administrative and court proceedings over Lindner’s claim for social security disability benefits for which Lindner now seeks attorney’s fee...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
In this declaratory judgment action the plaintiff moves, pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for leave to amend the Complaint and the defendant moves, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), to transfer venue of this case to the United States District Court for the Western District of New York.
For the reasons set forth below, the plain...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
[[Image here]]
*766
[[Image here]]
This Opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against,
inter alia,
the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT") and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent or...
Views: 1
At issue in these consolidated actions is whether the Resolution Trust Corporation (“RTC”) is empowered by federal statute to evict tenants in RTC-controlled apartments in violation of state rent control, rent stabilization, and securities laws. The RTC contends that its enabling statute contains such authorization, and that contrary state laws are preempted under the Supremacy Clause of the Un...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint. Plaintiffs’ complaint is in two counts. Count I was filed pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132, 1145 (ERISA) alleging that defendant breached its obligation to make fringe benefit contributions under the terms of an alleged collective bargaining agreement. Count II a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Jagraj Singh, a native and citizen of India who fled that country on October 30, 1991, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 et seq. and the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 106(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(b). Petitioner asks this court to review a determination of the Board of Immigration Authority (“BIA”) that pet...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 965 (1992)
Frances F. BAHRS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
HUGHES AIRCRAFT COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Third Party Defendant.
No. CIV 92-097.
United States District Court, D. Arizona.
June 29, 1992.
Amended Order July 2, 1992.
*966 John G. Stompoly, Mary Judge Ryan, Stompoly & Stroud P.C., Tucso...
Views: 0
ORDER
Pending is the plaintiffs’ motion regarding the applicability of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to this action, (doc. 860). The issue presented is whether the Civil Rights Act of 1991 [Pub.L. No. 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071 (to be codified at various sections of Titles 29 and 42,
United States Code)]
(hereinafter “the 1991 Act”), which became law on November 21, 1991, applies t...
Views: 0
ORDER
This action'for vacation of an arbitration award is before the court on Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time within which motions for summary judgment may be filed, Plaintiffs motion for an extension of time within which responses to motions for summary judgment may be filed, and the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment.
As an initial matter, Plaintiffs two motions for extensio...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE
The Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation of the United
*930
States Magistrate Judge signed on February 28, 1992, regarding instrument # 87.
The Court finds as of March 18, 1992, no objections were filed by either party pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and General Order 80-5, S.D. Texas. Failure to file o...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Barr Laboratories, Inc., (“Barr”), to compel plaintiff Burroughs Wellcome Co. (“BW Co.”) to produce discovery pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Barr seeks production of 357 documents withheld by BW Co. on the basis of the attorney-client and/or attorney work product privilege.1 The parties have submitted m...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Appellant, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), appeals the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado in favor of Appellee/Debtor James D. Kreidle.
The parties have fully briefed the issues and oral argument would not be helpful. Jurisdiction is alleged under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
I. FACTS.
James D. Kreidle was a fifty pe...
Views: 0
Page 12734
Sitting by Designation MEMORANDUM This is an action for debt and foreclosure of real property instituted by Carteret Savings Bank ("Carteret"). Carteret alleges that defendants defaulted on a loan and Carteret seeks a judgment of foreclosure on the property which secured the loan. Carteret has moved for summary judgment on the issue of defendants' indebtedness on the Promissory Note, which evide...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter has come before the Court upon Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff, Michael Cherry, is a former employee of the Crusader Engine Division of Defendant, Thermo-Electron. Defendant terminated Cherry in 1990, and Cherry brought this suit claiming that Defendant discriminated against him ba...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action for employee benefits, the parties have taken profligate advantage of the availability of pre-trial motions. Defendant The Bank of New York (hereinafter “defendant” or “the Bank”) has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56(i) as to Count One on the ground that no material issue of fact remains in dispute, and (ii) as to Counts Two, Three, ...
Views: 4
ORDER Before the court is the motion of the United States to dismiss count 2 of the plaintiff’s complaint. Count 2 seeks monetary damages under 26 U.S.C. § 7433. The government contends the alleged wrongful conduct does not fall within the purview of the statute and that the plaintiff has failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The statute in question, 26 U.S.C. § Section 7433(a), states, ...
Views: 0
*1201
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Dorothy Visconti, sues her employer, Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”), under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-60 (“FELA”), for both intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Defendant moves for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion is granted, with leave for plaintif...
Views: 1
OPINION
This is an action pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.A. § 552 (1977 & Supp.1991). Before the Court are plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment and defendant’s motion for summary judgment. After careful consideration of the entire record and an
in camera
inspection of the documents at issue, the Court denies plaintiff’s motion, grants defe...
Views: 1
ORDER RE: ENFORCEMENT OF SUMMONSES
BEFORE THE COURT are Wooden Horse Investments, Inc. (“Wooden Horse”) petitions to quash three summonses issued by the Internal Revenue Service Agent George Such and the Internal Revenue Service’s motions to enforce summonses at *1489issue in CY-92-3042-FVS and CY-91-3041-FVS. Larry Johnson represents the petitioners in this action; Assistant United States Attorn...
Views: 0
Page 12784
JUDGMENT For the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, having thoroughly reviewed the record and concurring with the Magistrate Judge’s findings under the applicable law: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, that the defendants’ cross-motion is DENIED, and that declaratory ju...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the Court on defendants’ motion to quash and remove the notices of lis pendens filed by a creditors’ committee and adopted by plaintiff on thirty-nine parcels of real estate. For the reasons that follow, the Court denies defendants’ motion.
I. BACKGROUND
Columbus Mortgage & Loan Corporation of Rhode Island, Inc. (“Columbus Mor...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This Opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against,
inter alia,
the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). Pur...
Views: 0
OPINION Now before the Court are the motions for summary judgment by plaintiffs 1 Ber *37 tha Redmond, Lucy Redmond, Ernestine Williams and Linda Allsop, against defendants Ralph A. and Mary M. Birkel and William J. and Mary C. Bailey. On consideration of the entire record, the Court grants plaintiffs’ motions in part, and denies them in part. 2 BACKGROUND This suit originated on Janu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On the evening of March 30, 1991, defendant was traveling northbound in an auto
*1566
mobile on U.S. Highway 69. He was returning to his residence in Tyler, Texas, from a day long visit to his aunt in the Houston area, accompanied by two friends, Kelvin Williams and Roderick Kellum. All three vehicle occupants were African-American juveniles. Defendant was ...
Views: 4
ORDER DISMISSING THE CASE AS NOT RIPE
I. BACKGROUND
The Hawaii state legislature has declared that sexual orientation discrimination in employment is against public policy.
See,
HRS § 368-1. In furtherance of that policy, the legislature amended HRS § 378-2 to include “sexual orientation” as a class protected from discriminatory employment practices. Plaintiffs bring this ...
Views: 0
ORDER CONTINUING CASE UNTIL JULY 22, 1992 AND OTHER MATTERS As a preliminary matter, the Court must deal with several pending motions in the case before the Court. The Pennsylvania state class objectors’ motion to remove from seal their objections (doc. 145) is granted. The motion of Public Citizen to *139appear amicus curiae (doc. 150) is granted. Similarly, the motion of the Dutch Consumentenbon...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on motions for summary judgment filed by all parties. The defendants filed their “Amended Motion for Summary Judgment” [Doc. # 64] on January 2, 1992. The plaintiffs responded on February 3, 1992, with “Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” [Doc. # 72], incorporating the “Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment” [Doc. #73] a...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil action for injunctive relief and civil penalties against defendant-Midwest Suspension and Brake (Midwest), pursuant to Section 118 of the Clean Air Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7413, for violations of § 112 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7412 and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Asbestos, 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart M (the Asbesto...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiffs, Luther M. Ragin, Jr., Deborah Fish Ragin, Renaye B. Cuyler, Jerome F. Cuyler (collectively, the “Individual Plaintiffs”) and the Open Housing Center, Inc., (the “OHC”) (the OHC and the Individual Plaintiffs are referred to collectively as the “Plaintiffs”) seek declaratory and injunctive relief and compensatory and punitive damages against defendants The Harry Mack...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Background
Defendants’ consolidated motion for summary judgment has been briefed fully *418and argued orally. The motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
From October 1984 until December 9, 1991 plaintiff David R. Erickson (Erickson) served as County Administrator for Delta County, Colorado. Defendant Board of County Commissioners (the Board) appointed h...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
This class action suit arises from the May 5, 1988, explosion at Shell Oil Company’s refinery in Norco, Louisiana. The Court addresses here the issues raised by the Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee’s (PLC) ex parte contact with an unidentified employee of Shell Oil Company.
The facts regarding the contact are not entirely known. Based on the nature of certain questions asked by the P...
Views: 4
OPINION
Kinetic Instruments, Inc. (hereinafter "Kinetic") brings this action for patent infringement against Craig J. Lares (hereinafter "Lares"), the President of Lares Research, Inc. (hereinafter "Lares Research"). Kinetic alleges that its United States Patent Number 3,634,938 and Reexamination Certificate Number Bi 3,634,938 (hereinafter collectively "the `938 Patent") for a dental han...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12852: Indiana Lumbermens' Mutual Insurance v. Construction Alternatives, Inc.
Page 12852
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon Appellant Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company’s (Indiana) appeal from a summary judgment order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division (document 2). The parties have filed various responses and replies.
Factual and Procedural Background
Construction Alternatives Inc. (CAI) entered into an asbest...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS FOR RULING
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment was considered this date on memoran-da. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART.
FACTS
Prior to December 1986, the plaintiffs, Art Franz, William Sem, Tom Walsh, Steve Montague and Pat Fox, were all sales representatives with Precision-Cosmet Company, Inc. The plai...
Views: 0
BACKGROUND
In this court’s detailed decision of October 31, 1991,
Nolley v. County of Erie,
776 F.Supp. 715 (W.D.N.Y.1991), the court found that four defendants violated a number of plaintiff Louise K. Nolley’s statutory and constitutional rights. The defendants named were Erie County, Sheriff Thomas Higgins, Superintendent John Dray, and -Nurse Jane O’Malley.
Id.
at...
Views: 0
Page 12869
ORDER Before the Court is the plaintiffs’ Expedited Motion for Leave to Register Judgment in the above-captioned case. Although the time to respond has lapsed under the Local Rules, the defendants have filed no opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion.1 The Court has carefully considered the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion, the applicable law, and the entire record herein, and concludes that the motion m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Marcella Hammond-Warner, plaintiff in the above-referenced action, alleges that she sustained injuries after slipping and falling on a slushy substance on the sidewalk immediately in front of the main entrance to the United States Post Office located in the Jamesport Shopping Center, Route 25, Jamesport, New York. Plaintiff has brought suit against defendants Alan A. ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Fred L. Fulson against the City of Columbus, James Jackson, Chief of the Columbus Police Department, Officer James Donaldson and Sergeant Blair Schu-ler. The individual defendants have been sued in their official and individual capacities. Claims asserted against Franklin County and the Franklin County Sheriff have been...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT • BEFORE THE COURT is the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Ct. Rec. 25). The defendant is represented by Assistant Attorney General Pat L. DeMarco; the plaintiff is proceeding pro se. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted. I. The plaintiff is incarcerated at the Washington State Penitentiary. The defendant is the Correction...
Views: 0
OPINION Education plays a vital role in a free society. While not a fundamental right under the Constitution, our courts have consistently recognized that the opportunity to “acquire the minimal skills necessary for the enjoyment of the rights of speech and of full participation in the political process” should be available to all children equally. San Antonio School District v. Rodriguez, 41...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment of Travelers Insurance Company (“Travelers”) seeking to recover rents due under two lease contracts from defendant, Liljeberg Enterprises, Inc. (“LEI”). Having reviewed the record, memoranda of counsel, exhibits and the law, the Court finds that summary judgment is appropriate and grants the motion by Travelers. FACTS The...
Views: 1
OPINION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) seeking to dismiss Count Three of the Complaint on the ground that plaintiff cannot prevail as a matter of law on its claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons hereinafter set forth, this motion will be granted.
BACKGRO...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is a civil rights action arising out of a collision between a police car operated by Sergeant Ross A. Deck of the City of Lancaster Police Department and plaintiffs’ car. Sergeant Deck and several other police officers, including defendant Randy Herman, were pursuing a fleeing motorcyclist when Deck’s vehicle collided with the car in which the plaintiffs were travel...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the court is an appeal brought by plaintiff, John Jordan (Jordan), from the order issued by Magistrate Judge Freda L. Wolfson on April 28, 1992, and entered on the docket on April 29, 1992, which denied plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint to add new defendants. On appeal, the plaintiff initially makes only one argument. Specifically, Jordan contends that because a denial of a...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Plaintiff filed this action in December, 1991, alleging that the Defendants violated certain provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 (“the ’33 Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“the ’34 Act”), Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Commission and the common law of misrepresentation. Pending before the Court is a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) t...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Defendant’s (VGC’s) Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s Second Cause of Action and Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s Third Cause of Action, as amended (document 6). The Court also considers herein the Plaintiff’s (Napier’s) response to the Court’s show cause order (document 10).
Factual and Procedural Backgr...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon a motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Lynn Martin, Secretary of Labor (Doc. no. 14). Plaintiffs Joseph Small and Don Hurst, appearing pro se, oppose the motion. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion is hereby GRANTED.
*1090
Procedural History
Plaintiffs are members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Loca...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is third-party defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to defendant’s third-party complaint which seeks indemnification or contribution for alleged negligence. Because there is no genuine dispute of the material facts and, as a matter of law, no reasonable jury could find third-party defendant liable, the Court grants the motion.
On May 9, 1988, plaintiff Ophe...
Views: 0
Page 12924
ORDER
Two motions are pending in this dispute over a construction contract: a motion to strike introductory portions of the complaint and a motion to strike an offer of settlement made pursuant to section 807.-01(3) and (4), Wisconsin Statutes. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship.
Four out-of-state contractors who are plaintiffs here — Dillingham Construction N.A., Inc....
Views: 0
ORDER
This is an action brought pursuant to a homeowner’s insurance policy. This court is vested with diversity jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The case is presently before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Supplement Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [20— 1], and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [19-1]. The Court GRANTS as unopposed Defendant’s Mo...
Views: 0
OPINION
The motor vessel FIR GROVE set out on its maiden voyage from the Shin Kurushimi dock yard'A at the Port of Onishi, Japan, in January of 1989. The FIR GROVE is owned by Delica Shipping, S.A. and was designed and built by Hisao Otani, an engineer for Inui Steamship, Ltd. The plaintiffs are fourteen former crew members of the FIR GROVE who were recruited to work aboard the vessel by ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case is before the Court on a motion for summary judgment by the Defendant, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The basis for the FDIC’s motion is that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the instant case because Plaintiff, Anne McLaughlin (“McLaughlin”), failed to submit an administrative claim to the FDIC within the required filing period. For the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Edward McAndrews, as Trustee of Iyanough Realty Trust, seeks a declaratory judgment that its leasing arrangement with the Bank of New England (“Bank”) was terminated upon insolvency of the Bank. At issue is the constitutionality of a provision in the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1821
et seq.,
th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This appeal of a decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) raises the issue as to whether the Appeals Council of the Social Security Administration had authority to review, after passage of the sixty-day appeal period, matters that plaintiff did not raise when she appealed a decision of an Administrative Law Judge (“AU”).
1
The Circuits are...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The action arises out of the plaintiff’s attempt to recover on a fidelity bond issued to Heritage Loan and Investment Co. (“Heritage”) by defendant Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (“Aetna”). Heritage i...
Views: 2
*315
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND QUASH ARREST
Multiple Defendants bring several motions in which other Defendants join. Since all Defendants will stand or fall together, this Order consolidates all motions and does not indicate in whose pleadings the issues are raised. This Order considers each of the two major motions in turn: A. the...
Views: 7
OPINION AND ORDER Following a hearing, the Court took certain portions of Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment 1 under advisement. See Minute Entry (filed June 24, 1992). The Court has reviewed the briefs and exhibits filed by the parties, as well as carefully considered their oral arguments. FACTUAL OVERVIEW: The facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, United S...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff has filed for relief under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e — 2000e-17, and under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for violation of rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The plaintiff has also filed pendent state claims under 29 L.P.R.A. § 146. Defendants have moved to dismiss under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be grant...
Views: 2
ORDER
Following evidentiary hearings and arguments of counsel for all parties, this matter is before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ complaint for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, Plaintiffs’ motion and memorandum in support of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief, Defendants’ memorandum in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, an...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the plaintiffs motion for prevailing party attorneys’ fees and the defendant’s motions for dismissal and for Rule 11 sanctions.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The plaintiff, Dr. Gilbert Boese (“Boese”), was the director of Milwaukee’s Zoological Gardens from 1980 to 1989. In April 1988, the Milwaukee County Ethics Board (“the Board”) began investigatin...
Views: 0
Page 12956
OPINION
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves a struggle between plaintiff Miriam K. Kahn and her former husband, defendant Dr. Alfred J. Kahn, over the future of certain pension benefits. Plaintiff, who is now seventy years old and a resident of New York, married Alfred Kahn in 1949. After providing economic support for the first three years of their marriage while her husband ob...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are two motions, plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint a third time and defendants’ motion for leave to amend their answer. Plaintiffs seek to add Catherine Warburton as a plaintiff. Defendants seek to add the statute of limitations as a defense to the second amended complaint. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the plaintiffs’ motion and denies de...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants The Bank of New York Company, Inc. (“BNYC”) and Irving Bank Corporation Benefits Protection Trust (the “Trust”) through its trustee Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company (“MHT” or the “Trustee”) (BNYC and the Trust are referred to collectively as the “Defendants”) have moved under Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P.
*1249
for summary judgment dismissing the complaint of pl...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION
This is a civil rights action arising out of a warrantless entry and search of American Legion Post # 1212 (the “Post”), which was conducted in connection with an investigation into the January 1986 shootings of two detectives of the New York City Police Department (the “NYPD”). All of plaintiffs’ claims against the City of New York (the “City”); Benjamin Ward, Police Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Schuyler, Roche & Zwirner, P.C. (“Schuyler”) has moved for summary judgment on plaintiff Dagmar C. Adams’ Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) complaint. Schuyler’s argument is that Adams failed to file her charge of age discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) within 300 days of Schuyler’s alleged unlawful employment...
Views: 0
Page 12970
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs presented, and this court’s clerk’s office accepted, for filing a memorandum in opposition to defendant’s motion to transfer venue or alternatively dismiss. The form of this memorandum violates this court’s rules in two respects. It violates this court’s rules by being bound on the side rather than at the top, U.S.Dist.Ct., N.D.I1L, GR 9(b), and it violates ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire Insurance Company (“Norfolk & Dedham”), brought this suit seeking declaratory relief regarding defendants’ claim for loss of property which collapsed and, in defendants’ absence, was then demolished by the City of Philadelphia. Defendants counterclaimed, seeking damages of approximately $125,000.00 pursuant to the insurance policy at issu...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the motion of plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) as receiver for Community Federal Savings and Loan Association (Community) for summary judgment. RTC, as receiver for Community and the holder of guaranties which were executed by all named defendants, seeks recovery of amounts owed to Community by defendants pursuant to guaranties of ...
Views: 0
Page 12983
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This class action was brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and to the Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d). This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e — 5(f)(3), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(3), (4). The named plaintiffs are: the American Federation of State, County and Muni...
Views: 2
ORDER FINDING THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT TO BE FAIR
The matters before the Court include the following items: response by Hearl D. Scales (doc. 60), a letter in opposition to the proposed settlement from Esterina Fabbo (doc. 62), the Interim Memorandum of Completed Notice (doc. 65), a letter from Maya Bisht (doc. 70), letter from Elaine Levenson on behalf of YALV (doc. 114), the Objections by Kasdan...
Views: 5
Page 12985
OPINION Before the Court is defendant’s petition for certification pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(3) that he was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the events underlying this action. The United States, through the Attorney General, opposes the petition. On consideration of the entire record, the Court denies defendant’s petition. Background Pursuant to the Federal T...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT This matter comes before the court on the Plaintiff’s, United States of America (“United States”), Motion for Entry of Default Final Judgment (DE 6). Having reviewed the record and relevant authorities, the court enters the following order. The American Dream Often it has been said that as part of the “American Dream” one goes to college...
Views: 0
ORDER At the pretrial conference the parties asked the Court to decide whether this case should be tried by a jury. The third party plaintiff, relying on the demand made by the plaintiff in the original claim, seeks a jury trial. The third party defendant disputes the applicability of the original plaintiff’s jury demand to the third party claim. In the original action, the Plaintiff, Tokio Marine...
Views: 0
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff U.S. Express, Inc., a New York corporation with its principal place of business in Jamaica, New York, brings this action against the Defendant U.S. Express, Inc., a Delaware corporation doing business in Washington, D.C., seeking declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief on the basis of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114,
et seq.,
due to the ...
Views: 0
*650ORDER Before the court are defendant Drexel National Bank’s (“Drexel”) motion for summary judgment and plaintiff Linda Glover's (“Glover”) motion for a continuance. For reasons that follow, Drexel’s motion is granted and Glover’s motion is denied. FACTS Glover, acting pro se, filed her original complaint on May 21, 1991 and an amended complaint on February 28, 1992.1 Both complaints alleged th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Dahlgren International, Inc.’s (“DU” or “Dahlgren”) Motion . to Enter Judgment Disallowing the Administrative Expense Claim of Baldwin Technology Corporation Against Dahlgren and Granting Related Relief, filed May 18, 1992 (“Motion to Enter Judgment”); Dahlgren’s supporting Brief, filed May 27, 1992; Baldwin Technology Corporation’s (“Bald...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Sears, Roebuck and Co.’s (“Sears”) motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons stated below, the court grants the motion.
FACTS
Plaintiff Kenneth Sarsha filed this suit against Sears alleging age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621,
et seq.,
and gender...
Views: 0
ORDER There is before the Court the Motion of the Defendant to Withdraw Plea pursuant to Rule 32(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Court has considered the Motion and the transcript of the Change of Plea hearing and finds that the Motion should be denied. At Defendant's Change of Plea hearing the attorney for the government announced that as consideration for Defendant’s plea of g...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action concerns plaintiffs’ claim for reimbursement from the District of Columbia for the costs of special education for Joseph Kroot for the 1988-89 school year. Plaintiffs seek to recover those costs pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA or the Act), 20 U.S.C.A. §§ 1400-1485 (1988).
1
The matter is before the Court on defendants’ motio...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff moves for judgment by default pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(C) against defendant Chief Everest N. Ofoegbu (“Ofoegbu”). For the reasons that follow, plaintiff's motion is granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff commenced the present action on March 1, 1991. The complaint’s five causes of action arise out of an alleged fraudulent contract for the sale of Nigerian lig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF REFERENCE
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case arises out of the leveraged buy-out of all of the stock of Palomar Electric Supply, Inc. (“Palomar”) by Torwest Acquisition Corporation (“Torwest”) on January 30,1988. It is alleged that Marine Midland, one of the defendants and the moving party, directly participated in a common plan or design ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Jeannette Ganousis (“Ganousis”) and Eva Cazares (“Cazares”) have sued E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company (“du Pont”), each claiming injury from a temporomandibular joint (“TMJ”) implant that had used a product bearing the “Proplast” trademark. Proplast was manufactured by Vitek,. Inc. (“Vitek”) with the use of raw materials purchased from du Pont. Vitek has sin...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Geraldine Pilarczyk (“Pilarczyk”) appeals the final decision of Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan (“Secretary”) denying her claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423(d).
1
Pilarezyk now moves for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 56. For the reasons stated in this m...
Views: 0
801 F.Supp. 280 (1992)
CONTICO INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff,
v.
RUBBERMAID INCORPORATED and Rubbermaid Commercial Products, Inc., Defendants.
No. 91-1852C(6).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
August 20, 1992.
*281 Michael H. Wetmore and Alan E. Popkin, Husch, Eppenberger, Donohue, Cornfeld & Jenkins, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
George E. Leonard, Shughart Thomson & Kilroy,...
Views: 0
Page 13035
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is a civil action seeking to restrain and enjoin the defendant, and those acting in concert and participating with it, from assessing, levying or collecting ad valorem personal property taxes from the plaintiff for the 1990 tax year, to the extent that such taxes are discriminatory and unlawful under Section 306 of the Railroad Revitali *30 zation and Regulatory Reform...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case was removed by the defendant from a state court, on the ground of diversity of citizenship. In her complaint, the plaintiff alleges that the prescription antibiotic drug Omniflox, manufactured by defendant, was dispensed to her by a physician, Dr. Maffezzoli, for the condition of sinusitis. Plaintiff alleges that Dr. Maffezzoli gave her some sample packages of...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before this Court is the defendant’s motion for a stay of the proceedings in this action pending determination of a reexamination proceeding in the United States Patent Office, United States Patent No. 4,604,1111 (hereinafter “GPAC” patent *61or “111” patent). Plaintiff, GPAC, Inc. (hereinafter “GPAC”), opposed a stay in this case. This matter is being considered pu...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter arises under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (the “IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-85, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(4)(A).
The history of this case is set out in our opinion of April 24, 1992, where we denied cross-motions for summary judgment, and we...
Views: 1
*1399ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Randy J. Seip commenced this action on June 29, 1992. He asserts three claims for relief against his former employer and the employer’s employee welfare benefit plan. First, he claims that the employer unlawfully withheld benefits under the plan in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Second, he ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Maddelena Herbig, having been removed from her management position within International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) allegedly because of,
inter alia,
her racist treatment of other employees, has decided that she did not deserve to be disciplined, and she has translated that decision into a federal lawsuit, in which a complaint was filed alleging eve...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and on plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37. The motions have been fully briefed and the parties have submitted exhibits forecasting their evidence. This matter is now ripe for disposition.
I.
Facts
Any...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I
This case involves the alleged copyright infringement of home plans. Plaintiff Great Southern Homes possessed an exclu
*610
sive license to market home plans designed by Plaintiff James Gleason. Great Southern entered into an agreement with Osias Enterprises, Inc., (not a party to this suit) to build some of the Gleason homes in Greystone Estates in Williams...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action presents, in essence, the question whether a private lawsuit under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c) (1984), and other federal statutory provisions identified hereinafter, may be instituted against Arkla, Inc., Arkla Exploration Company, Arkoma Production Company, Jerrell Jones, Michael V. McCoy, Bi...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 990 (1992)
Tina C. DeBACA, James Miner, and Elena Anita Moreno, on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, Norman Hickey, Chief Administrative Officer of San Diego County, Brian P. Bilbray, County Board of Supervisors, George F. Bailey, County Board of Supervisors, Susan M. Golding, County Board of Supervisors, Leon L. Williams, Cou...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER On June 7,1991, defendant Bank of Sturgeon Bay (“Sturgeon Bay”) filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon *229 which relief can be granted. Because Sturgeon Bay filed affidavits in support of its motion, the court ordered on July 7, 1992, that it would treat the motion as a motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the court grants the mot...
Views: 0
*59
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff has moved to remand this case to the Circuit Court of Cook County on the basis that removal was defective. For the reasons stated below, the court grants plaintiff’s motion.
FACTS
Plaintiff Corporate Travel Consultants, Inc. filed this class action for injunctive relief and damages in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Plaintiff alleged t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for a motion to compel discovery under Fed. R.Civ.P. 37(a) in an action for an accounting of damages to be awarded pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284. In the prior history of this case, the court granted a motion for summary judgment for the plaintiff, Barry Rutherford, holder of U.S. Patent No. 4,047,478 entitled “Drywall Bead Accesso...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Dr. David .G. Walker, brings this action pursuant to § 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C.A. § 2620, for judicial review of a final decision by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) denying plaintiffs petition to initiate a rule-making proceeding aimed at amending the definition of “polychlorinated biphenyls” (P...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are plaintiffs’ objections to Magistrate Judge Joan B. Gottschall’s June 14, 1991, February 21, 1992, and June 10, 1992 Reports and Recommendations (“Reports”).1 For reasons stated below, the court rejects both the June 14,1991 and the February 21, 1992 Reports and accepts the Magistrate Judge’s June 10, 1992 Report. The court denies Mid-American Growers, Inc.’s (“Mid-Americ...
Views: 2
OPINION
Background
Plaintiff France Stone Company owns 200.92 acres of land, all of which abut a federal and state trunk line highway known as US-24, which is also known as Telegraph Road, in Monroe Township, Monroe County, Michigan. This property is known as the “Denniston Farm”.
There exists at this site approximately 46,000,000 tons of minable dolomite
1
after ...
Views: 0
*26OPINION
Benjamin Ghitelman, an Israeli national, maintained for a number of years a checking account and several certificates of deposit in defendant’s International Private Banking Division. On June 29, 1987, Benjamin and his wife Susana appeared personally at the bank. They met with Esther Obadia, the bank official who handled the Ghitelman accounts, and requested that the accounts be made j...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs Susan Q. Bridges, Virginia D’Aponte and Kimberly Muryasz bring this action against defendants Eastman Kodak Company, Yourdon, Inc., Thomas A. Walker, John Kucik, Michael French, Kevin Cash, Mary Heaphy and David Offenhartz alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991), and alleging pendent clai...
Views: 0
*1437
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR REMAND AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF APPEAL
I.
Background
General Dynamics, a private corporation, has been named as a nominal defendant in a shareholder derivative action against its management. Plaintiffs allege, among other things, fraud by the management of General Dynamics in its weapons ...
Views: 6
OPINION AND ORDER
This case arises out of a claim of gender discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2, 2000e(k). By Stipulation and Order dated January 24, 1992 the parties settled all claims, and defendants agreed to pay plaintiff the reasonable costs, ex...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the court are the motions of plaintiffs, David M. Blandford and John H. Easter, for partial summary judgment on their claims for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 4,678,031 (“the Patent”) and for the priority, validity, and enforceability of the Patent. For the reasons stated below, the motions are granted. I. BACKGROUND On January 27, 1986, plaintiffs filed an applica...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs are past and/or present residents of housing units owned and/or managed by the Philadelphia Housing Authority (“PHA”). Plaintiffs have filed a class action suit against PHA, other local, state, and federal government instrumentalities and officials, lead-pigment manufacturers, and those manufacturers’ trade association. Plaintiffs advance a plethora of claims against...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING HIGH COUNTRY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ZOLLMAN’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter came before the court on High Country Snowmobile’s motion for summary judgment and Esther Zollman’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court heard oral argument on August 17, 1992, and took the matters under advisement. Jeffrey D. Eisenberg of Wilcox, Dewnsup & King...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter was tried to the court beginning April 9, 1992, and ending the following day. Trial was held on plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract against defendant, all other claims having been withdrawn. After review of the evidence and the appli*266cable law, I enter the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
At the commencement of this action, Plaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. § 151, et seq. Hearing on the motion was held on August 19, 1992. Because this action necessarily implicates representation issues that are vested exclusively in the National Mediation Board (NMB), I do not have jurisdiction and the motion to dismiss is granted.
P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The issue here presented is whether defendant’s July 9, 1979 guilty plea to robbery in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County- was intelligent and voluntary and, if not, whether this Court may consider that conviction in determining the defendant’s status as an armed career criminal for sentencing purposes. The Court must also determine whether defendant is a career offender u...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this patent infringement action, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), plaintiff The Upjohn Company (“Upjohn”) seeks a permanent injunction enjoining defendants Medtron Laboratories, Inc., Anthony Imbriolo, and Dominick J. Carlisi (collectively “Medtron”) from continued infringement of U.S. Patent No. 4,139,619 (the “619 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 4,59...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court are six motions filed in anticipation of the retrial of this strict products liability action—five by plaintiffs and one by defendants—addressing a farrago of issues. These motions are fully briefed and ripe for disposition.
Background
This action arises from the death of John Habecker in 1984. Mr. Habecker, a civilian employee at the New Cumberla...
Views: 2
ORDER Plaintiff in the above-styled civil action seeks recovery pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and pendent state law claims for the allegedly improper termination of his employment with Defendant Housing Authority of the City of Grafton (“Housing Authority”). By Order entered June 23, 1992, this Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment regarding the § 1983 claim. Defendants on July 9,...
Views: 0
OPINION
This cause of action was removed from the New Jersey State Courts on or about June 1, 1992. Plaintiffs contend that Defendants’ Notice of Removal was not filed in a timely fashion; consequently, they move to remand. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted.
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs filed this suit in the Superior Court of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration of this Court’s Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand this cause of action to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. This action was originally filed in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs’ original complaint named Daimler-Benz, AG, a German corporation with its principal...
Views: 0
OPINION
This ease arises out of a series of events which transpired during a wrestling meet
*1260
at Dieruff High School, in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on February 2, 1991. Michael Fenstermaker [“Michael”] was a wrestler for the visiting team, which was from Salisbury High School. Defendant Edward Nesfedder [“the coach”] was Salisbury’s wrestling coach. In the course of his bou...
Views: 0
OMNIBUS FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND FINAL ADJUDICATION
Plaintiff Horizon House brought this action against defendants seeking a declaration that the provision of Ordinance No. 300, imposing a distance requirement of 1000 feet for group homes within the township of Upper Southampton, discriminates against people with handicaps in violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C....
Views: 1
OPINION
I. Introduction
A. Procedural history.
Plaintiffs, as limited partners, brought suit against three land investment limited partnerships and against the general partners, defendant Michael H. Myers (“Myers”) and defendant Myers Financial Group, Inc. (“Myers Financial”). The case was tried before the court on November 4-15, 1991.
The parties submitted proposed fin...
Views: 2
Page 13135
ORDER
This matter is before the court on:
1. Plaintiff Multi-Tech Systems, Inc.’s (“Multi-Tech”) motion for summary judgment in the patent case;
2. Defendant Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.’s (“Hayes Inc.”) motion for summary judgment in the patent case;
3. Hayes Inc.’s motion for a preliminary injunction in the patent case;
4. Hayes Inc.’s motion for summary judgme...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.App. § 688,
1
arises from injuries that plaintiff, Martin Wiradihardja (“Wiradi-hardja”), allegedly sustained as a result of a subordinate crew members’ assault while Wiradihardja was aboard the Bermuda Star Line (“BSL”) vessel the S.S. QUEEN OF BERMUDA (the “S.S. QUEEN”). Presently before the Court is BSL’s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Lisa A. Phifer, I. Bibicoff Inc. Pension Trust Fund, Gerald S. Susman and Diana Goldshlack bring this action alleging violations of §§ 11 and 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “1933 Act”), as amended, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77k and 77Z(2), § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act” or “1934 Act”), as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this diversity action, plaintiffs Kenneth and Laura Conte (the “Contes”) seek to recover damages for personal injuries which they allegedly suffered in an automobile accident. Defendant Karen Justice (“Justice”) moves, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order granting her summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the basis that t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In responding to a Freedom of Information Act request from one Larry Pekoskie, the Government released certain materials. One document released to Mr. Pekoskie in a redacted form allegedly referred to information which the Plaintiff David Sterling, a cellmate of Mr. Pekoskie, provided to prison authorities under a promise of confidentiality during an investigation of Mr. Peko...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The instant matter has been referred for the conduct of all proceedings, including trial and entry of judgment with direct appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Before the Court is the Plaintiffs claim for a refund of a $3,000.00 penalty, assessed by the Internal Revenue Service under 26 U.S.C. § 6701, plus interest, costs, and ...
Views: 0
ORDER OF NEW TRIAL During the criminal trial of Defendant for assault on a federal officer, this Court refused to permit a surprise expert witness to testify on behalf of the Defendant because defense counsel (the Federal Public Defender) had failed to disclose the witness in a timely manner. In fact, defense counsel only disclosed the surprise witness when ordered by the Court to do so. Defense c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Robert Gustafson (“Gustafson”) has filed á Notice of Removal (the “Notice”) bringing to this District Court an action originally launched against him by Thomas Rosenquist (“Rosenquist”) and Michael J. Wolff (“Wolff”) in the Circuit Court of the Nineteenth Judicial District, Lake County, Illinois. Based on its initial review of the Notice and the underlying Ros...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider the Court’s prior decision not to revoke an order for pretrial detention based on new information and changed circumstances. The Defendant was originally detained pursuant to the Bail Reform Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 3141, after a hearing before Magistrate Judge Robinson of this Court on April 27, 199...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s and defendant’s cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiff's motion is granted, and defendant’s motion is denied. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Nike, Inc. (“Nike”) filed this suit against defendant Michael Stanard (“Stanard”) alleging trademark infringement, unfair...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF CHARLES R. RICHEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The plaintiff filed the above-captioned case under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, seeking disclosure of various information submitted to the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”, “Commission”) by various telecommunications companies as part of cost justification for proposed “Open Network Ar...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Introduction
This action was brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b) and 2671
et seq.
Plaintiff Paul Stuart (“plaintiff”) seeks damages from the United States Government (“defendant”) for the death of Babette Stuart and injury to plaintiff and his minor son Nicholas Stuart. Plaintiff...
Views: 0
*1049 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Roger Mills (“Mills”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan (“Secretary”) denying Mills’ claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act (“Act”) §§ 216(i) and 223, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423. 1 As is usual in these cases, both, sides now move for summary judgment under Fed....
Views: 0
Page 13170
OPINION
Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) applied for an order of civil contempt against defendants Keith Hammond and Med-Fac Investments, Inc. (Med-Fac), and non-parties John Allen Chalk and the MFI Liquidation Trust (MFI Trust). On July 8, the Court directed those four parties (respondents) to show cause why they should not be held in civil contempt for violating its De...
Views: 0
Page 13174
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”). Defendants move jointly pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment. Plaintiff cross-moves for partial summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ motion is granted, and Plaintiffs motion is denied.
BACKGROUND 1
The events underlying this dispute...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant has filed several motions to revoke the detention order pending against him. The Court has heard testimony relating to these motions on several occasions. It is now prepared to rule. In a superseding indictment dated May 28, 1992, Kenneth Williams is charged with a number of serious offenses including first degree murder, conspiracy, continuing criminal ...
Views: 1
*1544
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment, plaintiffs’ opposition thereto, defendant’s reply and plaintiffs’ surrebuttal; and on plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their complaint by interlineation to add Rollie Morgan (Morgan) as a party defendant to this action, Morgan’s opposition thereto and plaintiffs’ reply. This...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
This case concerns the constitutionality of § 476 of the Federal Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“§ 476”), which amended the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“34 Act”) by adding Section 27A.
See
Pub.L. No. 102-242 § 476, 105 Stat. 2236, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa-1. The amendment affected the limitation period for pending § 10(b) cases under the 34 Act, as w...
Views: 2
Page 13180
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment (Document *177Nos. 70, 75, 85) and on two motions for judgment on the pleadings (Document Nos. 101 and 103). The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) based upon diversity of citizenship of the parties and an amount in controversy exceeding $50,-000.
I. FACTS
In 1966, plaintiff Edward Smith...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 15, 1991, David DeHerrera filed a complaint alleging employment discrimination prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.
Plaintiff has filed a motion to amend his complaint. Plaintiff seeks to invoke several provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (Act), specifically those provisions which (1) enlarge the time within which plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
A three day jury trial in this case was concluded on March 25, 1992. Defendant Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (“WMATA”) was found guilty of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets. Defendant Guy F. Atkinson Company (“Atkinson”) was found guilty of misappropriation of trade secrets. The jury awarded damages in the amoun...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of August, 1992, it is hereby ORDERED that (1) Resolution Trust Company’s (“RTC’s”) motion for summary judgment is DENIED, (2) plaintiffs’ cross-motion is GRANTED except as to their request for costs, (3) the RTC will accept and process plaintiffs’ proof of claim as timely if filed within ten (10) days of the date of this order, and (4) this act...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 288 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
BROWN UNIVERSITY IN PROVIDENCE IN THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS; the Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York; Cornell University; the Trustees of Dartmouth College; President and Fellows of Harvard College, Massachusetts; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the Trustees of Princeton University; the Trust...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Plaintiffs initially filed this action in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on January 4, 1991, seeking damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff Rodney Zeger while attempting to calibrate the back gauges of a sheet metal bending machine manufactured by defendant Joseph Rhodes, Ltd. (“Rhodes”). In their complaint, plaintiffs Rodney and Stacy Zeger assert causes of acti...
Views: 0
OPINION I. Introduction On June 2, 1992, the court ordered an evidentiary hearing to facilitate the determination of a single issue. A resolution of the issue in favor of the defendants will terminate the case, while a resolution of the issue in favor of the plaintiff will render the case trial ready. The question presented can be stated simply: whether the position of Director of Veterans’...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case comes before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for the Entry of a Judgment of Acquittal After the Declaration of a Mistrial and Discharge of the Jury. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 29(c). The Court held a trial on the indictment against the defendant in which the jury was discharged and a mistrial declared sua sponte after the jury informed the court that it was unable...
Views: 0
Page 13203
OPINION
ON THIS DAY came on for consideration W.R. Grace & Co. — Conn.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Reconsideration.
Defendant requests that the Court reconsider its Opinion and Order of February 12, 1992 finding that Defendant is not protected by the Statute of Repose in light of the recent Fifth Circuit decision in Dedmon v. Stewart Warner Corp., 950 F.2d 244 (5th Cir.1992). This Court is, of cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment (Document Nos. 12 and 14). The Court has jurisdiction of the ease pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1988) because the plaintiffs complaint raises a federal question under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 (1988).
I. FACTS
At issue in this case is wheth...
Views: 0
ORDER This action, brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 USC 2671, et seq. is before us on the government’s Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 5), which was opposed by plaintiffs (docket entry 7). The action, based upon an accident occurring on March 24, 1989, was originally filed on August 14, 1990 as Civil No. 90-2095. On January 22, 1991, Judge Pieras dismissed that action as a sanc...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Defendant is charged with violation of 16 U.S.C. §§ 703-711 and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Because the Court is not persuaded that the Government has discharged its burden in this case, the Court FINDS the Defendant, JOHN F. BOOKOUT, NOT GUILTY.
*934
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Defendant consented, in writing, to trial before this Court on October 2...
Views: 1
THE COURT’S OPINION RE: DEPARTURE FROM THE SENTENCE RANGE UNDER THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES
The defendant, William L. Hart, had a tenure of almost 40 years in the Detroit Police Department, culminating in his appointment as Chief of Police by Mayor Coleman A. Young on September 28, 1976, a position which he continued to hold until he was indicted in this matter. He subsequently resigned fro...
Views: 0
Page 13212
OPINION AND ORDER This action for declaratory and injunctive relief arises from alleged violations to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988, et seq. and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States. Plaintiffs John Doe, a former member of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard (PRANG) with over twenty-one years of civilian employment as a National Guard Technician, and Local 393...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Bethlehem Steel, Inc.’s (“Bethlehem”) motion for summary judgment. For reasons that follow, the motion is granted.
FACTS
Plaintiff Rosario Lostumbo (“Lostumbo”) suffered severe knee injuries on November 28, 1988 when he jumped from a scaffold at Bethlehem’s Burns Harbor plant in Chesterton, Indiana and fell on his
*654
knees.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case concerns a far ranging Department of Agriculture entitlement program that paid farmers to leave dairy farming for five years. Specifically, plaintiff seeks to recover payment for 64 cows which he purchased as replacements for heifers that he sold before the program regulations were published.
1
Before this Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs have moved this Court to reconsider its protective order entered on October 15, 1991. The protective order prohibited plaintiffs’ counsel from disseminating or using copies of letters written to the defendants by their counsel. The Court concludes that: (1) the two letters fall within the attorney-client privilege; (2) defendants have not waived the privilege; (3) ...
Views: 0
*710
ORDER
Before the court is a motion for partial summary judgment filed by plaintiff Hei-chelbech and plaintiff-intervenors Reid and Fleming. Plaintiff and plaintiff-interve-nors are incapacitated adults acting through a guardian ad litem, and in their motion, they seek declaratory and injunc-tive relief against defendant employees of the State of Georgia for their policy of n...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In his complaint brought pursuant to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 1973c, the plaintiff, an Hispanic registered voter of Hale County, Texas, seeks an order prohibiting the county and its Commissioners Court 1 from further implementation of voting changes effected without preclearance as required by the Act. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs, seven Black and one Hispanic New York City Transit Authority police lieutenants, brought this action against the City of New York and various of its officers, agencies, agents and employees, alleging that they were denied promotion due to racial discrimination. The complaint invokes 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, 1988, and 2000e-2 (Title VII), as well as the Thi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a consolidated action seeking review of decisions of the Maritime Administration (“MarAd”), the Maritime Subsidy Board (“MSB”), and the United States Coast Guard (“Coast Guard”) concerning a U.S. vessel built with subsidies, Barge 4102, and a wrecked foreign-built vessel, the Fuji. “Seabulk America” is a vessel constructed from the Fuji and Barge 4102, owned by ...
Views: 0
ORDER The Court held a Mental Competency Hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241, on June 22, 1992, wherein Dr. Cabrera, the defendant’s examining psychiatrist testified and the Court was able to observe the defendant. The record also contains a written psychiatric evaluation of the defendant by Dr. Cabrera. (Dkt. # 14). The Supreme Court has articulated a two-part test for determining competency to ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Currently before the court is the motion of plaintiff Exxon Shipping Company (“Exxon”) for summary judgment to vacate an arbitration award (the “Arbitration Award”) in favor of the Exxon Seamen’s Union (the “Union”) which required Exxon to reinstate Randall Fris (“Fris”) as an able bodied seaman rather than discharge him from employment.
1
Jurisdiction is alleged pursua...
Views: 0
Page 13238
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Velveta Golightly-Howell commenced this action seeking damages, declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq.
Defendants are the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union (OCAW); the AFL-CIO; Joseph Misbrener, OCAW’s president; and Dean Alexander, Misbrener’s assistant. In an o...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants the City of Vineland, the Vineland Police Department, Chief of Police Joseph P. Cassisi, Police Captain Mario R. Brunetta, Officer David Tesoroni, Officer Beny Velez, Officer Richard Putnam, Officer Phillip Bocelli, and Officer Peter Cocearo III (the “Vineland defendants”) have filed five motions seeking summáry judgment.
The first motion asks for summary judgment ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
This litigation involves disputes concerning the implementation and termination of
*321
an agreement for distribution in Saudi Arabia and neighboring countries of Canada Dry beverage products by plaintiff, a Saudi Arabian entity. Plaintiff complains of cancellation of the agreement, and defendant Canada Dry Corporation (“Canada Dry”) has interposed thi...
Views: 1
ORDER The above-entitled civil action was filed by the United States of America on April 16, 1992. It not only seeks the forfeiture of certain described real property in rem but states the names and addresses of three possible claimants to that property. Inter alia, plaintiff “requests that due process issue to enforce the forfeiture and to give notice to the interested parties”. On April 20, 1992...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court are the Magistrate Judge’s April 21, 1992 report and recommendation, and objections to that report and recommendation by plaintiff Henry H.
*132
Stafford, Jr. (“Stafford”) and by defendants Sena Puro and Robert D. Levin as
co-executors
of the estate of Arthur Puro, and Louis Puro (collectively the “Puros”). For reasons that follow, all object...
Views: 0
Plaintiffs Thomas and Filomena Prisco own land in Putnam County, New York, that has been contaminated with hazardous waste. In this action they have sued the
*520
State of New York, its Department of Environmental Conservation, various other state agencies, officials, and private companies, to recover for damages to their property and to enjoin all the defendants to restore the pro...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On August 13, 1990, plaintiffs commenced this action alleging RICO and pendent state law claims against defendants Makita Electric Works, Ltd., Makita USA, Inc., and Makita Corporation of America (hereinafter referred to collectively as “Makita”). On May 8, 1992, the court adopted the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bobrick and dismissed this action with prejudi...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss filed by defendants Ismael Betancourt Lebrón and Mercedes Otero de Ramos on May 20,1992. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is hereby DENIED.
I. Background
When examining a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court must accept as true all factual allegations contai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced action, here on remand from the Court of Appeals, plaintiff class’ counsel (“counsel”) seeks attorney’s fees and expenses from the equitable fund created by the approximately $31 million settlement1 of the above-referenced action. This Court initially granted a $1,465,809.00 lodestar award, multiplied by a risk enhancement factor of 1.6, for a total of...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT This court heard plaintiffs’ motions on August 31, 1992. Mark J. Bennett, Esq. appeared on behalf of plaintiffs; Mark R. Fox, Esq. appeared on behalf of defendant. BACKGROUND Defendant Hawaii Planing Mill, Ltd. (“HPM”) is in the business of selling building materials. In connection with this business, HPM issues surety bonds to contrac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant Margaret Paulson pled guilty to the criminal offense of conspiring to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The plea agreement effected between Paulson and the government, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(e)(1)(B), was reduced to writing and filed in the record on March 2, 1992. In accordance with the mandate of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d), Paulson’s plea o...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it defendant José Rivera Ruiz’s Motion to Suppress a confession. The Magistrate held a Suppression Hearing and submitted a Report and Recommendation which recommended that the Motion to Suppress be denied. Upon a thorough review of the record, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should not be adopted, and that the Motion to Suppres...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I Defendant Columbia Savings and Loan Association has moved for summary judgment against the fourth amended complaint in this case involving alleged fraud against Illinois investors purchasing shares in a limited partnership dedicated to constructing an apartment complex in Texas. The investors executed promissory notes which were purchased by prearrangement by Columbia, a Ne...
Views: 2
ORDER Pending before the Court are the original petition for writ of habeas corpus (Document # 1), the motion to reopen evidentiary hearing (Document # 37), and the motion for expansion of the record (Document # 42) all filed by petitioner Joseph Bennard Nichols (“Nichols”). Having considered the motions, the submissions of both Nichols and the respondent James A. Collins (“Collins”) and the ap...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants have moved for reconsideration of our decision, published at 790 F.Supp. 1188 (D.P.R.1992), under Fed. R.Civ.P. 59(e). This motion, if filed within ten days of the initial judgment, allows the court to amend or alter its judgment. Defendants ask the court to reconsider the order which required the Navy to both withdraw its award of a contract for security serv...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This is a prisoner’s civil rights suit alleging assaults and denial of medical treatment. The New York State Department of Correctional Services has moved to dismiss the complaint against it on Eleventh Amendment grounds.
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV dated March 30, 1992, and having noted that no ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment dated July 16, 1992 (docket No. 50), along with defendant’s Opposition dated August 11, 1992 (docket No. 66),
1
and defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment dated July 17,1992 (docket No. 51), along with plaintiffs Opposition dated July 31, 1992 (docket No. 59). For the reasons set forth be...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The appellant, National Management Services, Inc. (NMS), brings this appeal challenging rulings by the United States Bankruptcy Court in approving the motion of the trustee in bankruptcy (the trustee) to authorize settlement of preference claims. In the matter before the court, the trustee moves to dismiss the appeal of NMS contending that NMS does not have standing to bring the...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for damages and injunctive relief alleging various state law claims sounding in fraud and breach of contract. Defendant San Diego Gas & Electric Company (“San Diego”) moves pursuant to Lo
*1190
cal Civil Rule 3(j) for reargument of the Court’s Opinion and Order filed on June 24, 1992.
Chrysler Capital Corp. v. Century Power Corp.,
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This case highlights the traumatic difficulty of providing medical and personal care to dependent, mentally retarded adults. When they are children, their problems are often mitigated by their youth, the energy of their parents, and an educational system that assumes much of the financial burden of caring for them. But as they enter adulthood, the educational sub...
Views: 0
ORDER In order to resolve the issue of whether the government has presented sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant “used or carried” a firearm “during and in relation to a ... drug trafficking crime” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), we must closely examine the factual contexts of the relevant case law. In all the cases cited by both the government and the defendant, the “nexus to the...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendant E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Company, Inc. on April 3, 1991. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is hereby GRANTED.
I. Background
Plaintiff Wilfredo Rosado Serrano worked at the Agricultural Experimental Station of the University of Puerto Rico located in Corozal, Puerto Rico, from 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court upon the motion of plaintiffs to reinstate claims under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The motion has been fully briefed and argued to the court, and is ripe for decision.
BACKGROUND
This action is a consequence of the decline and fall of one of the Commonwealth’s premier thoroughbred horse farms. A pu...
Views: 7
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Patricia Dulceak (“Dulceak”) brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Reid Paxson and the City of Northlake, an Illinois municipality, alleging abridgments of her First Amendment rights. She also alleges common law complaints against both Defendants for libel and slander. Defendants, in a combined motion, request that this court, ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are twenty-eight physicians or groups of physicians specializing in radiology and providing “radiologist services” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1395m(b)(6). (Am.Complaint, ¶ 1). They commenced this action to challenge the amounts they were receiving or were permitted to charge their patients under the Medicare statute for radiologist services. These amou...
Views: 3
OPINION
This bad faith insurance case is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Voluminous evidentiary material has been reviewed and legal authority (including oral argument of counsel) has been considered. The question of whether there is a genuine issue of material fact with .respect to punitive damages must be answered in the negative; defendant is entitled to judgment a...
Views: 0
Page 13314
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 65(a). The Court held a hearing on the motion in Alexandria, Virginia, on August 17 and took the matter under advisement, giving the parties additional time to further outline their positions.
The International Lotto Fund (...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
THE TRIAL of this Action was held before this Court and a jury from 4 May 1992 through 7 May. 1992 in Charlotte, North Carolina. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant and Plaintiff entered into a contract obligating Defendant to provide Plaintiff a custom computer system capable of performing functions specified by Plaintiff. Complaint of Plaintiff at 2. Plaintiff further allege...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant’s amended motion to dismiss
1
the remaining cause of action by the plaintiff, John D. Callan, against defendant Pepsi-
*450
Cola Bottling Co. of Topeka, Inc.
2
Plaintiffs claim alleges a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.,
con...
Views: 0
Plaintiff, Imagineering, Inc., brings this action against defendants Van Klassens, Inc. and Robert Lukingbeal, alleging claims for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271, for unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and alleging pendent state claims for unfair competition and dilution. Defendants have moved, under Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3), F.R.Civ.P., to dismiss this action for lack ...
Views: 3
ORDER Before the court is the government’s Santiago proffer on the superseding indictment (the “original proffer”) and the government’s amendment to the Santiago proffer on the superseding indictment (the “amended proffer”). Defendant Gus Alex (“Alex”) has filed a response to both the original proffer and the amended proffer. Defendant Nicholas Gio (“Gio”) has moved in limine to exclude any testim...
Views: 0
ORDER Now before the court are various pretrial motions filed by defendant Gus Alex (“Alex”). The government filed a consolidated response. Alex filed a consolidated reply. The court addresses each of the motions separately. I. Motion for Early Return of Trial Subpoenas In this motion, Alex seeks an order permitting the early return of trial subpoenas. This motion is granted as the govern...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff was discharged by the defendant hospital after a series of incidents most saliently involving a series of crude sexual epithets directed at a woman colleague while on duty, which plaintiff concedes in his deposition at 167-175. Plain
*324
tiffs explanation as to these incidents is that the epithets were appropriate or accurate (id).
Based on th...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court, acting as emergency judge, is the motion of plaintiff, Burlington Northern Railroad Company (“BN”), for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) enjoining defendants, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes (“BMWE”), Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (“BLE”), Allied Services Division and Brotherhood of Railway Carmen, divisions of Transportation Communications Union ...
Views: 0
OPINION In 1989, while a resident of this state, plaintiff, Jon Grinols, attempted to apply for a Mississippi driver’s license. At that time, Mr. Grinols, who believes that a social security number is (or may become) the “mark of the beast” as prophesied in the Bible, refused to divulge his social security number, 1 and he was not allowed to take the driver’s license examination. 2 See Mi...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the motion of plaintiffs, Fred Amoakohene and Adu Opoku (collectively “plaintiffs”), to reconsider this court’s order of July 23, 1991 dismissing Count I, dismissing defendant City of Chicago (“the City”) from Count II and substituting the United States as a defendant in Count II for the individual defendants. On or about August 15, 1991, this court referred plaintiffs...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it plaintiffs’ Motion Requesting Judgment dated August 22, 1990, and defendants Motion for Dismissal of All Claims dated September 11, 1990, as well as supplemental briefs filed by both sides. For the reasons set out below, plaintiffs’ motion is hereby GRANTED and defendants’ motion is hereby DENIED.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
The material facts cont...
Views: 0
Page 13339
MEMORANDUM DECISION In this dog eat dog world, anything is fair game for litigation in the federal courts. While it may not be news when a dog bites a man, it is notable when a dog bites a female minister. As compensation for her injuries, plaintiff seeks to take a bite out of the defendants’ pocketbooks. Before us now is her motion for summary judgment against James and Constance An-nand and t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The defendant Desantis has moved this court for an order that would grant him the following relief: (1) that the government be directed to respond to his request for a Bill of Particulars; (2) that the government reveal to him similar act evidence it intends to offer at trial pursuant to Rule 404(b), Fed.R.Evid.; (3) that the government fully comply with Rule 16, Fed....
Views: 1
Page 13345
ORDER
. The Court has before it a wave of post-trial motions in this case, including (i) plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Judgment to Include Prejudgment Interest dated April 7, 1992 (docket No. 131-A), (ii) plaintiff’s Motion Submitting Bill of Costs dated April 7, 1992 (docket No. 131-C), (iii) the UPR-related defendants’ Request for a New Trial dated April 9,1992 (docket No. 133), (iv) the ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Veryfine Products, Inc. (“Very-fine”) has filed the instant case under the provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051-1127, seeking equitable and monetary relief against defendant Colón Brothers, Inc. (“Colón”). Veryfine alleges that certain fruit juices and fruit juice drinks which Colón is selling in 10-oz. bottles in Puerto Rico and elsewhere in the Car...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Vernon Williams, an African-American inmate at San Quentin prison has filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that he has been targeted by white prison personnel and treated inhumanely due to his race and his filing of legal actions challenging his conviction and conditions of confinement. Specifically, Mr. Williams alleges that he has been kept in administrative...
Views: 1
ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for retrial, to which defendant has filed a timely opposition, and defendant’s bill of costs, to which plaintiff has filed a timely response. Also before the Court is plaintiff’s application for appointment of counsel. After a two-day trial before the Court sitting without a jury, the Court entered judgment in favor of defendant by an ord...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER John Ronsberg initiated this suit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of the United States after he was assessed a one-hundred percent penalty pursuant to 26 I.R.C. § 6672. Ronsberg was assessed the penalty in his capacity as a “responsible person” for purposes of collecting withholding and employment taxes of Pavement Maintenance, Inc. (PMI). The matter is currently...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a civil action under 26 U.S.C. § 7426 in which the plaintiff bank contends that the defendant United States, acting through the Internal Revenue Service, wrongfully levied on property against which the bank had at the time of the levy a prior lien. The action is before the court for consideration of the United States’ motion to dismiss [doc. 7], in support of which the ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS This court heard defendants’ motions to suppress on August 25, 1992. After reviewing the motions and the supporting and opposing memoranda and hearing witness testimony as well as arguments of *896 counsel, the court denies the defendants’ motions to suppress. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On October 11, 1991, defendant Charles Kapela Stevens (“Steven...
Views: 0
ORDER REVERSING ORDERS OF BANKRUPTCY COURT THIS CAUSE comes before the court on the appeals of two Bankruptcy Court orders brought by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). In the orders appealed from, the Bankruptcy Court denied FDIC’s motion for an 180-day stay of bankruptcy adversary proceedings brought by General Development Corporation (“GDC”) against Southeast Bank, for which FDIC i...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the court to resolve disputed sentencing issues pursuant to Guidelines § 6A1.3 1. On June 8, 9, *140910 and July 15, 1992 the court held a hearing to resolve the following sentencing issues: (1) the amount of heroin to be attributed to defendant Caterini for guidelines purposes; (2) whether Caterini attempted to escape from Fairton Correctional Institute thereby m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
David B. Lilly Company, Inc. (“plaintiff” or “Lilly Co.”) filed suit against the law firm Smith, Gill, Fisher and Butts (“SGF & B”) and one of the firm’s partners, G. Robert Fisher (“Fisher”), alleging malpractice arising from a corporate acquisition. Plaintiff contends that, because of the malpractice, the transaction was improperly structured. As a result, plaintiff a...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the court is the motion of the individual operator defendants, Anthony Amadei, Richard Winn and David Ehrlich, for partial summary judgment dismissing the claims asserted against them pursuant to the Sanitary Landfill Facility Closure and Contingency Fund Act N.J.S.A. 13:1E-100 et seq. The individual operator defendants argue that summary judgment is appropriate because t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiff John Dolence (Dolence) was an employee of defendant U.S. National Bank (Bank) for twenty-eight (28) years until he was discharged as part of a reduction in force on January 11, 1988. On May 23, 1988, Dolence filed a charge with the EEOC alleging that his discharge violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Thereafter, plaintiff ...
Views: 0
Plaintiff Robert Matter filed a complaint against his employers BethEnergy Mines, Inc. (BethEnergy)1, Fawn Mining Corporation (Fawn), and C.L.I. Group of Companies (“CLI”),2 and his collective bargaining representative, United Mine Workers of America, District 5 (Union), in the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County on January 30, 1991, alleging that the corporate defendants had violated the terms...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court at this time are defendant CBS, Inc.’s (CBS’) motion for summary judgment, defendant’s motion to bifurcate the liability and damages phases of the trial of this matter, and plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint. The motion for summary judgment is granted; the motions to bifurcate and to amend are denied as moot.
1
Plaintiff Martin W. Berd...
Views: 2
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13457: Carte Blanche (Singapore) PTE., Ltd. v. Diners Club International, Inc.
Page 13457
OPINION AND ORDER
By this complaint, plaintiff seeks to compel defendant Diners Club International, Inc. (“Diners”), the corporate parent of defendant Carte Blanche International, Ltd. (“CBI”), to satisfy a judgment which it obtained against CBI in 1991. By Opinion and Order dated March 5, 1991 Judge Leisure decided the parties cross-motions for summary judgment and narrowed the issues fo...
Views: 2
Page 13460
OPINION This is an appeal from an order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Francis G. Conrad, J., dated August 15, 1991, dismissing an American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc. Complaint to Determine Dischargeability of Debt. Relying solely on the time-stamp from the clerk’s office, Judge Conrad dismissed the complaint as not timely filed. Am...
Views: 0
Page 13484
ORDER AND OPINION
In this action, plaintiff Hampton International Communications, Inc. (“Hampton”) claims that defendant The Johnson & Hardin Company (“J & H”) breached its agreement with Hampton by failing to effect timely delivery of the Winter 1992 and Summer 1992 editions of the CES Daily News. The case was originally filed in the Supreme Court, New York County, but on July 20, 1992, J & H re...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS On August 12, 1991, plaintiff China Basin Properties, Inc., (“China Basin”) filed the instant complaint in the Superior Court for the State of California, in and for the City and County of San Francisco, against defendant Allendale Mutual Insurance Company (“Allendale”). On August 27, 1991, Allendale removed the action to this Court on the basis of diversity jur...
Views: 0
INTRODUCTION
These actions have been related before this court because they involve the same parties and substantially the same set of facts. The following motions to dismiss and strike by Kentucky Central Life Insurance Company (“Kentucky Central”) and certain directors and officers of Kentucky Central (“Individual Defendants”) are before the court: (1) Kentucky Central’s motion to strike...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an
in rem
forfeiture action brought by the plaintiff, United States of America (“plaintiff”), pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “Act”), 21 U.S.C. § 301
et seq.
The requisite Initial Scheduling Conference and Pretrial Conference were held, and a Non-Jury Trial was conducted on September 3 — 13, 1991; February 13 — 14, ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON DEFENDANT DADE COUNTY’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF PARTIAL FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant Metro Dade County’s Mo
*676
tion for Final Summary Judgment with Respect to Plaintiff Reina Gomez, filed April 24, 1992.
I. Background
Plaintiff Reina Gomez (“Gomez”) alleges that Metro Dade County (“County”) viola...
Views: 1
OPINION & ORDER
In these related actions, over two hundred individual plaintiffs seek to recover their losses as limited partners in shopping centers organized and sold by defendants.
1
Defendants Alan Talansky (“Talansky”), United Growth Properties, L.P. (“United Growth”), AST Properties, Inc. (“AST”), First Atlantic Investment Corp. (“First Atlantic”), United Properties o...
Views: 2
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND INTRODUCTION Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss was scheduled to be heard on August 20, 1992. After a review of the briefs, this court considered it appropriate to submit the motion on the pleadings pursuant to Local Rule 220-1, and now GRANTS the motion. DISCUSSION 1. Factual Background Plainti...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT
Luis Colon Osorio, the defendant herein, has moved to dismiss the indictment filed against him on the grounds that the method of selecting jurors for his grand jury in the Hartford Division of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut violated (1) the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment b...
Views: 1
SECOND OMNIBUS ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Tamiami Partners Ltd.’s (“Tamiami Partners”) Emergency Motion, for Order Enjoining Tribe from Exercising Self Help to Terminate Management Contract. On April 7, 1989, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida (“Tribe”) entered into a Management and Economic Development Agreement (“Management Agreement”) with Tamiami Partners,...
Views: 2
OMNIBUS ORDER THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the motions listed below, which, pursuant to its previous order, the Court deems adopted by all defendants: 1. Defendant Yerco Huerta Rojas’ Motion to Dismiss Indictment and to Suppress Evidence, filed May 15, 1992. 2. Defendant Osvaldo Sotgiu-Quijada’s Motion to Suppress Evidence, Incorporated Memorandum of Law and Request for Evi-dentiar...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT This cause comes before the Court upon Plaintiff Da Rosa’s Motion for Summary Judgment and upon Defendant Transportes Aereos Portugueses, E.P.’s (“Tap Air”) Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This is an action brought by Da Ro...
Views: 2
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13547: McGuire v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, District Director
Page 13547
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
On February 7, 1992, plaintiff Barry Dennis McGuire, an illegal alien, filed a complaint in this Court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief concerning a prior deportation order. The parties appeared before this Court on June 15, 1992, for oral argument on defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, filed pu...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION FOR MISTRIAL
This matter is before the Court on the motion of the defendants for a mistrial. Defendants contend that the Assistant United States Attorney made improper references to the defendants’ right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment during the closing argument in this case. The Court took the matter under advisement to allow the parties and the Court to review a tra...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court1 on the Plaintiff’s, B & H Manufacturing, Inc. (hereafter “B & H”), Motion for Sanctions filed on May 13, 1992. On May 28, 1992, Foster-Forbes Glass Company, a Division of American National Can Company, Inc. (hereafter “Foster-Forbes”) filed its response and on June 8, 1992, B & H submitted its reply. Both parties have submitted exhibits in support of their a...
Views: 0
AMENDED ORDER ON STATUS CONFERENCE AND ORDER FOR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND JURY TRIAL
This cause came before the Court on May 15, 1992 for Status Conference. Argument was heard on the following motions: Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Defendant’s Counsel; Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim of Defendant Lone Star; and Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order. Also discussed at the St...
Views: 1
797 F.Supp. 973 (1992)
AMPAC GROUP INC., Plaintiffs
v.
The REPUBLIC OF HONDURAS, the Ministry of the Treasury and Public Credit of the Republic of Honduras, Corporacion Nacional De Inversiones, an agency or instrumentality of the Republic of Honduras, Comision Negociadora Especial, an agency or instrumentality of the Republic of Honduras, and Benjamin Villanueva, Cesar Batres, Arturo Alvarado, Ra...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND MOTIONS TO STRIKE
THIS CAUSE comes before this Court upon Defendant Dade County’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike; Defendants’ (Robbie Stadium Corporation and Estate of Joseph Robbie) Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike; and, Defendants’ (Estate of Emil Morton, Lottie Morton, and Estate of Lawrence Morton) Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike.
...
Views: 1
OPINION This action was submitted upon cross-motions for summary judgment upon the pleadings and undisputed facts. Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1729, plaintiff sues to recover of defendant the reasonable costs of care or services furnished to the veterans named in the amended complaint 1 to the extent the veterans (or the provider of care or services) would be eligible to receive payment if the ca...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING ALLSTATE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT •
Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) filed the instant diversity jurisdiction action against defendants Sylvester L. Chaney, Lillie M. Chaney (collectively “the Chaneys”), and Karen Matson, seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify the Chaneys in an underlying state court action. The parties are no...
Views: 2
ORDER ON AMOUNTS DUE
This matter is before me for a determination of the amount of interest, liquidated damages, costs and attorney fees to be awarded to the defendants, the trustees of the Colorado Tile, Marble & Terrazzo Workers Health, Welfare and Pension Funds Nos. 6 & 85 (“Trustees”). The facts of these consolidated cases are set forth in my May 22, 1992 order, in which I ruled in favor of t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant Jeffrey T. Wilkinson’s Post Trial Motion for the Reconsideration of the Admission of Evidence. Both defendant and the United States submitted memoranda addressing the questions raised by defendant’s motion. Neither party requested oral argument and the court deems such unnecessary. Having considered the parties’ pa...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter came before the court on July 16, 1992 on cross motions for summary judgment. Both parties agree that no material facts are in dispute and the court should decide this case on the summary judgment motions. The plaintiff, Lands’ End, Inc., is a retailer of merchandise, primarily through its mail order catalogue. In fiscal year 1991, Lands End catalogue sales gene...
Views: 0
*495
MEMORANDUM OPINION .
This matter came before the court on May 29, 1992 on the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The plaintiff has moved, pursuant to Section 306 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act (4-R Act), 49 U.S.C. § 11503, for a preliminary injunction enjoining the defendants from collecting any di...
Views: 3
Page 13602
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Claimant Metrex Research Corporation (Metrex) moves for its attorney fees and expenses incurred in this forfeiture action under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1). The issues are adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid their resolution. Because the position of the United States was not substantially justified, Metrex’ mo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The subjects of this memorandum opinion and order are: (1) defendant Resolution Trust Corporation’s (“RTC”), as receiver for both ABQ Bank (“Old ABQ”) and ABQ Federal Savings Bank' (“New ABQ”), motion to dismiss, filed April 22, 1991 and defendant RTC’s renewed motion to dismiss filed April 22, 1992; (2) defendant ABQ Development Corporation’s (“ABQ D”) motion...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Echostar Satellite Corporation (Echostar) commenced this action asserting claims for: (1) fraud (first claim); breach of contract (second claim); (3) negligent misrepresentation (third claim); and (4) breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing (fourth claim). Pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 3 of the- Federal Arbitration Act, the defendant General Electric Compa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter came on for consideration on the motion for summary judgment brought by defendant Travelers Insurance Company (hereinafter “Travelers”). Having considered the motion, response, and reply, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, I find that defendant’s motion is well taken and is hereby granted. Plaintiff’s complaint against insured Edwar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This § 2254 action challenges a state court conviction for violation of a statute proscribing mask-wearing that conceals the wearer’s identity. In essence, petitioner, a Ku Klux Klan (“Klan”) member, was arrested while distributing Klan propaganda in full klan regalia, including a mask. He was subsequently convicted of violating Virginia Code § 18.2-422, which prohibits...
Views: 0
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on two motions to dismiss. The first is a
*426
motion to dismiss or for more definite statement filed by Defendants EG & G, Inc., EG & G Rocky Plats, Inc., and individual Defendants Carlson, Bell, Evans, Bretz, Poling, Eustrom, Senna, Lippold, Dorr, Oliver, Wise, Mo, Williams, Shainholtz, Chandler, Kallerud, Sherrill, and Weis [hereaft...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This federal “patient dumping”
1
action is brought pursuant to the Emergency Medical Treatment & Active Labor Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd
et seq.
(1988), as amended (“EMTALA”).
2
Two questions, both novel in this circuit, are presented by the parties’ cross-motions in limine. They are:
(1) Are damages recoverable by a plaintiff ...
Views: 2
Page 13612
805 F. Supp. 1298 (1992)
X CORP., Plaintiff,
v.
John DOE, Defendant.
Civ. No. 92-338-A.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division.
August 25, 1992.
*1299 *1300 MEMORANDUM OPINION
ELLIS, District Judge.
Few problems are as vexing as determining what evidence justifies a lawyer's disclosure of a client's confidential information and documents, which the lawyer believes refl...
Views: 1
ORDER This action arises from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s cancellation of plaintiffs’ federal flood insurance policy in March of 1991. The insured property is located on the ocean front in Nags Head, North Carolina. The defendant can-celled the policy because the plaintiffs allegedly failed to relocate their house, which was in danger of collapse from erosion, to a point sufficien...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION This action was brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a public school student of Blair Middle School in Norfolk, Virginia. The matter comes before the Court after a trial on plaintiff’s assertions that school administrators violated her Fourteenth and First Amendment rights. Plaintiff, by her next friend, asserted that her suspension for refusing to change out of a shirt pri...
Views: 1
802 F.Supp. 1180 (1992)
LIGHTNING LUBE, INC., etc., Plaintiff, and Counterclaim Defendant,
v.
WITCO CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, Counter-claimants and Third-party Plaintiffs,
v.
Ralph VENUTO, et al., Third Party Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 87-3243 (WGB).
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
September 2, 1992.
*1181 *1182 *1183 Steven M. Kramer & Associates by Jeffrey Nowak, Blackwood,...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY • JUDGMENT
This is an action brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq., by plaintiff Larry Rucker against his former employer, defendants Pacific FM, Inc. (“Pacific FM”), and its owner and president, James Gabbert. Pacific FM owns and operates a local television station commonly known as “KOF...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of plaintiff Resolution Trust Corporation, as receiver for Peoples Federal Savings Association, to dismiss the counterclaims asserted against it by defendants Philip A. Ryan, Jr., David Treutel, Sr., Arthur J. Chapman, Arland P. Guizerix, Edward C. Milner and David A. Treutel, Jr., on the grounds that this court lac...
Views: 2
*1155
ORDER AND REASONS
A motion for summary judgment was filed by the United States of America (“the Government”) requesting this court to dismiss the third-party complaint of Metropolitan World Maritime Corporation (“Metropolitan”) with prejudice. The Government contends that because contribution is based on a theory of subrogation and because plaintiffs have no remedy against ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to one of the exceptions to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h), which bars suits against the United States based on assault and battery committed by a Government employee, and the plaintiffs’ opposition thereto.
Although defendant’s petition is entitled Motion to Dismiss, it amply ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Currently pending before the court in the above-captioned cause is a motion to strike portions of the complaint’s prayer for relief filed by defendant Stein, Inc. (Stein) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f). Plaintiff Dale L. Nitzsche has not opposed this request.
Plaintiff originally instituted this cause with the filing of a complaint on May 19, 1992 against Stein and defendant In...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the “Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand this Case to the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama.” [Doc. #7] For the reasons that follow, the motion to remand is DENIED.
I. FACTS
It appears to the Court from the pleadings and the affidavits filed by the defendants in support of their motion for summary judgment that the facts of this case are a...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
In this action involving a promissory note, Minority Equity Capital Company, Inc. (“MECCO”) seeks summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 against Eugene D. Jackson (“Jackson”) on the grounds that Jackson is in substantial default. Jackson opposes MECCO’s motion and cross-moves for summary judgment and Rule 11 sanctions contending that under the Subordination Agreeme...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss and plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order. *985FACTS Plaintiff Banks was released from the United States Army after six years of active duty in August, 1958. He attempted to join the Georgia Ar...
Views: 1
Before the court are the following Motions:
(1) Motion of Dooley Tackaberry, Inc., for Summary Judgment
(2) Motion of Freeport-McMoRan for Summary Judgment against Specialty and for Judgment of Default against Kenray
Oppositions have been filed. This matter is before the court on briefs, without oral argument.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
This case arises out of work performed fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. Plaintiff filed a three count complaint alleging constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, breach of contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleges...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendant Ford Motor Credit Company (“FMCC”), an automobile financing company, requires that its customers purchase collision and comprehensive insurance on vehicles financed by FMCC. When FMCC’s customers fail to provide such insurance, the financing agreement entities FMCC to protect its security interest in the financed vehicles by purchasing collateral protection for the veh...
Views: 1
Page 13692
*651
ORDER AND OPINION
Wachovia Bank of Georgia (the “Bank”) appeals from an Order dated November 27, 1991, of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Pursuant to the Order, Chief Bankruptcy Judge Lif-land approved a Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”) between the Bank, Apex Tech of Georgia, Inc. (“Apex Georgia”) and the individual and corporate debtor guar...
Views: 0
Page 13696
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION This action is before the Court on the motion of defendant, Long Haul Express, to dismiss the amended complaint as having been brought outside the period of limitations. *931 I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint, plaintiff Gathol A. Crowe was injured in a motor vehicle accident that occurred in Walker County, Alabama on November 26, 1989. Mr. Crowe asserts that a...
Views: 1
Page 13698
ORDER
Currently pending before the court in the above-captioned cause are cross motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff American Employers Insurance Co. (heréin-after American Employers) and defendant Metro Regional Transit Authority (hereinafter Metro) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The within action was instituted with the filing of a complaint in this court on January 15, 1992 by...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The defendant in this criminal case was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (West 1976 & Supp.1992), after a jury trial. A presentence investigation was conducted in accordance with the scheduling order entered by the Court under Local Rule 213.2, D.Md., and a revised presentence report was forwarded to the Court, af...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER In this section 1983 action, plaintiff claims the defendants violated his First Amendment and due process rights when they discharged him. The defendants have moved for summary judgment. They argue the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata bar plaintiffs First Amendment claim because he litigated the relevant issues before various state agencies and courts, received f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On April 28 and 29, 1992 came counsel for the parties for a hearing on several pending motions. After noting appearances, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Jury Demand of Defendants Anna Shaffer and Shaffer Equipment Company, granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss the Third Counterclaim of Defendants Anna Shaffer and Shaffer Equipment Company and den...
Views: 1
Page 13715
*131ORDER
Currently before the court is a motion to intervene as a party defendant in the above-captioned matter. (Docket # 21) The moving party, the Ohio Edison Company, seeks this intervention pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a) and (b). Rule 24 provides, in pertinent part, the following:
(a) Intervention of Right. Upon timely application anyone shall be permitted to intervene in ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Donna K. Hrabak commenced this Title VII sexual harassment action against her employer, defendant Marquip, Inc., one of its executive officers, Carl R. Marschke, one of its supervisory employees, Sam Opresik, and Marquip’s insurer, General Casualty Company of Wisconsin. Plaintiff alleges that certain actions of defendant Opresik constituted sexual harassment and t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an action for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114, for false advertising, false designation of origin, and false description under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and for trademark counterfeiting under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 and 1116(d) and 18 U.S.C. § 2320. Plaintiff also has brought pendant claims under Texas law.
This...
Views: 0
Page 13731
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Defendants William Weksel and Albert Bromberg (the “management defendants”) have moved for summary judgment in these cases involving alleged fraud in connection with the conduct of business by Information Displays, Inc. (“IDI”), and have requested a pretrial ruling that testimony of the plaintiff Leonard Stuart Levy (“Levy”) now classified as confidential under a protective order...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
This case involves dismissal of a guard at a nuclear facility for failure to make a complete search of a designated area after receipt of an alarm. It appears that failure to state accurately what search had been made may also have been a factor in the dismissal.
Plaintiff sues the local union representing him as collective bargaining agent and its parent inte...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
This case involves a dispute between a purchaser of assets relating to a condominium project (“HMB”) and a homeowners’ association which is alleged to have interfered with HMB’s contract and other rights. HMB initiated a pre-complaint discovery proceeding in the courts of New York State by ex parte order to show cause under CPLR 3102, citing the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Numerous memoranda and orders have recounted the facts of this litigation. The court assumes familiarity with its previous published memoranda and orders dated December 30, 1988, Bernstein v. Crazy Eddie, Inc., 702 F.Supp. 962 (E.D.N.Y.1988) (the 1988 Order); June 16, 1989, In re Crazy Eddie Sec. Litig., 714 F.Supp. 1285 (E.D.N.Y.1989) (the 1989 Order); June 19, 1990, In re C...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the Court has reviewed the petition, all of the
*626
records and files herein, and the attached Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge. The Court concurs with and adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER ON DAMAGES By memorandum order of April 7, 1992,1 found the M/V LUNAMAR II responsible *1245 for damage to plaintiff’s cable line under the Hudson River and requested the parties to submit further papers concerning damages. The following are my findings of fact and conclusions of law on that subject; they incorporate by reference and supplement the findings made in the memora...
Views: 0
*1099
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ija Wilson brought this action against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, and Police Officer Joseph Clifford pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 and 1986, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for false arrest, use of excessive force, and malicious prosecution. Defendants move for summary judgment.
I.
For ...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S MAY 14, 1992 DECISION
On May 14, 1992, this court ruled on various issues concerning plaintiffs’ claims of securities fraud. Part of this court’s order dealt with the proper statute of limitations for claims of violations of Section 10(b) of the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)) and...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On March 16, 1992, defendants filed a motion for partial summary judgment in which they asked the court to rule that plaintiff was barred from pursuing relief with respect to 20 of plaintiff’s 49 alleged trade secrets.
1
As originally filed, defen
*37
dants offered th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case presents a variant on the types of drug-related forfeiture actions most frequently brought by the United States. Claimant Abiodun Oloko (“Oloko”) has moved to dismiss the forfeiture as bearing too attenuated a connection to the substantive drug offense to bring the relevant statute, 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4),1 into play. For the reasons stated in this memorandum...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. # 32). Therein, defendants request that the court: (1) dismiss the portions of Counts I through III which demand a jury trial and seek the recovery of compensatory and punitive damages pursuant to the Civil Rights Act of 1991; (2) dismiss the portion of Count IV which demands a jury trial for plain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant Orem City Corporation’s (Orem City) Motion to Dismiss. A hearing on the motion was held July 14, 1992. Jody Burnett, Esq. represented Orem City and Lisa A. Marcy, Esq., Robert B. Denton, Esq. and Paul Johnson, Esq. appeared on behalf of plaintiff Brad Bangerter. Facts Brad Bangerter is a mentally retarded man who w...
Views: 1
ORDER This case is currently before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss the indictment for violation of defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, or alternatively, to include in the statutory speedy trial period the time during which the government failed to provide to defendants documents the court had ordered it to provide. Facts On April 23, 1992, defendant William M. House ...
Views: 0
ORDER
On August 1, 1991 the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of West Virginia held an adversarial hearing following which secured liens of Defendant Wood Products, Inc. (“Appellant”), as well as a secured lien of Royal Tippling, in the property of Debtor Daugherty Coal Company (“Appellee”) were equitably subordinated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 510(c) (1988). Appellant filed a timel...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Daniel R. Wiley commenced this action contending that Colo. R.Civ.P. 241.24(a) violates his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. He requests that this court declare Rule 241.-24(a) unconstitutional, enjoin defendants from enforcing that rule, grant him a new state-court trial, and award him his costs and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (1) This Court has held a number of on-the-record hearings in this case and has received from counsel for the claimant and the Secretary numerous submissions. In that context, it becomes clear that the vocational expert testified before the Administrative Law Judge (ALT) that (1) the claimant could perform the duties of the job of a cashier, which job was classified at the tim...
Views: 0
FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE INCLUDING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This is an action brought by the United States of America for forfeiture of a certain parcel of real estate which includes a single family residence, located at 9818 S.W. 94th Terrace, Miami, Florida (“9818 residence”). The Government seeks forfeiture of this property pursuant to 21 U.S.C. Section 881(a)(7).1 The case w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION Joseph and Agnes Grabowski are appealing the bankruptcy court’s decision to allow the trustee of Mr. Grabowski’s bankruptcy estate to sell their home pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363(h). The Grabowskis own a home in Hastings-on-Hudson, New York which was appraised a year ago as having a market value of $353,000. There is no mortgage on the property. When the house was purchased...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiff, Scott C. Smith, a prisoner at the Washington State Penitentiary filed this civil rights complaint on November 18, 1991 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and alleges that the Defendant James Blodgett violated Plaintiffs due process rights by placing him in administrative segregation without due process of law. Defendant moved ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This case was assigned to me through the blind, random draw selection process utilized in all cases by this court. That procedure serves two important purposes. First, it prevents judge shopping by any party, thereby enhancing public confidence in the assignment process. Second, it ensures an equitable distribution of the case load among the judges of this court. Once assigned, a j...
Views: 1
ORDER
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (ADM) brought this action against the United States of America on behalf of itself and as the common parent of an affiliated group of corporations. ADM is seeking a refund of federal taxes along with interest paid to the United States for the tax years 1975 through 1978. The parties have filed cross motions for partial summary judgment. (docket # 17 and 19) Th...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff filed this case pro se, but the Court has since appointed counsel for plaintiff from the Civil Pro Bono Panel. Plaintiffs original complaint alleged that the defendant had discriminated against her on the basis of her race and her family responsibilities in violation of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act. Plaintiff has subsequently filed an amended com...
Views: 0
STATEMENT OF REASONS OF IMPOSING SENTENCE I.Findings of Fact The probation office has conducted an extensive presentence investigation (PSI) in this matter. Rule 32, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C. § 3552. The court has ordered certain amendments to the report because substantial portions of the reported information is, in fact, irrelevant to Peter Jackson. The parties have p...
Views: 3
ORDER
Attached is a memorandum based upon the transcript of the decisions rendered orally on June 16, 1992, regarding the objections to the Presentence Report of the defendant Raymond J. Patriarca. This memorandum adds citations to the law and the evidence; deletes for publication colloquy and other non-essential remarks (with such deletions noted by asterisks); clarifies some language; a...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction presented by codefendants Electric Mutual Liability Insurance Company (“EMLIC”) and General Electric Company (“GEC”). For the reasons fully discussed below, the Court finds the grounds for dismissal in said motion to be meritless.
The present cause of action arose from a motor ...
Views: 0
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT New Destiny Development Corp., Paul Limone, Eugene O’Neill, Liberty Properties, LTD., and Liberty Property Associates Limited Partnership (collectively referred to as “plaintiffs”) bring this action against Samuel Piccione, Jr., and Scalesse, Scalesse and Piccione (collectively referred to as “defendants”). This action arises over a property foreclos...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1575 (1992)
Ernest L. JORDAN, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
SOUTHERN WOOD PIEDMONT COMPANY, ITT Rayonier, Inc., ITT Corporation, and The Dow Chemical Co., Defendants.
R.J. FOREMAN, Sr., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
SOUTHERN WOOD PIEDMONT COMPANY, ITT Rayonier, Inc., ITT Corporation, and The Dow Chemical Co., Defendants.
Civ. A. Nos. CV191-108, CV191-063.
United States District Court, S.D. Georgia...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Having considered all of the documents relevant to the plaintiff’s motion for perma *248 nent injunction and all of the evidence presented to the Court in the week-long hearing, the Court concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT A. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff, Charles L. Arnold, as guardian ad litem for H.B., filed this action on November 14, 1991 ...
Views: 2
ORDER INTRODUCTION On June 29, 1992, this court granted Valley Recreation Products, Inc.’s, defendant, motion for summary judgment of noninfringement. On July 28, 1992, defendant filed a bill of costs to which Arachnid, Inc., plaintiff, objects. Defendant’s bill of costs seeks the following: $3,794.81 for court reporter’s transcripts; $1,016.88 for printing; $676.00 for witnesses; and $6,668.16 fo...
Views: 0
Page 13803
OPINION
Before the court is the motion of defendants William Fauver, Patrick Arvonio, and Timothy Dill to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Background
Plaintiff Daulton Banks is a prison inmate currently incarcerated at Northern State Prison. Banks alleges that on April 2, 1992, following a visit by his wife, he was i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Defendants Donald Vaughn, William Winder, and Thomas Stachelek have moved for Summary Judgment in the above captioned case. For the following reasons, the motion will be granted. Plaintiff, a prisoner at the State Correctional Institution at Graterford (“SCIG”), has sued Donald Vaughn, Superintendent of SCIG; William Winder, Deputy Superintendent of Operations; and Thomas Stache-le...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
Background
The Plaintiffs are the Oklahoma Nursing Home Association, an association of Oklahoma nursing facilities, and six private nursing homes. Many of the Association’s members, and the six nursing home Plaintiffs, participate in Oklahoma’s Medicaid program. Defendant, Benjamin Demps, Jr., is the Director of th...
Views: 2
TRANSFER ORDER
This litigation presently consists of eight actions pending in the following districts: three actions in the District of Delaware; two actions in the District of Colorado;1 and one action each in the Central District of California, Northern District of California and Southern District of New York. Before the Panel is a motion by the Northern California plaintiffs to centralize thes...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to 42
US. C.
§ 1983, the plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated his constitutional rights by demonstrating deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 64 at A1-A8.) The plaintiffs amended complaint originally named Correctional Medical Systems, Inc. (“CMS”), Dr. Robert Hooper, Dr. Benjamin Robinson, Nurse Marga...
Views: 1
RULING AND ORDER
Defendants move for partial summary judgment on or, in the alternative, to dismiss, Count YII (RICO) of plaintiff's amended complaint (revised). Defendants argue (1) that plaintiff cannot establish the existence of an enterprise separate and distinct from the persons alleged to have associated with the enterprise, (2) that plaintiff failed to allege injury “by reason of” ...
Views: 0
802 F. Supp. 208 (1992)
Edward Charles PICKENS, Petitioner,
v.
A.L. LOCKHART, Director Arkansas Department of Correction, Respondent.
No. PB-C-91-331.
United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division.
September 2, 1992.
*209 *210 Jeffrey M. Rosenzweig, Little Rock, Ark., for petitioner.
Olan W. Reeves, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, Ark., for respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HENRY ...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS BASED ON LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY
The question presented for decision is whether defendant members of the Los Angeles City Council have absolute immunity from being sued for indemnifying police officers found by a jury to have used excessive force in violation of the Constitutional rights of the victim citizens.
If the defendants prevail...
Views: 0
ORDER Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”) issued a deluxe mobilehome owner’s policy to John and Margaret Dillard on January 30, 1988. Thereafter, Michael Griffin sued the Dillards in the Superior Court of Tift County seeking damages for his injuries. The Dillards asked Allstate to defend them. Allstate filed a declaratory judgment action in this court seeking a declaration that it has no du...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motions to dismiss the first amended complaint for failure to state a claim.
Plaintiff William H. Viehweg brings this diversity action for abuse of process against five defendants. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
According to his complaint, Viehweg filed a petition in state court against defendants ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner, Lewis E. Ashker, seeks habe-as corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After consideration of the record, briefs, and arguments of counsel, the Court concludes that Petitioner is entitled to relief. Accordingly, his petition shall be granted. Background Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder in the death of Jerry Plihal on June *591 10, 19...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this action, plaintiff United States of America seeks forfeiture of defendant property, a residence which it alleges was used to facilitate the sale of narcotics. 21 U.S.C.A. § 881(a)(7). Claimant Gussie Gantt, the record owner of the defendant property located in Montgomery County, Alabama, has filed a claim and contests forfeiture, claiming to be an innocent owner....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Judge Alcee Hastings, a federal district court judge, was removed from office by the United States Senate after he was convicted on articles of impeachment on October 20,1989. Impeachment is an extraordinary remedy. As an essential element of our constitutional system of checks and balances, impeachment must be invoked and carried out with solemn respect and scrupulous ...
Views: 0
The parties entered into a Management Agreement for the conduct of Class III gaming on the defendant’s reservation on March 7, 1991. Pursuant to the agreement, plaintiff made a cash payment to the defendant and purchased the gaming assets of a prior casino management company. Following a change in tribal government, plaintiff was advised that because the agreement had not been approved by the B...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending is the Government’s motion to strike findings of fact and conclusions of law. This Defendant was tried by Magistrate Judge Notzon on charges that he violated 16 U.S.C. §§ 703-711. After a bench trial, Judge Notzon prepared findings of fact and conclusions of law. He concluded that the Government had failed to prove the various counts beyond a reasonable doubt. On April...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Richard Graff has filed an emergency motion for an injunction pend*585ing appeal. FRCP 62(c). See FRAP 8(a). In connection with that motion, the court has considered plaintiff’s motion itself; defendant City of Chicago’s memorandum in opposition to the motion; the oral arguments of counsel; the various materials attached to the motion and the memorandum in o...
Views: 1
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL
This is a negligence action brought by Edward Manes (“Manes”) against the Metro-North Commuter Railroad (the “Railroad”) pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. § 56
et seq.
The action arises from an accident on February 6, 1990 in which Manes fell off the Cos Cob railroad bridge into water below while empl...
Views: 0
OPINION This case involves claims of willful copyright infringement based on defendant’s public performances of copyrighted musical compositions, which were broadcast over radio station WACR-FM in Columbus, Mississippi. Presently before the court is plaintiffs’ unrefuted motion for summary judgment. Although this court cannot grant summary judgment by default, i.e., simply because there is no o...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Craig L. Parshall, attorney for some of the defendants in the above-captioned removal action, has filed a motion seeking reconsideration of an order by the court dated July 13, 1992 awarding the plaintiffs attorneys fees in the amount of $1,300 under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). The July 13 order followed a June 15, 1992 decision and order in which the court determined that the def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund and Trustee Howard McDougall (collectively “Central States” or the “Fund”) bring this two-count complaint against Plymouth Concrete, Inc. (“Plymouth”). Count I seeks the payment of contributions owed for the period of September, 1991 through February, 1992, based on employee work history as report...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is now before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 (Doc. 24). Plaintiff has responded (Doc. 29) and opposes the motion. Because matters outside the pleadings are presented to the court in defendant’s motion, it shall be treated as one for summary judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b). For the reas...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
On December 2, 1991, the court dismissed all five counts of this uncertified class action brought by twenty-one shareholders (“the plaintiffs”) against the Travelers Corporation (“Travelers”), Edward H. Budd (“Budd”), Thomas O. Thorsen (“Thor-sen”), and Richard Shima (“Shima”) (collectively,. “the defendants”), for violations of federal...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
This is an action under the National. Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amend
*1242
ed, (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 to 4347,
1
challenging the defendants’ decision to allow the Pennsylvania Army National Guard Aviation Support Facility and Company G, 104th Aviation (“104th Aviation”)
2
to relocate its training base to the Mi...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendants Parker Hannifin Corporation (“Parker”) and RG Industries (“RG”) have moved for summary judgment on each count of plaintiff MHB Distributors’ (“MHB”) Amended Complaint. For the reasons that follow, defendants’ motion will be granted.
I.
When considering a summary judgment motion, the court must take as true the evidence of the non-movant and draw all justifiabl...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs are a group home for recovering drug addicts and alcoholics and its residents. They seek a preliminary injunction from this court preventing the Township of Cherry Hill from interfering with their rental and occupancy of a house located in a single family residential zone in Cherry Hill. The complaint and an application for a temporary restraining order were filed on Ma...
Views: 3
TRANSFER ORDER
This litigation presently consists of five actions pending in the following districts: three actions in the Southern District of Florida; and one action each in the Northern District of Texas and the Southern District of Alabama.1 Before the Panel is a motion by Marine Transportation Service Sea-Barge Group, Inc. (Sea Barge), the owner and operator of a barge identified as GULF FLE...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Timothy Anderson, incarcerated at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution, seeks redress from prison officials who allegedly confiscated $150 in United States currency found in his possession. He commenced this action by filing the following materials: (1) a “Notice of Writ of Habeas Corpus-Writ of Mandamus Pursuant to the Appropriately Respective Statutes Coupled under an...
Views: 1
On August 21, 1992, the court issued a decision awarding damages to the plaintiff. As part of the award, the court assessed punitive damage against defendant John Dray in the sum of $20,000.00. Soon after the judgment was entered, the court had second thoughts about the suitability of that award and decided to reconsider the grant of punitive damages on its own motion. Several meetings were held w...
Views: 0
ORDER
Regina Chesir and Gloria Johnson brought this case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that the defendant has violated their rights under federal law in its administration of the rent assistance program for the city of Milwaukee. Another plaintiff, Betty Covington, has already settled her claims. In April 1991, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. After an ...
Views: 0
RULING ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND
Plaintiffs filed this suit against John E. Graham & Sons (“Graham”), Offshore Trawlers, Inc. (“Offshore Trawlers”), Offshore Marine, Inc. (“Offshore Marine”) and Atlantic-Richfield Company (“ARCO”) in state court to recover damages arising from personal injuries that allegedly occurred when plaintiff was being transferred from a fixed platform owned ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
This order addresses the question of whether a litigant, proceeding in forma pauperis [IFP] in a civil rights action, is entitled to have the United States shoulder the expenses associated with subpoenaing witnesses for trial on behalf of an IFP litigant. The above question is one of first impression in this circuit. See Merritt v. Faulkner, 697 F.2d 761, 768 (7th Cir.1983), ce...
Views: 1
Page 13954
*136
OPINION OF THE COURT
This case presents claims in contract and tort to recover damages for property damage and economic loss caused by fire. Now before the Court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment, asking the Court to dismiss all claims.
I.FACTS
In late 1976 or early 1977, the Koeze Company entered into a sales agreement with defendant Proctor & Schwartz, I...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION
Plaintiff Towers Financial Corporation (“Towers”) has moved, by Order to Show Cause, for a temporary restraining order barring defendant Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (“D & B”) from publishing a Business Information Report (“BIR Report”) on Towers pending expedited discovery and hearing on Towers’ motion for preliminary injunction. Towers alleges that because the proposed BIR R...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action by two former clients charging their former attorneys with malpractice. In June of 1991 plaintiffs moved for summary judgement on the complaint, while defendants cross moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for judgment in their favor on a counterclaim for unpaid legal fees. By Opinion and Order dated October 4, we granted summary judgment for ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The motion will be denied.
*1476
FACTS
This action' arises out of the alleged contamination of the Humboldt Yard property (the site) in Minneapolis. Plaintiff Soo Line Railroad Company (Soo Line) owned a parcel of property ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 4, 1991, Plaintiff Cabot Corporation (“Cabot”) filed this motion for a preliminary injunction against one of its former employees, Defendant Gregory King (“King”) and Defendant Sid Richardson Carbon & Gasoline Company (“Sid Richardson”). Both sides submitted affidavits and other supporting material. The hearing in this matter was conducte...
Views: 0
Page 13960
ORDER
The Court has received proposed Report and Recommendation for entry of Summary Judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1) from United States Bankruptcy Judge Mary Davies Scott. After careful review of that Report and Recommendation, and the timely objections received thereto, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in its...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT The following matters are before the Court: the Defendant Northwestern National Life Insurance Company’s (“NWNL”) Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 18), the Defendant James H. Fair-cloth’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 20), the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 26), Defendant James H. Faircloth's Response to the Plaintiff’s ...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
The plaintiff, Brotherhood Railway Carmen Division (“BRC”), is a division of the Transportation Communications International Union (“TCU”) which represents car-men in the railroad industry, and is the duly authorized collective bargaining agent for thirteen carmen employed by the defendant, Green Bay & Western Railroad Company (“Green Bay”). Complaint at ¶ 5. Green Bay is in th...
Views: 0
Page 13968
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
The Motion of plaintiffs JULIA GOMEZ,
et al.
for attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 came on for hearing regularly on May 11, 1992.
Having reviewed the papers filed in connection with this matter and being fully apprised of the relevant facts and law, the court finds as follows.
I. Facts
This case aro...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. Introduction and Procedural History
Louise Ogima originally filed this suit in the 21st Judicial District Court for the Parish of Livingston, Louisiana against Marsha Rodriguez and her automobile insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm). Plaintiff claimed that she sustained damages because of the negligent manner Rodriguez was driving her vehicl...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL
After a three-day jury trial and pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29(b)-(c), the Defendant, Joseph M. Roberto, has moved for a judgment of acquittal following his conviction on a one-count indictment of receiving or soliciting a gift or thing of value because of any of his actions, decisions, or other duties as a Trustee of the International...
Views: 6
DECISION AND ORDER
On January 28, 1991, plaintiffs filed a Complaint against defendants alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as well as other state law causes of action, including misrepresentation and violations of the Wisconsin Organized Crime Control Act. Now before the Court are the motions to dismiss of defendant Grant Thornton, defen...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff Dennis Zatterstrom’s (“Zatter-strom”) application for attorney’s fees and motion for entry of judgment. The motions were fully briefed and this Court now rules on the pending motions. The motions raise the single issue of whether this Court’s July 29, 1991 remand order was a “sentence four” or a “sentence six” order, under the...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ motion to dismiss (doc. 24), the Plaintiffs’ response (doc. 25), and the Defendants’ reply (doc. 26). The issue before this Court is whether a high school student at a public school has a cause of action under § 1983 when the student has been repeatedly harassed and assaulted by her classmates and ...
Views: 0
ORDER REVERSING DECISION OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT This cause is before the Court on the appeal of the bankruptcy court’s February 23, 1989 decision 96 B.R. 142 disallowing the United States trustee’s collection of fees pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1129(a)(12). By Memorandum of Opinion and Order dated December 29, 1988, 95 B.R. 79, as amended by Supplemental Order dated February 23, 1 the bankru...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY INJUNCTION This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s petition and amended petition for a temporary injunction (docs. 1 and 28). The Plaintiff filed a Memorandum in support of its motion (doc. 21). The Plaintiff also has written a Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. This was never properly filed with the Court. However, the Plaintiff delivered a copy ...
Views: 1
Page 13993
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Communications Transmission’s Motion For Summary Judgment, filed February 7, 1992. Having reviewed and considered this motion and the applicable responsive pleadings and exhibits, this Court is of the opinion that this motion should be DENIED.
In this action the dispute centers upon the meaning and interpretation of a clause in the letter agreement...
Views: 0
Page 13997
*826 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 10), the Defendants’ Response (doc. 13), the Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Supplement its Response (doc. 14), and the Plaintiff’s Supplemental Memorandum (doc. 15). The Defendants’ Motion for Leave is granted. Therefore, all matters ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court are defendant District of Columbia’s motion to dismiss and plaintiff’s response. Upon consideration of the entire record, the Court grants defendant’s motion and dismisses plaintiff’s case. On January 18, 1990, plaintiff filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the District of Columbia, the District of Columbia Department of Corrections, and several correctional ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provides for thr...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause came on before the Court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment, filed March 4, 1992. By memorandum filed on June 17, 1992, the plaintiff requested an expedited hearing or ruling. Accordingly, the Court held a hearing on the motion on July 24, 1992.
This case involves alleged unc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Police from the Chicago suburbs of Oak-brook Terrace and Waukegan arrested Craig Yattoni (“Yattoni”) for crimes that he did not commit. Yattoni has sued both municipalities and the individual officers responsible for the arrests, claiming under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) that the arrests violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizure...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
The Hobart Corporation (“Hobart”) and Intedge Industries, Inc. (“Intedge”) are co-defendants in this personal injury action. Hobart moves this court to 1) strike the answer and discovery responses of Intedge, and 2) for an order granting summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The amount in controversy exceeds $50,-000. Plaintiffs are citizens of Massachusetts and both de...
Views: 0
Page 14011
OPINION AND ORDER
We have before us plaintiffs Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) motion for reconsideration of this court’s decision of October 31, 1991. See Cooperativa de Ahorro v. Kidder Peabody & Co., 777 F.Supp. 153 (D.P.R.1991). There, we found plaintiff’s securities law claims time-barred.
The motion for reconsideration makes reference to the recent passage of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporatio...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM I. Petitioner has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and an accompanying motion for a stay of execution of her sentence or bail pending a decision on her petition. The petition and motion were filed shortly before the closing of the Clerk’s office on Friday, September 4, 1992. Petitioner alleged that she had received notice that day of an order to commence the following m...
Views: 0
OPINION
This action arises out of the shipment of a bake oven by the defendant, Consolidated Freightways, Inc. (“Consolidated”) to the plaintiff, Main Road Bakery, Inc. trading as Upper Krust Bakery (“Main Road Bakery”) which was completely damaged by Consolidated before delivery. Presently before the court is Consolidated’s motion for summary judgment.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
On...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Arlin Shields (“Shields”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan (“Secretary”) denying Shields’ claim for disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act (“Act”) §§ 216(i) and 223, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423.
1
As is usual in these cases, both sides now move for summary judgmen...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER INTRODUCTION This matter is before the court upon defendants’ motion for summary judgment, or, in the alternative, partial decertification of the class. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion is denied in its entirety. The background facts of this case have been set forth in the court’s order dated November 29, 1991. The court incorporates additional facts as they ...
Views: 0
Page 14045
This is an appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Court which found appellant Joseph Bernstein [“Bernstein”] in contempt and which had ordered him to pay one *863thousand dollars ($1000) in legal fees and costs to the debtor, David Tardo [“Tardo”], d/b/a/ City of New Orleans for Visitors.
This bankruptcy appeal was submitted on briefs without oral argument on a former date.
After considering the b...
Views: 0
ORDER
The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the undersigned Magistrate Judge of District Court on March 16, 1992, on Defendant’s Motion in Limine.
Based on all the files, records and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
■1. Defendant Kawasaki Motors Corporation’s Motion in Limine is GRANTED.
2. The attached memorandum is herein incorporated.
MEMORANDUM
I. FACTS
Defendant ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER In this appeal from orders of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Puerto Rico, appellants Liliane Unanue and Emperor Equities, Inc. (“Emperor”) make a facial and as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of the Puerto Rico provisional remedies statute, 32 L.P.R.A.App. Ill R. 56. Finding no constitutional infirmity in the statute, we affirm the bankruptcy...
Views: 2
OPINION
This case, tried to the court without a jury, is brought by plaintiff Dr. Adam Lande against Dr. Michael S. Komarow and Dr. Thomas A. Koshy, his former colleagues in an incorporated medical practice at which he ceased working in 1987. Plaintiff claims that he is due certain sums from the defendants representing the value of his shares in the professional corporation and compensati...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the motion of the United States of America (the “Government”), pursuant to Section 157(d) of Title 28, United States Code, 28 U.S.C. § 157(d), to withdraw the reference of certain bankruptcy cases entitled In re Coated Sales, Inc. et al., case Nos. 88 B 11331-11336. As explained below, the Government’s motion is denied. The Debtors in these c...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief and money damages in which plaintiffs seek to have defendants enjoined from using any form of state power to prevent plaintiffs and their authorized agents from operating certain gaming activities on Indian trust lands within the City of Milwaukee. In addition, plaintiffs seek .a declaration of the Forest County Pot...
Views: 0
This Court having considered the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and having concluded that the findings and conclusions suggested therein are correct and in accordance with applicable authorities, and having considered any objections timely filed thereto; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Petition for Perpetuation of Evidence and for Temporary Restraining Order...
Views: 0
Page 14068
AMENDED MEMORANDUM ORDER I Christobol Solis has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, seeking relief from a state conviction for criminal sale and possession of cocaine, arguing that the evidence did not support the convictions, that a missing witness instruction should have been given, that the entire panel interviewed as potential jurors in a case with a...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff John Montgomery (“Montgomery”) brings this action against defendants William Scott, Robert Nearing, John Fer-ster and William Snider to set aside the administrative forfeiture of $32,000 in United States currency. Plaintiff challenges the forfeiture on two grounds: first, that he was deprived of his Fifth Amendment right to due process because the United State...
Views: 0
RULING RE MOTION TO COMPEL Now pending before the Court is the Motion of Calavar Corporation (“Calavar”) to Compel a Second Independent Medical Examination of the plaintiff by Dr. James C. McDaniel. Plaintiff objects to a second examination on two grounds, including (1) the first examination by Dr. McDaniel occurred only nine months ago on June 12, 1991; and (2) there has been no change in the p...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case presents an action by a sales representative to recover commissions with respect to sales consummated after he was terminated. Both parties move for summary judgment, agreeing that the relevant facts are not disputed and that the matter is ripe for disposition as a matter of law. The Court has reviewed the briefs and other matters presented, heard arguments on...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs brought this action under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the Clean Water Act (“CWA” or “the Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251
et seq.,
to obtain injunctive relief, a declaratory judgment, and money damages. Defendants have moved for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
1
Plaintiffs are two married c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is a civil rights case in which the parties have consented to the entry of judgment by the undersigned. Pending is plaintiffs renewed motion to empanel a jury and allow the award of compensatory and punitive damages. For the reasons stated below, plaintiffs motion shall be denied.
On January 5, 1989, plaintiff filed the present action alleging, among other t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM RULING Pending before this court is a Motion To Dismiss filed by the defendants in this case. On October 17, 1991, a pleading styled “Inmates of African Descent- FCI Oakdale vs. U.S. Department of Justice, et. al., Application For Writ of Mandamus Under 28 U.S.C. 1361 and Class Action, Seeking In-junctive Relief Jurisdiction and Declarative Judgment and Damages Pursuant to 28 U.S.C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This motion and cross-motion for summary judgment brought pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56 arises from disputed interpretations of two electrical installation contracts. The plaintiff F. Garofalo Electric Company, Inc. (“Garofalo”) moves for summary judgment on the first cause of action. The defendant Hartford Insurance Company (“Hartford”) cross-moves for summar...
Views: 0
OPINION ON REMAND
1.
Introduction.
Having been sued in state court by people who bought houses from General Homes, the banks removed the action on the ground that it was related to the bankruptcy of General Homes. An independent case that touches transactions that also happened to be part of a bankruptcy is not removable. This case will be remanded.
2.
Background.
...
Views: 1
Order on Motion to Remand Robert Creighton filed a motion to remand this case to the Secretary of Health and Human Services based on new and additional evidence. Prior to the aforementioned motion, the Secretary of Health and Human Services denied his application for Disability Insurance Benefits. 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423(d). Jurisdiction over Mr. Creighton’s petition for judicial review is c...
Views: 0
*1211 ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs originally brought this civil rights and declaratory action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the United States Constitution and the Arizona Constitution, challenging Arizona Revised Statutes § 36-2152 and § 36-2153 on their face and seeking declaratory judgment that the statutes are unconstitutional and permanent injunctive relief against t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the separate summary judgment motions of defendants Interstate Brands Corporation, d/b/a Dolly Madison Cake Company (“Dolly Madison”) and Bakery Confectionery and Tobacco Workers’ Local Union 218 (“Union”).
1
NATURE OF THE CLAIM
In this action, plaintiff Linda L. Baker alleges that her former employer, defendant Dol...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On August 10, 1992, Financial Control Associates, Inc., (FCA) filed its complaint alleging violation of its copyright on the “Mortgage Controller” by Equity Builders, Inc., Robert V. Bundy, Benjamin F. Blair, and Dave Anderson.
1
The defendants produce a product called the “Equity Builders.” The purpose of both products is to provide a system for prepayment...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs sue defendants Ronald J. Deer, Robert Olszewski, and the Borough of Bellevue (hereinafter “Bellevue”), alleging federal claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and pendent state claims for conversion, assault, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, defamation and negligence. Plaintiffs sue Deer individually and in his official capacity as the e...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER Defendants have moved to suppress the fruits of governmental electronic surveillances authorized by Hon. Gerard L. Goettel, and for additional relief. 1 While conceding that the agents sought to avoid taping unnecessary material and to minimize the surveillance, the defense points to inclusion of irrelevant conversations in the material actually taped as indicating a violat...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM In this action for a declaratory judgment brought by International Insurance Company against its insured, Newmont Mining Corporation to declare certain environmental-impairment liability policies void or not affording coverage, the carrier seeks certain discovery from the company which opposes it on the ground of attorney-client privilege. It appears that the company itself defende...
Views: 2
Page 14135
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This Court has received and reviewed the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Grubin dated August 6, 1992 in the above-captioned action. No timely objections to the Report and Recommendation have been made by the parties to this action.
See
Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The Court has considered the Report and agrees w...
Views: 1
ORDER.
The plaintiffs in this case first sued officials of the State of Alabama over 20 years ago claiming that conditions at facilities operated by the Alabama Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation violated residents’ rights under state and federal law. Six years ago, on September 22, 1986, the 'court approved a consent decree which resolved the parties’ continued conflicts ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR REMAND AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT Arthur Smith appeals from a final judgment of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying his application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423. Jurisdiction over Mr. *935Smith’s petition for judicial review is conferred on this court by 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). I. Mr. Smi...
Views: 0
ORDER OF FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THIS CAUSE is before the court on motion of defendants for summary judgment in the above styled cause. Upon consideration of the motion, the oral argument of the parties and the record in this cause, the court finds as follows:
Plaintiff, Robert Landry, was employed by Bechtel Construction, Inc. as a welder. Plaintiff has worked in four nuclear plants ...
Views: 1
RULING
This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of the Court’s prior order denying a jury trial on the plaintiff’s sex discrimination claim and on his alternative request that the Court recertify the order for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
Upon reconsideration, the Court adheres to its prior ruling on the jury trial issue. In this regard, t...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is an action seeking injunctive relief against defendant G. William Diamond, the Secretary of State of Maine (“the State”). Plaintiffs, the Libertarian Party of Maine and 18 of its members (“the Party”), seek to force the State to place the names of the 18 members on the ballot for the 1992 general election. These members want to run for United States Congressman...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case is before the court on appeal from a bankruptcy court decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
1
In its September 20, 1991 order, the bankruptcy court found Kimco Leasing, Inc. (“Kimco”) and Frank A. Webster (“Webster”) in contempt of court for violating the permanent injunction of 11 U.S.C. § 524 and awarded attorney fees and costs in the amount ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT PETITION
A Criminal Justice Act [“CJA”] petition and supplemental petition have been presented to this Court seeking attorneys’ fees in excess , of $10,000. Counsel for defendant Alfonso Ramon Diaz [hereinafter “petitioner”] asks the Court to certify that this case was an “extended or complex” case warranting departure from the statut...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Background
This diversity action is brought by plaintiffs (collectively “Hedaya”) to recover insurance proceeds allegedly due under an all risk insurance policy issued by the defendant insurer (“Federal”). Federal moves for the second time pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 9(b) and 12(b) to dismiss all but Hedaya’s claims for actual damages for failure to me...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This action is between plaintiff Sundance Cruises Corp. (hereinafter “plaintiff”),
1
the owner of the M/V Sundancer, a ship that flew the flag of the Bahamas, and defendant American Bureau of Shipping (hereinafter “defendant”), a classification society in the business of issuing classification and safety certificates on behalf of itself and the countries by wh...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants defendants’ motion.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs brought the present action to determine the proper recipient of profit sharing benefits accrued by the late Donald Zinn. Plaintiff Alice Zinn was Donald
*71
Zinn’s f...
Views: 1
*540
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is the motion of United States Gypsum Company (“U.S. Gypsum”) to withdraw the order referring to the bankruptcy court its proof of claim and related filings in this case. For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
On November 12, 1991, U.S. Gypsum moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d), for withdrawal of the ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This is an action to review an arbitration decision rendered pursuant to the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. § 151 et. seq. (“RLA”). The plaintiff (“Shafii”) seeks to amend his complaint pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 15(a) and the defendant (“British Airways”) crossmoves for sanctions pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and/or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 for the filing of this motion....
Views: 1
ORDER
Defendant Delta Airlines, Inc. (“Delta”) filed its motion for summary judgment on March 23, 1992 (document # 14). This action concerns the crash of an airplane operated by Defendant SkyWest Airlines, Inc. (“SkyWest”). Plaintiff Samuel Shaw was on-board SkyWest flight 5855 scheduled to fly from Salt Lake City, Utah to Elko, Nevada on January 15, 1990. The flight crashed just miles fr...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Supplemental Motion for Remand and Brief in Support, filed August 18, 1992
1
; and De
*671
fendants’ Response to Plaintiffs Motion and Supplemental Motion to Remand to State Court, filed July 31, 1992.
Plaintiff moves to remand this case to state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction...
Views: 0
Page 14163
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
The United States Postal Service leases the first floor of a two story building from the Black Hawk Masonic Temple Association, Inc., where it operates the Black Hawk, Colorado post office. Employees and customers of the post office customarily use a parking lot adjacent to the building when working and conducting business there. In May 1992,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is an appeal from a bankruptcy court order imposing Rule 11 sanctions against the debtor’s attorney, John B. Ku-sic. Kusic argues that the bankruptcy court erred in finding that he had not conducted a reasonable inquiry into the facts surrounding the filing of the Chapter 11 petition by members of a cooperative association and that the filing was not warr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the court is a proposed Amended Consent Judgment and Decree which is submitted for the court’s approval. The proposed order amends the Consent Judgment and Decree, dated March 30, 1987, in which the parties agreed to build and operate a new county jail under the terms and conditions set forth in that agreed order. Factual Background This action began in 1986 wi...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO DISMISS Plaintiff Mississippi Power and Light Company, a Mississippi corporation, commenced this diversity action asserting claims for: (1) strict products liability (first and fourth claims); (2) negligence (second and fifth claims); and (3) breach of express and implied warranties (third and sixth claims). Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), the defendant Beech Aircraf...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion to certify a voluntary class for the nation’s colleges in this asbestos property damage action, as well as on various other pending motions.
I. Background
A. Nature of this Case
This is an action brought on behalf of all colleges and universities in the nation to recover their costs of finding, sampling, evaluating and dealing with asbes...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 12(b)(6). The defendants allege that the relief sought by the plaintiffs is barred by the applicable statutes of limitation. For the reasons set forth below, the Court agrees and grants the motion to dismiss.
Factual Background
A. Allegations of Un...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending are the Defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, alternatively, to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Response and reply briefs have been submitted and now this ma...
Views: 0
Page 14172
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Response and reply briefs have been submitted, and now this matter is ripe for the Court’s attention.
Huff is a former coal miner who was employed in the bituminous coal industry in West Virginia intermittently between the years of 1951 and 1983. H...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on motion of Defendant, filed June 22,1992, to dismiss the indictment. The United States (the “Government”) filed a response on July 10, 1992. Defendant filed a reply to the Government’s response on July 24, 1992. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The underlying issue here concerns the interface between the instant criminal case and a civil seizure that the Government...
Views: 0
802 F. Supp. 1361 (1992)
Ronald M. HAYES, Randy L. Hagler, Darrell A. Price, David H. Holland, Robert A. Holl, Oswald D. Holshouser, Raymond T. Carlton, S. Vance Elstrom, and Mark E. Corwin, Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant,
v.
NORTH STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, Intervenor Defendant.
No. C-C-91-158-P.
United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Cha...
Views: 1
Page 14175
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
THE TRIAL of this Action was held before this Court without a jury on 6 January 1992 in Charlotte, North Carolina. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant and Plaintiff entered into a contract obligating Defendant to pay certain patent royalties to Plaintiff. Complaint of Plaintiff at 2. In addition, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has refused to make royalty payments required by...
Views: 0
Page 14176
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the joint motion of plaintiff, the State of Utah, and defendant, Kennecott Corporation, for approval of a proposed Consent Decree relating to a negotiated monetary settlement for damages to the State’s interest in ground waters in an area within Salt Lake County, Utah. The proposed Consent Decree would settle the State’s claim for na...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The above-captioned matter came before the court for trial on June 5, 1992, at 8:30 a.m. Plaintiff was present and was represented by Mr. Brian Florence. Defendant CIGNA Insurance Co. was represented by Mr. Gary Johnson. Defendants Allied Stores Corporation and The Bon, Inc., (jointly “The Bon”) were represented by Mr. James S. Lowrie and Mr. Den...
Views: 0
ORDER On June 18, 1992, the plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the defendants to produce photographs of plaintiff David Scott McDonald’s vehicle. These photographs were taken by representatives of the defendants after the automobile accident which is the subject of this suit. On June 23, 1992, the plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the defendants to produce the statement or statements of Carol J...
Views: 0
ORDER William Andrews, an inmate at the Utah State Prison under the custody of the respondent warden, has filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus and Motion for Stay of Execution. The petitioner is under sentence of death and awaiting execution. The petitioner has challenged, in substance, both the imposition of the death sentence and the validity of his conviction. This is the third petition for habea...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the motion for summary judgment of defendants Ralph G. McAllister and M. Jeffrey Hoaster. The motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for disposition.
Background
In January 1983, plaintiff Tim Lee Adams was tried and convicted in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas of several counts of receiving stolen property, one count of threatening ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is third-party plaintiff Sherwin-Williams Company’s (“SherwinWilliams”) motion for summary judgment. For the following reasons, the motion is granted.
FACTS
In May of 1987, Sherwin-Williams contracted with Fred P. Berglund & Sons, Inc. (“Berglund”) for the construction of a boiler house on an industrial facility owned by Sherwin-Williams.
1
Dona...
Views: 0
*200
DECISION AND ORDER
On March 15, 1991, Harry John commenced this defamation action in a California state court. In this action, Mr. John seeks $200,000,000 in damages for the harm to his reputation that allegedly resulted from the publication of a news article in the
Wisconsin Magazine
section of the June 10,1990 edition of
The Milwaukee Journal.
The art...
Views: 0
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs allege violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78n(a) and 78t(a), Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder, and also a pendent claim for breach of fiduciary duty under state law. Defendants move to dismiss all claims.
I.
Facts
The second amended complaint alleges the following.
Plaintiffs ow...
Views: 1
Page 14191
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Gary Magee (“petitioner”) petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Following his arrest for selling cocaine to an undercover police officer, petitioner was charged with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree and Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree, in violation of New York Penal Laws §§...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. Facts.
This is an action for declaratory judgment arising out of the issuance of a life insurance policy by the plaintiff, Kentucky Central Life Insurance Company, to Mr. James A. Jones. The defendants, Ms. Vonda L. Jones and Ms. Nancy Gay Jones, are beneficiaries under this insurance policy.
On December 17, 1988, James A. Jones completed an application for life in...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
I. INTRODUCTION
Petitioner John Narayan (“Narayan”) seeks a writ of habeas corpus barring the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS") from deporting him to Fiji, pending a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) on his motion to reopen deportation proceedings.
II. FACTS
Narayan is a native and citizen of Fiji,...
Views: 1
*1237
AMENDED MEMORANDUM
This Amended Memorandum supersedes the Memorandum of even date to correct the contents of footnote 4 on page 3. Pending before the Court are Class Plaintiffs’ Motion For Final Approval of Settlements (Document # 383) and Opposition To Plaintiffs’ Motion For Final Approval of Settlements (Documents ##409, 414, and 415) submitted by Defendants Ernst & Young...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. INTRODUCTION The cross-motions of the parties for summary judgment came on regularly for hearing on January 16, 1992, before the Honorable John P. Yukasin, Jr., United States District Judge. Thomas Steel, Esq., Margaret Crosby, Esq., Fred Blum, Esq., and John Beattie, Esq. appeared for plaintiffs. Louise H. Renne, City Attorney, by Deputy City A...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In this case, nineteen defendants are charged in a nineteen-count indictment with various offenses including conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin and cocaine, money “laundering” and criminal racketeering. 1 Three defendants have filed motions to suppress evidence and requested a hearing. 2 Defendant Donald Moore moves to suppress all evidence, ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action arises out of the dismissal of plaintiff Anton Novak’s claim for benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416, 423. Presently before the court is the Secretary’s motion to dismiss Novak’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). For the reasons set forth below, we grant ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Creditor The Northern Trust Company (“Northern Trust”) cross-appeals from a final order of the bankruptcy court in an adversary proceeding, ruling that rents in which Northern Trust had perfected its security interest prior to the filing of the bankruptcy petition are nonetheless cash collateral and part of the bankruptcy estate under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the appeal of the Bank of Bellwood (“Bellwood”) and the cross-appeal of Thomas E. Raleigh, as Trustee of the Estate of William J. Stoecker (“Trustee”), from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern Dis
*881
trict of Illinois. For the following reasons, the decision of the bankruptcy court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.
FACT...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending is Plaintiffs motion to remand this case to state court. This case was not removed by the original Defendants but rather by the Third-party Defendant, Mattel, Inc. The original Defendants, who did not join in the removal notice, have been in the case since 1990. Although there appears to be diversity of citizenship between them and the Plaintiff, they could no...
Views: 1
ORDER This case is before the Court on plaintiff, Dan E. Moldea’s Motion to Amend Complaint. After responsive pleadings have been filed “a party may amend [his] pleading only by leave of Court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). Plaintiff seeks to “amend his complaint to add a new additional cause of acti...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendants filed a motion on March 16, 1992 to dismiss certain claims and to strike
*1072
Plaintiff’s jury demand (document # 4). The case is basically a sexual harassment case under Title YII but includes three pendent state claims, two of which are at issue here. Defendants argue that Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”) pre-empts Plaintiff’s thi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is an action in which the plaintiff, Glyptal, Inc. (“Glyptal”), a manufacturer of paint, asserts claims for breach of warranty and unfair trade practices against the defendant, Engelhard Corporation (“Engel-hard”), a supplier of chemical products. Engelhard has counterclaimed to collect payment for products it sold to Glyptal. The case is presently before the Court on a mo...
Views: 2
Page 14231
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on West Suburban Bank of Darien’s (“WSB”) appeal from the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court of the Northern District of Illinois. The bankruptcy court ruled that WSB is equitably estopped from asserting an Amended and Restated Proof of Claim against CCGK Investors (“Debtor”). After careful consideration, we affirm the lower...
Views: 0
ORDER This court feels it appropriate and probably helpful to a reader of the opinion of the Eleventh Circuit in Gean v. FMC Corp., 971 F.2d 642 (11th Cir.1992), for the trial court to publish its findings and conclusions, from which the appeal was taken by plaintiffs, Dannie Lee Gean and his wife, to the Eleventh Circuit and which resulted in the Eleventh Circuit’s above-cited opinion of Septembe...
Views: 0
Page 14238
OPINION I. Introduction Plaintiff Robert J. Coar has brought this action against defendants Joseph Kazimir, Rocco Morongello, William Levine, Donato DeSanti, and Robert Dudik, in their capacities as trustees of the Pension Fund of Mid-Jersey Trucking Local 701 (“the Fund”), and against the Fund itself. Among the relief Coar seeks is a declaration that defendants’ actions in withholding his ve...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant William F. Masucci’s (Masuc-ci) motion for a protective order. The Court held a hearing on the motion on April 28,1992. Present were the following counsel: Nancy Grunberg, attorney for Masuc-ci, and Gary Jackson, attorney for Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Argument was heard, and the motion was taken...
Views: 1
*195OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs have brought this suit pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the “Rules”) on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased Dun & Bradstreet Corporation common stock between October 2, 1986 and November 15, 1989 (the “Class Period”). Plaintiffs assert that defendants Dun & Bradstreet Corporation (“D & B”), Charles W. Moritz and Robe...
Views: 2
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW INTRODUCTION On April 17, 1992, the court held a hearing on defendant’s amended motion to suppress evidence and statements filed on April. 10, 1992. Defendant filed a súpplemental memorandum in support of his motion on April 15, 1992. Plaintiff filed a response on April 15, 1992. DISCUSSION Because there were three distinct encounters with law enfor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION FACTUAL NARRATIVE This action challenges the legality of a five-year lease of sugar cane farm land offered by defendant Teche Sugar Company, Inc. to the three plaintiff farmers. As a condition of farming the land, the lease requires plaintiffs to take their sugar cane to the mill designated by defendant. Plaintiffs say this illegally ties the leasing of farm land to the use...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is an appeal from the Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois, the Honorable William V. Alten-berger presiding. For the reasons set forth below, the decision of the bankruptcy court is affirmed.
BACKGROUND
This case presents solely a question of law. There are no facts in dispute. Between 1969 and 1983, the debtors failed to pay federal incom...
Views: 1
OPINION
Are collateral attacks interposed against a foreign contempt judgment and resulting sanctions, registered for enforcement in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1962, properly considered by this Court?
In this case, absolutely not!
I. Factual Background
On August 26, 1982, Manville Corporation and certain affiliated entities (“Man-ville”) filed a petition for reorganization under Chapte...
Views: 0
Page 14269
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER As this plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court has taken the trouble to fully and completely review the entire record in this case to determine if the demands of basic due process and Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) have been met. *268 Plaintiffs complaint was filed in this case on August 27, 1985 alleging negligence on the par...
Views: 0
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR REMAND
Janice Wilson appeals from a final judgment of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying her application for Widow’s Insurance (WI) benefits pursuant
*946
to the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(B), 20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (1990). Jurisdiction over Ms. Wilson’s petition for judicial review is conferred on this cour...
Views: 0
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT John Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) appeals from a final judgment of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) 1 denying his application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423. Jurisdiction over Gonzalez’s petition for judicial review is conferred on this court by...
Views: 0
ORDER REMANDING TO STATE COURT On June 18, 1992, this Court denied Plaintiffs motion to remand. After reconsidering said motion, this Court is of the opinion that Plaintiffs motion to remand is meritorious and should be GRANTED. It is, therefore, ORDERED that this Court’s June 18, 1992 Order is VACATED and the above-styled and numbered cause is REMANDED to the 17th District Court of Tarrant Cou...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Abraham J. Hirschfeld claims that the Board of Elections, by invalidating his nominating petitions as an independent candidate for the 14th Congressional District and refusing to put his name on the ballot as a candidate in the general election, has violated his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and his rights to due process and equal protection of law under the Firs...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO VACATE HIS SENTENCE This matter is before the Court for consideration of the defendant’s motion to vacate his sentence (doc. 20). The government opposes the motion (doc. 22), and the defendant replied (doc. 24). For the rea*1577sons set forth below, the defendant’s motion to vacate his sentence must be granted in part and denied ...
Views: 0
Page 14286
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss by codefendant Valentin Beato (“Beato”). Plaintiff Richmond Steel, Inc. (“RSI”), a construction firm based in Texas, brought this claim for declaratory relief and monetary damages based on diversity jurisdiction 1. This case arises out of the construction of a project known as the “Mayaguez Composting Facility.” In 1987 Puerto Rico Aqueduc...
Views: 0
FINAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER sitting by designation. I. Background This phase of United States, et al. v. Gila Valley Irrigation District, et al., Globe Equity No. 59, (hereafter “Globe Equity”) concerns the enforcement of the Globe Equity Consent Decree of June 29, 1935, (hereafter “Decree”) for the benefit of the Gila River Indian Community and the San Carlos Apache Tribe. The Court held ...
Views: 0
Order on Motion for Summary Judgment Rufus Caruthers (“Caruthers”) appeals from a final judgment of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”)1 denying his applications for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423. Jurisdiction over Caruthers’ petition for judicial review is conferred on this court by 42 U.S...
Views: 0
144 B.R. 510 (1992)
In re Clarence Joseph EBEL, Jr., d/b/a Haystack Mountain Golf Course and Driving Range, d/b/a Golf Haystack, SSAN: XXX-XX-XXXX, Debtor.
Lois J. EBEL, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Clarence Joseph EBEL, Jr., and Dennis King, Interim Trustee, Defendants-Appellees,
and
Robert Kayne E. Warren Goss, and W.F. Robinson, III, Intervenors-Appellees.
Civ. A. No. 92-K-177, Bankruptcy No. 90-10...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The instant action was filed by Hercules, Inc. against Martin Marietta Corporation. In the plaintiff’s second amended complaint (File Entry # 88) plaintiff alleges various claims for relief arising from a contractual relationship between the plaintiff and defendant. The complaint alleges a contract (SRMU) between the parties for the Titan IV space launch vehicle, and the suit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner an inmate at the El Dorado Correctional Facility, El Dorado, Kansas was convicted on September 1, 1987, of two counts of first degree murder, one count of aggravated assault, and one count of possession of a firearm following a prior felony conviction. P...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant moves for summary judgment, contending that as a matter of law plaintiff was not “discharged” within the meaning of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621, et seq. The issue is adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid its resolution. Because plaintiff voluntarily took a leave of absence knowing that her position w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings, contending that plaintiff’s state *1570law claims are barred by the statute of limitations, C.R.S. § 13-80-103(l)(c). The issue is adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid its resolution. Because plaintiff did not file this action within one year after her claim accrued, defendant’s motion is granted an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.
Introduction
Plaintiff, Johnson & Towers, brought suit in admiralty to collect payment for work performed by Plaintiff in June and July of 1990 on Defendant Clayton 0. Kat-ski’s, yacht, the vessel “Hunter.” The
*1345
Hunter is a 1970, 53-foot, Hatheros Sport Fisherman.
In June of 1990, Defendant contacted Johnson & Towers and requested ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER came before the Court on May 13, 1992 for hearing on Plaintiff’s motion to compel. Present were the following counsel: Hugh Pixler and Ronald Gregson, attorneys for Plaintiff, and Brent Slosky and Louise Romero-Atwood, attorneys for Defendant. Argument was presented on the motion, and the matter was then taken under advisement. Plaintiff has filed this comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In light of the recent decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Haines v. Liggett Group, 975 F.2d 81 (3d Cir.1992), and its obvious applicability to the above entitled matter, I have determined to recuse myself voluntarily in this matter as well. 1 I sincerely believe that all of the rulings that I have made in these cases involving the tobacco industry have been...
Views: 0
Page 14326
OPINION
Telebrands Direct Response (“Teleb-rands”), a consumer products marketing company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia with headquarters in Wayne, New Jersey, initiated this action on October 3, 1991 with the filing of a declaratory judgment complaint. That complaint, which sought an injunction against any lawsuit brought by the defendant in jurisdictions outsi...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CERTIFYING QUESTION TO HAWAII SUPREME COURT
This court heard the parties’ motions for summary judgment on August 10, 1992.
*328
BACKGROUND
On December 4,1991, the City Council of defendant City and County of Honolulu
1
passed Bills 156 (1990) and 36 (1991) which were later enacted on ...
Views: 3
*738
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
This civil action
in rem
was brought to enforce the provisions of 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7) for forfeiture of real property which was used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 801
et seq.
The issue at trial was whether the claimant had actual knowledge of or consented to the use ...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Plaintiff United States of America (“the Government”) brought this in rem forfeiture action pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“the Act”), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq. Specifically, the Government alleges that the products under seizure are adulterated within the meaning of § 351(a) of the Act because they are not manufactured, packaged, ...
Views: 0
Page 14350
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiff Midwest Payment Systems, Inc.’s (“Midwest”) Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 6), the Defendant Citibank Federal Savings Bank’s (“Citibank”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (doc. 11), Citibank’s Response (doc. 12), Midwest’s
*11
Reply (doc. 14), and Citibank’s Reply (do...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff Midwest Terminals, Inc. (Midwest) seeks to recover penalties it paid to the IRS pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 4041(a) *628and 6656 for failure to make timely deposits of excise taxes on diesel.fuel. The matter is now before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated herein, the court grants summary judgment in favor of the defendant. The per...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 73, the parties have voluntarily waived their rights to proceed before a United States District Judge and have consented to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in this case including the trial and entry of a final judgment. The parties have also agreed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On June 12, 1992, this Court entered final judgment for TNT Overland Express (“TNT”) in this race-discrimination action brought by Charles R. Myrick pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d), TNT moved for an award of $1,991.95 for costs incurred in defending this action. F...
Views: 0
Findings of Fact And Conclusions of Law
Having tried the above-captioned case on its merits without a jury, the Court hereby issues its findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a). To the extent that any of the following findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopted as such; to the extent that any of the conclusions of law constitute findi...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action arises out of the termination of plaintiff Hollis A. Talamine’s disability benefits. Talamine initially filed this action in the Circuit Court of Cook County against defendant Unum Life Insurance Company of America (“Unum”), alleging breach of contract and violation of § 154.6 of the Illinois Insurance Code, Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 73, par. 766.6. Unum r...
Views: 0
Page 14378
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner Ronald Mark Draughn, who is presently confined at the State Prison of Southern Michigan in Jackson, Michigan, has filed a pro se application for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 14, 1986, a jury in Recorder’s Court for the City of Detroit, Michigan, found petitioner guilty of murder in the second degree and possession, of a f...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is a multi-cdunt criminal prosecution against sixteen remaining defendants, for a continuing criminal enterprise and drug conspiracy. Several firearms violations are also charged. The indictment mentions that defendants, some of whom allegedly belong to the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club, influenced other motorcycle groups and together distributed large quantities of methamphetamine,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
To a producer, a film is more than the sum of its parts. Each decision reflects his or her work, so that the parts become a coherent and, in this case, prize-winning whole.
1
But what, if any, are the rights of
*1169
participants who give the work spirit and validity? How much control should they have on the way their contribution is projected? I...
Views: 0
Page 14404
*1267 MEMORANDUM BACKGROUND Defendant Donald T. Vaughn is the Superintendent of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford (“Graterford”) and defendant Joseph D. Lehman is the Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Plaintiff Roger Peter Buehl is a death-sentenced prisoner at Gra-terford. He and co-plaintiff Deborah J. Ayres wish to marry. Because Ms. Ayres has bee...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiff Linda Hamilton (“Plaintiff” or “Ms. Hamilton”) brings this action against the United States (“the government” or “the defendant”) for an alleged wrongful leyy. 26 U.S.C. § 7426(a)(1). The case raises an issue of apparent first impression in this Circuit, to wit, whether an executed but unrecorded quitclaim deed purporting to transfer specified real propert...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter comes before the court on a motion for a protective order filed by the John Doe Company. The pleadings and the identity of the movant are under seal in accordance with the secrecy provisions of Rule 6, Fed.R.Crim.P., relating to grand jury proceedings.
In August 1991, the John Doe Company was served with three grand jury subpoenas duces tecum. The Company has produced over 22,00...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Ritz-Craft Corporation, Inc. (“Ritz-Craft” or plaintiff) seeks to recover sums allegedly due from Stanford Management Group, Inc. (“SMG”), and Woods Crossings Limited Partnership, on a contract for the manufacture, delivery and installation of pre-fabricated housing units.
1
A court trial
*1314
was held on April 20, 1990, and the parties have filed post-...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, a prisoner, filed suit alleging that defendants, employees of the Pennsyl *1050 vania Department of Corrections, violated his rights, creating a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as under state law. After a non-jury trial held on August 17-19, 1992, I make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law. 1 Findings of Fact 1. Plaintiff, Robert...
Views: 0
ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. By Order dated March 31, 1992, 788 F.Supp. 884, the Court ruled that certain information which plaintiff sought from defendant through discovery interrogatories,. relating to the identity of an HIV-infected blood donor (“the Donor”), is privileged information not subject to discl...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM We are considering defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment. Plaintiffs allege certain violations of both federal and state environmental laws 1 and seek both damages and injunctive relief. We have previously dismissed claims for a medical monitoring fund pursuant to CERCLA and for injunctive relief pursuant to the Federal To...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
We are now considering motions for summary judgment filed by both parties. Summary judgment is appropriate in federal court if the “pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed...
Views: 0
ORDER
Two motions have been brought by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”):
1. As a counterclaim defendant, the FDIC moves for summary judgment on the counterclaims of Steven D. Hanson (“Hanson”) in the first action, Civil No. 4-91-72, for failure to comply with the statute of limitations set forth in 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(6)(B); and
2. Defendant FDIC moves for summ...
Views: 2
ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on May 29, 1992, came on to be heard and considered the Defendant U.S. Fire Insurance Co.’s Motion for Summary Judgment m the above-styled and numbered cause. Having reviewed the complete file and relevant case law, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted.
Background
A.
This Lawsuit
Plaintiff Dax ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
BE IT REMEMBERED on July 9, 1992, this Court held a motions hearing, at which the parties appeared by and through their counsel of record. Having considered Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, responses thereto, and accompanying briefs, and listened to counsel argue the motions, the Court finds that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismi...
Views: 0
*182
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are a group of disappointed investors who purchased real estate limited partnership interests in 1983. The partnerships were formed to acquire, own, operate, and eventually sell numerous hotels, office buildings and apartment complexes throughout the country. After their investments soured plaintiffs commenced this action for damages. ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Jury Demand, filed May 7, 1992. Plaintiff originally filed this action in state court, seeking relief for alleged discriminatory employment practices committed by the defendant in violation of the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act, TEX. REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 5221k (Ver...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER BE IT REMEMBERED on April 17, 1992, the parties in the above-styled and numbered cause appeared in person and by and through their attorneys of record before this Court for a hearing on qualified immunity. Having read the pleadings, reviewed the relevant depositions and affidavits, and listened to the arguments of counsel, the Court is of the opinion that Nixon Rich...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand, filed November 8, 1991, and Defendant’s Motion for More Definite Statement, filed October 16, 1991. Upon review of those motions, as well as the entire file in this case, the Court finds the Motion for Remand has merit and should be granted.
I. Procedural History
Plaintiff originally filed this action on October 3, 1991, ...
Views: 1
OPINION
This case presents the tale of a disgruntled developer, seeking an unknown quantity in damages for a short delay in preapplication approval of a subdivision plan by the Coventry Planning Commission (“Commission”). Plaintiff, John T. Trafford, claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 a denial of his rights under the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment, resulting from an ...
Views: 1
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ and Intervener’s motions for a preliminary injunction. The Plaintiffs and Intervener allege that the Defendants intercepted and recorded telephone conversations in violation of federal and state law.
See
18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521 and 15 M.R.S.A. §§. 709-713. The Plaintiffs and Intervener request tha...
Views: 0
Page 14466
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1985 John C. Evins decided to retire from participation in Evins & Associates, Inc. [hereinafter Evins] and to sell his stock in Evins to a proposed employee stock ownership plan. At that time, he and his wife Elizabeth owned 275,900 shares out of the 581,300 outstanding shares. Their combined shares represented 47.5 percent of the outstanding stock. His son, who was...
Views: 0
*1458
FIRST AMENDED ORDER
On March 26, 1992, counsel for the parties in the above-styled lawsuit appeared before this Court to argue pending motions. As commonly encountered by the Court, the suit has an interesting and slightly convoluted procedural history that requires a brief explanation.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The parties listed above as Defendants, Synchronal, et al. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This cause is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Having considered the motion, the court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This case arises from the sale of a motor home by defendant to plaintiffs. Defendant sold the subject vehicle to plaintiffs on an “as is” bill of sal...
Views: 0
ORDER On October 30, 1991, this Court entered an order (document # 25) consolidating this case with CV-N-91-208-ECR. The Court held, however, that the attorneys in each case would remain as lead counsel for their respective clients. On April 17,1992, plaintiffs represented by Mr. Tarrantino filed (document # 32) a motion for partial summary judgment. Defendants filed an opposition (document # 3...
Views: 0
OPINION Petitioner Herman Strauch (“Strauch”), a state prisoner, has petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Upon the opposition of the State and all the prior proceedings heretofore had, the petition is dismissed. Prior Proceedings By Westchester County Indictment Number 79-01148 Strauch was charged with the crimes of murder in the second degree, criminal pos...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand State Law Claims and Claims For Monetary Damages, brought pursuant
*1509
to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), and the Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment and to Dismiss. On July 9, 1992, the Court held a motions hearing at which the parties appeared by and through their counsel of record. After listening t...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The issue in this medical malpractice action is the legal effect on successive medical tortfeasors of two prior separate settlements involving the original tortfeasors.
Counsel for both defendants in this action have moved and cross-moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, for summary judgment on the amended complaint. The Court heard oral argument of the motions on August 14, 199...
Views: 0
OPINION &. ORDER
This decision arises from the implementation of the rules for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“EBT”) International Union Delegate and Officer Election (the “Election Rules”), promulgated by the Election Officer and approved as modified by this Court and the Court of Appeals. July 10, 1991 Opinion & Order, 742 F.Supp. 94 (S.D.N.Y.1990), aff'd, 931 F.2d 177 (2d Cir.1991...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 728 (1992)
Susan M. MAXWELL, Plaintiff,
v.
J. BAKER, INC., and Prange Way, Inc., Defendants.
Civ. No. 4-90-941.
United States District Court, D. Minnesota, Fourth Division.
September 21, 1992.
*729 Earl D. Reiland, Daniel W. McDonald, Matthew J. Goggin and Merchant, Gould, Smith, Edell, Welter & Schmidt, Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff.
James J. Foster and Wolf, Greenfield &...
Views: 2
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM The defendant, Peter A. Lebon, was found guilty by jury verdict on May 11, 1992, in the District of Massachusetts, for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), felon in possession of a firearm. He was sentenced on August 4, 1992. A Presentence Report (PSR) was prepared by the probation officer of the court. Based upon the lengthy criminal record of this defendant, the court treate...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is Defendant Tahoe Regional Planning Agency’s (“TRPA’s”) motion for summary judgment (document # 14). The motion was renewed pursuant to court order by Defendant’s renewed motion for summary judgment (document # 31). The court has also read and considered Plaintiff’s oppositions to the motions (documents # 23 & # 35) and heard oral argument on the motion for summary...
Views: 2
OPINION Petitioner Gabriel Pemberthy seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 1 He bases his claim on the State’s alleged racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges in violation of Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment right to trial by an impartial jury and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection of the laws. Petitioner is a man of Latino descent c...
Views: 2
ORDER We have before us a motion for disqualification of trial judge, Docket Document No. 962, filed at 2:56 P.M., on Friday, September 11, 1992. Trial in this case is scheduled to commence on Monday, September 14, 1992, at 9:00 A.M. 1 The motion is based on 28 U.S.C. secs. 144 and 455(b)(1), and is predicated on the belief that the personal prejudice and bias of the trial judge against the H...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case is a multi-count criminal prosecution against sixteen remaining defendants, for a continuing criminal enterprise and drug conspiracy. Several firearms violations are also charged. The indictment mentions that defendants, some of which allegedly belong to the Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club, influenced other motorcycle groups and together distributed large quantiti...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs are suing defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) for violating plaintiffs’ rights to substantive due process and equal protection and for unconstitutionally impairing plaintiffs’ right to contract. Plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment against defendant City of Edgewood (Edgewood). Edgewood responded in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion, and with defendants Mark Ba...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (doc. 3), the defendant’s memorandum in opposition (doc. 6), the plaintiff’s reply (doc. 7), and the defendant’s supplemental memorandum in opposition (doc. 10).
1
This is a complicated case. Neither counsel has cited any law in ...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this opinion, the Court considers whether it has jurisdiction to entertain and grant a motion to reopen a social security case after an earlier remand to the Secretary. The remand resulted in the plaintiff again being denied benefits. The government opposed the reopening motion claiming that the motion was untimely and, alternatively, that the Court had no further jurisdiction to reope...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR TO CHANGE VENUE This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction or to change venue (doc. 4), the Plaintiff’s response (doc. 5), and the Defendant’s reply (doc. 6). In addition, the Plaintiff has moved for partial summary judgment (doc. 8), to which the Defendant has moved to hold in abeyance Plaintiff’s motion for ...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The plaintiffs allege that Chapter 869 of the Cincinnati Municipal Code, as applied to consensual tows by towing firms whose primary place of business is located outside the City of Cincinnati, has been preempted by federal law, places an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause, is arbitrary and unreasonable in violati...
Views: 0
*1152
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause comes before the Court upon Defendant Blue Lagoon Water Sports’ (“Blue Lagoon”) Motion for Summary Judgment, which was adopted by Co-Defendant Mirage International Inc., d/b/a/ Blue Lago...
Views: 0
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions under Rule 11 is currently before this Court. For the reasons described below, this Court will impose a sanction of $3,500.00 on plaintiffs’ counsel of record.
FACTS
Plaintiffs have previously litigated the constitutionality of O.C.G.A. § 48-8-46 in the Superior Court of Bryan County, Georgia. In an order dated May 10, 1989, that Court granted...
Views: 0
ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant George D. Hicks’ Motion to Compel Government Compliance with 18 U.S.C. § 4246, filed June 19, 1992; and after a status conference held before the undersigned United States District Judge on July 23, 1992, at 9:00 am. I. Background The United States Secret Service charged Defendant George D. Hicks (“Hicks”), on January 13,1989, with th...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff filed suit in January 1989 under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to compel disclosure of documents relating to his federal prosecution and resulting conviction. Defendant United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) moves to have plaintiff’s complaint dismissed, and defendants the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seek su...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On March 2, 1992, Magistrate Judge Jerome J. Niedermeier issued a Report and Recommendation (“MJRR”) in this matter, recommending this court grant plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and award plaintiff the relief requested. The defendant, Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services (the “Secretary”), objected to the MJRR. For the reasons that follow, thi...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 19), the Plaintiff’s Response (doc. 21), and the Defendant’s reply (doc. 22).
The questions presented by this motion are 1) whether this suit is time barred by the three year statute of limitations provided by 29 U.S.C. § 1113(2); and 2) whether t...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Presently before the court is defendant General Electric Company’s (“GE”) motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. This is a products liability action in which plaintiff alleges that a defective refrigerator caused a fire in his home. He seeks damages ($55,000), expenses, attorney’s fees, and costs. 1 GE des...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On May 15, 1992, petitioner, Victor R. Polewsky, filed a petition to vacate or set aside arbitration Award No. 2993 1 issued *397by the National Railroad Adjustment Board (the “NRAB”). Respondent, Bay Colony Railroad Corporation, has moved for dismissal. Petitioner argues that the NRAB exceeded its authority in rendering the award by considering matters outside its jurisdiction ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
The Vermont Department of Banking,Insurance and Securities seeks an order quashing a subpoena dated February 25, 1992, served upon the Department by plaintiff in this securities fraud litigation
1
on the ground that the subpoena requests documents that are privileged under federal law. The subpoena requests various documents in the Department's possession rela...
Views: 0
OPINION Where defendants are convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (“RICO Conspiracy”) on the basis of unspecified predicate acts, can those defendants be held accountable, for purposes of sentencing, for all the predicate acts charged in the indictment? In this case, no. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This case involved the jury trial and sentencing of six members of the El Rukns— an infamous Chicago...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Chef Paul Prudhomme and Tasso Travel, Inc. have brought this civil action claiming multiple violations of trademark infringement, invasion of privacy, and unfair competition resulting from a television commercial aired by defendants Procter & Gamble Company and Folgers Coffee Company. In their amended complaint, plaintiffs claim that the commercial depicts ...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
On August 4, 1992, we had occasion to sentence Mr. Johanna Hines and- Mr. Daniel Tavares, defendants in two jury trials held in May 1992 in the District of Massachusetts. The two cases involved indictments for violation to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), felon in possession of a firearm. After guilty verdicts, presentence reports were prepared by the Probation Officer and, as...
Views: 1
OPINION
Before the Court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. After consideration of the motion and plaintiff’s opposition and the Motion and Affidavit in Response thereto, the Court grants defendant’s motion in part and denies it in part.
1
Facts
By letter dated March 29, 1990, plaintiff requested records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Ohio Student Loan Commission is appealing a decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania issued January 6, 1992. 135 B.R. 254. That order permitted Virginia M. Pel-kowski to be discharged from debts she incurred as comaker for the student loans of Michael A. Pelkowski and Christine M. Pelkowski. For the reasons discussed below, the findi...
Views: 1
AMENDED OPINION
This matter comes before the court on a motion for summary judgment by defendant, the Estate of Ralph T. Reeve, and on a cross-motion by plaintiffs for summary judgment on Counts One and Two of the complaint and defendant’s counterclaim. Both parties also seek sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiffs Bowen Engineering and Niro Atomiz...
Views: 6
ORDER
The issues here considered arise from a motion filed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”). Document no. 32. Therein, the Secretary seeks clarification and modification of a
1986
order of this court.
Id. See Lenz v. Secretary of Health and Human Services,
641 F.Supp. 144 (D.N.H.1986).
1. Background
In general, claimants seeki...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court is defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment as to plaintiff’s claims of employment discrimination based on gender and reprisal for participating in prior Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) activity. These claims involve the placement of Robert Fagin in the position of Deputy Director of Administration and Finance at the Office of Surface Mining and Reclamat...
Views: 2
805 F.Supp. 967 (1992)
Carrie MEEK, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants.
No. 86-1820-CIV.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
September 11, 1992.
*968 Thomasina H. Williams, Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A., Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs Packington, Meek Burke and intervenor Ferguson.
Steven M. Cody, Miami, Fla., for plai...
Views: 7
OPINION AND ORDER We first addressed the instant lawsuit in a March 5, 1992 Opinion and Order [hereinafter the “Opinion”] 804 F.Supp. 504 in which we sustained three of the four counts plaintiffs had asserted against defendants under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1145, 1132(g)(2), and 1140 and the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185(a). Plaintiff now moves for class certification pursuant to Fed...
Views: 0
*1476
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on all pending motions, including the following:
DKT. 756 Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [Lowe]
DKT. 757 Memorandum in support of Summary Judgment [Lowe]
DKT. 758 Appendix to Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [Lowe]
DKT. 768 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Hoover Treated Wood]
DKT. 769 Memorandum in s...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS TO POST A SUPERSEDEAS BOND
This case arose as a breach of contract claim by plaintiff Terry Investment Company. In December, 1991, this court granted summary judgment for plaintiff, and later entered judgment of approximately $140,-000 in favor of plaintiff. Defendants Garrett Quintana Sr. and Garrett Quintana Jr. appealed to the Ninth ...
Views: 1
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO VACATE RULING OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 CERTIFYING CLASS ACTION CLAIMS INVOLVING “DISTINCT AND COMPLETED PHASES” Defendant, the United States of America, in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement and pursuant to the laws of the United States, moves that this Court vacate its ruling of September 4, 1990, 746 F.Supp. 887, certifying the class action for challenges to...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION RE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY THE ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF The defendants motion to disqualify plaintiff’s counsel is denied. Movants have failed to sustain their heavy burden that is the obligation of the party seeking to disqualify counsel for the opposing party. Bennet Silvershein Assoc. v. Furman, 776 F.Supp. 800, 802 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (noting that in the Second Circuit “[m...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court are plaintiff’s and defendants’ cross-motions for summary judgment and the oppositions thereto. This action concerns the legal standard governing the notice a public school system must give parents and guardians when it proposes to change a student’s placement pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“the IDEA” or “the Act”). 20 U.S.C.A. § 1400...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff pro se commenced this lawsuit on March 6, 1992 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, alleging deprivation of rights protected by the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution and state statutory law. Jurisdiction is based upon the existence of a civil rights claim, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (1988), and supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (West...
Views: 0
ORDER
All of the Defendants have filed a motion for certification of four questions to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Defendants by motions to dismiss and/or for summary judgment affirmatively sought and received from this Court a determination of the legal issues which are the subject of their proposed certified questions.1 Never did any of the Defendants suggest certification in connection with th...
Views: 0
Page 14594
OPINION
Pending before the Court is a fee petition in a school desegregation case. Plaintiff is the Coalition to Save Our Children (“plaintiff”). Defendants are the Red Clay School District, Brandywine School District, Christina School District, Colonial School District, and the State Board of Education. In opposing plaintiff's $650,000 fee petition, Red Clay School District (“Red Clay” or “defen...
Views: 0
Page 14595
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiffs have moved for voluntary dismissal without prejudice of their complaint in this products liability action seeking recovery for the severe burns caused to plaintiff Earl Schandelmeier, Jr., when the forklift he was operating exploded as the result of a fuel leak. Trial was scheduled in this matter during the September 14, 1992 jury trial term. Defendants have filed a br...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is yet another motion by Defendant Atlantic Richfield Company (“ARCO”), this time a motion to dismiss
*540
Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint for failure to join what Defendant contends are non-diverse indispensable parties to Plaintiffs’ claim for unjust enrichment.
Defendant ARCO’s argument proceeds as follows. A claim for unjust enrichment is a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Susan Gray Johnson filed this action for declaratory relief, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and breach of fiduciary duty against defendant Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance Company for failure to pay benefits under an “accidental death” insurance policy. Defendant has moved for summary judgment on the g...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
This case requires the court to examine the showing required to support a “truth on the market” defense to a federal securities action brought under Rule 10b-5, 17 CFR § 240.10b-5, and premised upon the “fraud on the market” theory. For the reasons stated below, the court holds that summary judgment in fav...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1972, Engis Corporation (“Corp”) and Engis Ltd. (“Ltd.”) entered into a licensing agreement (the “1972 Agreement”). Pursuant to the 1972 Agreement, Corp. licensed to Ltd. its intellectual property, including its trademarks and trade secrets pertaining to precision surface finishing products
(i.e.,
diamond abrasive compounds) and certain related accessories...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this case, nineteen defendants are charged in a nineteen count indictment with various offenses including conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin and cocaine, money “laundering”, criminal racketeering and murder. In a Memorandum Opinion and Order dated September 17, 1992, the court addressed the motions to suppress evidence. 808 F.Supp. 596. ...
Views: 1
*27
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court upon several pending motions. The defendant, Ronnie C. Moore, the Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Insurance (the Commissioner), has moved to dismiss the complaint. [Record # 4]. The intervening defendants (collectively referred to as “the associations”) have also filed a motion to dismiss. [Record # 7]. T...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO CHANGE VENUE
This action came on for hearing before the Court, Honorable Richard A. Gadbois, Jr., presiding, on April 20, 1992. Having considered the moving and opposition papers, arguments of counsel and all other matters presented, the Court hereby rules as follows.
Background
The Plaintiff is an art collector who so...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case arises out of a contract for sale of roll-forming equipment between Engel Industries, a Missouri corporation, and Medcon Enterprises, a Virginia company. The equipment was to be paid for by a letter of credit issued by First American Bank. Medcon intended to sell the equipment to an Iraqi government agency. In an earlier decision which sets forth the facts in detail...
Views: 0
OPINION
The derivative complaint here at issue relates to a 1989 stock purchase transaction whereby defendant BBA Group PLC (“BBA”) acquired an eighty percent interest in IGH, Inc (“IGH”), a closely held corporation owned by two individuals, Jerry Zucker and James G. Boyd. The plaintiff in this action, ZB Holdings, Inc. (“ZB Holdings”), is a corporation formed by Zucker and Boyd which is the depo...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO REMAND
THIS CAUSE came before the COURT upon Defendants’ motion to remand this case to the District Court of Appeal for the Third District of Florida. In addition to Defendants’ motion, the Court has before it Plaintiff’s response and Defendants’ reply.
FACTS
On April 23, 1985, First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Hammonton, New Jerse...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
A savings and loan association entered into an commodity futures agreement with
*1344
a commodities trading firm. One provision of this agreement was that if the association ever sued the trading firm and lost, it would pay the firm’s defense expenses, namely its attorneys’ fees and costs. The relationship between the savings and loan association ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS This cause is before the court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed July 29, 1992, for improper venue and lack of per *615 sonal jurisdiction, or in the alternative to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Defendant, GREYHOUND FINANCIAL CORPORATION, is a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, M.G.J. INDUSTRIES, Inc. is a F...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
This case presents two issues which have engendered a myriad of judicial decisions from numerous courts throughout the nation. First, whether a district court’s remand, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. sec. 405(g), so that a rehearing before the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”) may take place, automatically confers upon a claimant the “prevailing pa...
Views: 0
*234MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On September 21, 1992, the Court held a non-jury trial in this case. The government seeks judgment against Cooksey for two 100% penalty assessments made against him, one for $103,773.85, dated July 11, 1983, and another for $16,590.00, dated May 21, 1984. I. Stipulations In the First Revised Joint Pretrial Order, filed September 17, 1992, the parties stipulated to ...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiff Local 144, Hotel, Hospital, Nursing Home and Allied Services Union, SEIU, AFL-CIO (“Local 144”) has by order to show cause moved to hold defendants C.N.H. Management Associates, Inc. (“CNH”), Marvin Neiman (“Neiman”), individual and as sole proprietor of Concourse Nursing Home (“Concourse”) in contempt for failure to comply with the settlement Stipulation and Order signed by...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court is defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. At issue is whether complete diversity exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2).
The following facts are not in dispute. Plaintiff Allen W. Fox is a Canadian citizen and has not been admitted to the United States for permanent residence thus making plaintiff an alien for purposes of this action, (doc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before us on Plaintiff United States of America’s (the “USA”) Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses and for Partial Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the USA’s motion to strike in part and deny it. in part. Because we decide this motion as a motion to strike, the USA’s request for the alternative relief of partial summary judgme...
Views: 0
ORDER
APPROVED and ADOPTED over objection as the ruling of the court. See Endorsement Ruling entered today. It is so ordered.
RECOMMENDED RULING ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
F. OWEN EAGAN, United States Magistrate Judge.
The petitioner, Anthony Chapman, seeks habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on the ground that two alleged errors committed by the court at his trial violat...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs brought this action in state court alleging state law claims for breach of contract, professional negligence, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Defendants are alleged to be consultants, administrators and record-keepers of employee benefit plans established by plaintiffs’ professional corporation. Defendants removed the ...
Views: 0
Page 14711
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS V AND VIII AND ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON A STIPULATED RECORD
1
In its present posture, this class action raises the question whether final agency rules of the Maine Department of Human Services (“Department” or “DHS”) requiring recipients of Medicaid to co-pay for certain medical services violate federal la...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case involves an action filed by MODERN OFFICE SYSTEM, INC. (“MODERN OFFICE”) against defendant AIM CARIBBEAN EXPRESS, INC. (“AIM”) for the loss of a shipment of 114 pieces of furniture transported from the port of Fernandina Beach, Florida to the port of San Juan, Puerto Rico. The complaint was originally filed on
March 11, 1991
in the Superior Court of ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Petitioner, David McCarthy, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking release from the custody of respondent, Howard Peters, Director of the Department of Corrections of the State of Illinois. Respondent filed a document entitled “Answer and Motion to Deny Petition.” Such a document is not contemplated by the applicable statute or rules. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254; ...
Views: 0
*207
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Robert Holstein (“Holstein”) and Brian Grove (“Grove”), individually and on behalf of others, brought this declaratory judgment action against defendant City of Chicago (“City”). Count I, brought by Grove, and Count III, brought by Holstein, both allege that Chicago Municipal Code § 9-92-030, which governs when cars may be towed by the...
Views: 1
ORDER
In July, 1991, plaintiff Robert Haston (“Haston”), an inmate at the Utah State Prison, instituted this action under 42 U.S.C. sections 1983 and 1985(3) against several employees of the prison in their official and individual capacities. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Ronald Boyce pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(b)(1)(B). On October 8, 1991, the Magistrate Judge issued a...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING STATE OF WYOMING’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter comes before the Court on Respondents’ motion for summary' judgment. The Court,' having considered the materials in support of and in opposition to the motion, having weighed the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, FINDS and ORDERS as follows: Background On May 21, 1982, Kevin Winston Osbo...
Views: 2
*359
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment. The issue is whether the spouse of an injured Jones Act seaman may recover for loss of society and consortium based on a general maritime action. The Court concludes that such damages are not recoverable and, therefore, grants Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment.
Under R...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is the Plaintiffs’ motion to remand this action to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia (the circuit court). For reasons set out more fully below, the Plaintiffs’ motion is hereby GRANTED.
The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendant DuPont deliberately and intentionally exposed Ms. Arthur to hazardous chemicals. The claim is based in par...
Views: 0
OPINION
On October 11, 1990, Middletown Concrete Products, Inc. (“MCP”) filed a complaint against Black Clawson Co. (“Black Clawson”) and Hydrotile Machinery Company (“Hydrotile”) over the sale of machinery for which the contract price exceeded $2,000,000. Before the Court now in this diversity action is MCP’s motion for summary judgment on counts I and II and defendants’ motion for summa...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM ORDER Terrence B. Quirin filed a complaint on April 8, 1991, alleging that the defendants City of Pittsburgh and the Pittsburgh Civil Service Commission denied him equal protection of law under the Fourteenth Amendment, thereby violating 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and discriminated against him in the terms of employment, thereby violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiffs filed suit seeking a judgment declaring unconstitutional and granting permanent injunctive relief from two recently enacted amendments to a Delaware statute regulating adult entertainment establishments. The statute regulates closing hours and imposes open-booth requirements on adult entertainment establishments. Defendants filed a cross-motion for summary judgment urging the C...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Present before the court is the quintessential business dispute involving multiple parties, complex issues of fact and law, skilled advocates and a not insubstantial amount of money at stake. Not surprisingly, the case has spawned numerous discovery disputes leading to a veritable discovery gridlock. The question before the court is how best to resolve these disputes without undue burd...
Views: 1
802 F. Supp. 1223 (1992)
CITIZENS UNITED FOR FREE SPEECH II and Carol A. Surgens and Harry L. Brown, Jr., Plaintiffs,
v.
LONG BEACH TOWNSHIP BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and Sean Devitt, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 91-2776 (MLP).
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
September 25, 1992.
*1224 L. Gilbert Farr, Somerville, N.J., for plaintiffs.
Philip G. Pagano, Magee and Pagano, Wall Tp., N.J., for d...
Views: 4
Page 14742
ORDER
In this civil action, plaintiff Tourist Village Motel, Inc. (“Tourist Village”), seeks damages allegedly resulting from a leak of a 10,000 gallon fuel oil tank manufactured by defendant Massachusetts Engineering Co., Inc. (“MEC”). Plaintiff proceeds under seven theories of liability: negligence, strict liability, nuisance, breach of implied warranty, breach of express warranty, and ...
Views: 1
802 F.Supp. 235 (1992)
BECKER METALS CORP., Plaintiff,
v.
TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE CO., and Valley Forge Life Insurance Co., Defendants.
No. 91 0802 C(5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
September 25, 1992.
*236 Norah Ryan, Robert Espstein, Susman, Schermer, Rimmel & Shifrin, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Donald L. James, Brown & James, P.C., St. Louis, Mo., Stephen Son...
Views: 2
ORDER
This order addresses petitioner Robert Hurlburt’s Amended Petition for Writ of *588Habeas Corpus (doc. no. 10) along with the following pleading and motions: (1) Objection to Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 11); (2) Request for Further Orders (doc. no. 15); (3) Request for Further Orders and/or Discovery (doc. no. 16) and (4) Motion for Judgment by Default (doc. no. 20). Ju...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER came before the Court for consideration of Defendants’ alternative motion to dismiss the pendent claims under Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) law for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The administrative remedies at issue provide reduced judicial access to nonimmigrant alien workers alleging ...
Views: 0
Page 14753
ORDER GRANTING IN PART CLAIMANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The government filed a complaint seeking civil forfeiture of the residence of Stephen Titus under 21 U.S.C. § 881. On October 12, 1991, claimants Charles and Marian Titus, Stephen Titus’ parents, filed an answer to the complaint and a claim to the property to the extent of an unrecorded mortgage. Claimants filed the instant mot...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) AFTER HEARING HELD PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)
The defendant is charged in a Complaint issued on September 10, 1992 charging him *1019with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and knowingly possessing cocaine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
The defendant was arre...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The defendant in the above-referenced prosecution is charged with five counts of mail fraud for filing fictitious and inflated claims in connection with his fire-damaged property.. Currently before the Court are defendants pre-trial motions as well as the government’s motion
in limine
to admit evidence pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 404(b). For the reasons stated ...
Views: 1
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT •
Before the court is plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Defendant, Priscilla Caliendo executed a promissory note in favor of Maine National Bank, plaintiff FDIC’s predecessor-in-interest, in exchange for a loan of $35,000.00. The loan was secured by the properly executed transfer and pledge of 1,890 shares of Fleet/Norstar common stock. The...
Views: 0
ENDORSED MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs instituted this action for damages and injunctive relief against three Special Agents of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration; they claim that having slightly tapped the agents’ car with their motorcycle on November 16, 1988, the individual defendants assaulted them, subjected them to unwarranted, unreasonable and excessive beatings, and caused unjust...
Views: 0
Plaintiff filed suit against Defendants for copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, and breach of contract. The case was tried by this Court sitting without a jury on December 12-13, 1991.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.UCR is a Georgia corporation formed in October 1987, which was engaged in the rent-to-own business. UCR rented televisions, stereos, video cassette recorders an...
Views: 1
I. BACKGROUND
William E. Daniels, at all times relevant, was the president, sole shareholder, and Chief Executive Officer of Wedzeb Enterprises, Inc., an electrical supply company. Wedzeb had a warehouse in Lebanon,
*755
Indiana, and in that warehouse it stored electrical capacitors, transformers, and other electrical equipment, most of which contained polychlorinated biphenyl...
Views: 0
ORDER
In this lawsuit, plaintiff United States of America seeks to recover a defaulted student loan from defendant Charlotte J. McClendon Davis. Both sides have moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of whether the government’s claim is time-barred.
1
For the reasons that follow, the court concludes that, as a result of amendments to the Higher Education Act of 1965,
...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case comes before the court on plaintiff’s amended motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (“EAJA”). BACKGROUND On October 21, 1987, plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial review of the defendant’s denial of her claims for Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income ben...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is presently before the Court on the motion of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, pursuant to Rule 62(c), Fed. R.Civ.P., requesting that the Court stay its Judgment Order of July 29, 19921 and restore the injúnction of the Patterson Con*1054sent Decree pending appeal of that Judgment to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
BACKGROUND
A class of private plaintiffs and the ...
Views: 0
*571
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 30, 1991, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (the “Bankruptcy Court”), entered a final order disallowing certain attorneys’ fees and expenses sought by David E. Bennett (“Bennett”) and Vedder, Price, Kaufman & Kammholz (“VPKK”), as Special Counsel to the PL Committee. The PL Committee itself...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Tilcon Gammino Inc. has moved, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), to amend a judgment awarding it damages on its counterclaim. Specifically, it asks the Court to add prejudgment interest referable to amounts it previously recovered pursuant to a partial settlement and through a proceeding under the Rhode Island Mechanics’ Lien statute, R.I.Gen. Laws §§ 34-28...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs in this mortgage foreclosure action. Plaintiff seeks reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs in the total amount of $13,250.07. The Court has carefully reviewed the attorney’s fee records, and for the reasons that follow, it is unable to act on the mot...
Views: 0
Page 14790
DECISION AND ORDER
On October 31, 1991, the plaintiff, Abdul Akbar, also known as Phillip Hudson, currently incarcerated at the Waupun Correctional Institution [Waupun], filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis seeking redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Mr. Akbar sought redress from various prison officials at Waupun for alleged constitutional violations concerning the confiscation of h...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case is a multi-count criminal prosecution against sixteen remaining defendants, for a continuing criminal enterprise and drug'conspiracy. Several firearms violations are also charged. The indictment mentions that defendants, some of which allegedly belong to the Hell’s Angels Motorcycle Club, influenced other motorcycle groups and together distributed large quantiti...
Views: 2
Page 14801
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff Harold W. Hansborough, Jr. initially filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) after being terminated from his position with the defendant, City of Elkhart Parks and Recreation Department (“City of Elk-hart”) on July 5, 1990. A “right to sue” letter was issued by the EEOC to...
Views: 0
Page 14802
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services (“the Secretary”), submits written objections to the December 30, 1991 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Maxwell, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).
The December 30, 1991 Report and Recommendation reversed the final determination of the Secretary, and dire...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner Ernest Hicks was convicted after a jury trial in New York State Supreme Court, Kings County, of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree.1 On June 25, 1985, Hicks was sentenced, as a mandatory persistent felony offender, to a prison term of fourteen years to life. The New York Appellate Division, Second Department, unanimously affirmed the conviction on M...
Views: 2
Page 14812
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF OPINION This action for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. The Plaintiffs allege that they were injured by the failure on the part of the Secretaries of the Air Force and Defense and the Base Closure and Realignment Commission (“Base Closure Commission” or the “Commission”) to act pursuant to the s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 6, 1992, this Court certified plaintiffs’ class action claim against Bally Manufacturing for securities violations. At the same time, we dismissed Count I of the original amended complaint for failing to allege facts with sufficient particularity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). We also dismissed Counts II and III for lack of supplemental jurisd...
Views: 1
*110ORDER INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on appointed counsel’s claim for compensation submitted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A in which counsel seeks compensation for work done on the instant case. Appointed counsel was defendant Luis Tabares’s court appointed attorney in this criminal matter. On August 18,1992, defense counsel submitted a voucher stating that he was entitled to $640...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
On January 16, 1992, Baltimore City implemented a "payroll reduction plan," which placed all City employees on five days of unpaid furlough. (the "Furlough Plan" or "Plan"). The Plan was in response to an anticipated $13.3 million dollar cut in State aid to the City of Baltimore. The Baltimore Teachers Union, the City Union of Baltimore, and the Fraternal Order of Police ("Plaintiffs")...
Views: 0
*406 OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Appellants Donald Henderson and Air Line Pilots Association International (“Collectively referred to as ALPA”) seek review of the final order entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware entered on May 12, 1992, granting the motion of Appellee Continental Airlines, Inc., (“Continental”) for judgment on the pleadings. (Docket Item [“...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Presently pending before the Court is an appeal by Frederick County National Bank from a decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. This case arises from appellant’s motion in the Bankruptcy Court to lift the automatic stay to permit appellant to pursue certain non-estate assets consisting of tenancy by the entireties property exempted by the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court in these consolidated actions are Mellon Bank’s motions for summary judgment in mortgage foreclosure and for judgments on notes, and the responses of the defendants. Defendants assert several defenses to Mellon's attempts to obtain judgment on the notes secured by the mortgages and to foreclose on the mortgages to their vacation condominiums in the Blue K...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM This is a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request that, after processing, is ripe for disposition. Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment has been fully briefed and the Court has conducted an in camera inspection of the full text of the documents released to plaintiff in redacted form. 1 This inspection and the information contained in the motions provide a sufficien...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION In this action, plaintiff McGregor Printing Corporation (“McGregor”) challenges an informal rulemaking decision of the Committee for Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped (“Committee”) to add computer tabulating machine paper to a list of commodities and services which the federal government procures solely from blind and handicapped workshops. Before the Cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs in each of these similar lawsuits are employees who were terminated in the fall of 1991 from District of Columbia government employment by Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly (“the Mayor”). Their *797 terminations were part of an effort to reduce the bloated District of Columbia budget in order to prevent the city from sinking further into financial crisis. The Court has consolidat...
Views: 1
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Erwin J. Spence, Jr. (“plaintiff”), moves for partial summary judgment and for an order striking defendants’ respective Answers for abuse of discovery. Defendants cross-move for summary judgment against all of plaintiff’s causes of action. The parties’ respective summary judgment motions are brought pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiff’s mo...
Views: 6
805 F. Supp. 584 (1992)
Gerald H. FLEISCHFRESSER, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DIRECTORS of SCHOOL DISTRICT 200, Body Politic and Corporate, Defendant.
No. 91 C 7780.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 2, 1992.
Robert V. Gildo, William J. Stogsdill, Jr., P.C., Wheaton, Ill., for plaintiffs.
Anthony Gael Scariano, Lawrence Jay Weiner, John D. Dalton, Justino D. Petrarca, Lisa Ann ...
Views: 0
This cause comes to the Court upon the Plaintiffs’ motion to remand this action to the Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida. After due consideration it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
The Defendants petitioned for removal on May 4, 1992 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1441(b). Section 1331 bestows original jurisdiction on district courts in ...
Views: 0
OPINION.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Background
Plaintiff is a former police officer for the Philadelphia Police Department. In January of 1990, he was convicted of charges relating to his role in a drug...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
In this case, which involves participants in the solid waste disposal business, Plaintiffs allege violations of state and federal antitrust law, state and federal civil rights law and state common law. Counts I, II, III, and III-A
1
of the complaint seek relief from Defendants City of Auburn, Mid-Maine Waste Action Corporation (MMWA...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION
This age discrimination action is currently before the Court on the motion of defendant Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. (“Columbia”), joined by defendant Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc. (“Sony”), for an order of transfer to the United States District Court for the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). For the following reasons, defendants’ ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Sotheby’s, Inc. (“Sotheby’s”) commenced this interpleader action against the Republic of the Philippines (the “Philippines”) and Sandra H. Garcia (“Garcia”) on June 27, 1992 as a neutral stakeholder. Presently before the Court is defendant Garcia’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. or, in the alter...
Views: 2
Page 14880
JUDGMENT
Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, as well as any objections which have been filed thereto, the applicable law and the memo-randa and exhibits filed by counsel of record, and finding the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to be correct;
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Farmers...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Nine defendants are charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and conspiracy to distribute cocaine and marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(B)(ii) and 841(b)(1)(D).
This court heard motions in this case on July 30, 1992 during which defendants Ernest Shifflett and Margaret Shifflett, pursuant to
Brady v. Maryland,
...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 879 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Tyrone ROBERSON, Defendant.
No. 89-10106.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
August 4, 1992.
Kim Fowler, Asst. U.S. Atty., Wichita, Kan., for plaintiff.
Cyd Gilman, Federal Public Defender, Wichita, Kan., for defendant.
*880 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
THEIS, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on a petition for probatio...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on two motions filed by the defendant: (1) Motion for verbatim copy of guilty plea hearing *1540transcript and sentencing hearing transcript, Doc. 126; and (2) Motion for an order to expedite delivery of guilty plea and sentencing hearing transcripts to defendant, Doc. 129. In the former motion, defendant asserts that he has been granted leave t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on a motion for summary judgment by the garnishee, Hawkeye Security Insurance Company (“Hawkeye”) (Doc. 56). This case involves an accident which occurred on November 2, 1987 in Finney County, Kansas. A tractor-trailer driven by plaintiff Daniel J. Wallen and owned by plaintiff Wallen and Sons, Inc. was involved in a collision with a 19...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a criminal action in which defendant is charged with thirteen counts of misapplication of bank funds under 18 U.S.C. § 656 and one count of knowingly submitting false statements to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1007. 1 Before this court are defendant’s motion to strike portions of the indictment as surplusage (Doc. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
First Federal Savings Bank of Newton, Kansas (“First Federal”) brought this action against defendant Continental Casualty Company, seeking a declaration that certain losses incurred by it on two construction loans are covered under a savings and loan blanket bond issued to First Federal by the defendant. The loans in question were issued by First Federal’s wholly-owne...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the court on the Defendant’s Motion to Limit Review to the Administrative Record, filed April 30, 1992, and the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, filed May 18,' 1992. The court has reviewed the Defendant’s motions and supplements, the Plaintiffs’ responses, the Defendant’s reply, the entire case file, the arguments of c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In 1986 an ankle injury forced police officer Frank Buttitta (“Buttitta”) to go on disability leave. Buttitta has sued the city of Chicago (“City”) and its police officials Hubert Holton (“Holton”) and Richard Wedgbury (“Wedgbury”) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), seeking to force his reinstatement to active duty and to collect damages for defendants’ past r...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Richard Redzinski seeks an order staying all civil proceedings in this action pending completion of the related criminal trial. The government moves to intervene for the same purpose — to move for a stay of all civil discovery. For the reasons set forth below, these motions are granted.
FACTS
Plaintiff in' this action, Twenty-First Century Corporat...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
sitting as a United States District Court. Judge by designation.
INTRODUCTION
In this action for infringement of trademark, brought under sections 32 and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. §~ 1114(a), 1125(a) (1988), defendants seek modification of this court's Order and Opinion of July 15, 1992, 798 F.Supp. 177 adopting the report and re...
Views: 3
ORDER NO. 467
DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AGAINST THE PRE-FIRE INSURERS
Before the Court are numerous motions
1
filed by several Dupont Entities,
2
the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee (PSC) and the Dupont Entities’ Pre-fire Insurers.
3
After
*629
review and careful consideration of the matters contained therein, the Court finds that the claims aga...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed on February 21, 1992. After carefully consid*1427ering said motion and brief, Plaintiffs’ response, Defendant’s reply, and all evidence submitted in support thereof, this Court is of the opinion that Defendant’s motion is meritorious and should be GRANTED.
This lawsuit arises under...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER On November 4, 1991, defendants, Video Playback, Inc. ("VPI”) and Mary and Myron Kozak removed this action to federal court from Chittenden Superior Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1446. On November 20, 1991, defendants moved to *1559 dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction, or in the alternative, to transfer venue to the District of New Jersey. Plaintif...
Views: 0
Page 14941
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 3, 1990 plaintiff Jaime Lora-Rivera filed this action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) seeking compensatory relief for damages arising out of malicious prosecution. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss
1
which was opposed by plaintiff. Even taking into account the arguments presented in the untimely filed opposition, plaintiff’s claim ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Pandora Industries, Inc. appeals the Bankruptcy Court’s decision requiring it to reimburse Paramount Communications Inc. for monies advanced by Paramount to a lessor to cure defaults in leases held by Pandora.
BACKGROUND
On September 15, 1983, Kayser Roth Corporation, a former wholly owned subsidiary of Paramount Communications Inc., entered into three real pro...
Views: 1
REVISED ORDER
(Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims)
The United States moves to dismiss defendant Martech’s counterclaims for indemnification and discriminatory enforcement activities by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with respect to the Knik Arm Power Plant. The motion is opposed. Oral argument has not been requested and is not deemed necessary.
The issues presented by the instant motion a...
Views: 1
OPINION
As Alfred Hitchcock, the master of cinematographic terror and suspense, is reported to have said, “terror results from disorder,” and begging, the subject of the statute here under constitutional attack, over time has been viewed as the archetypical expression of disorder.
1
Since the early days of western civilization, people have sought to define the conduct that viol...
Views: 1
ORDER During the civil trial of James Censullo v. Brenka Video, et al., C. 90-097-L, a witness Michael J. Barniele, subpoenaed by plaintiff’s counsel failed to appear. A bench warrant was issued for his arrest. In order to address the issue of whether Barniele should be found in contempt for failing to appear in this court on Monday, July 27, 1992 at 10:00 a.m. some background on the Censullo v. B...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This cause is before the Court on Defendants Richmond, Booth, and Cook's individual Motion for Final Summary Judgment filed on June 15, 1992; and Defendants Martin, Richmond, Booth, Cook, Figurski, and Taylor's Motion for Summary Judgment also filed on June 15, 1992. Because the cause of action and ensuing motions stem from the same s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Among the issues presented in this Jones Act case, is, the interesting and elusive question of whether a seaman can recover damages for purely emotional distress.
This is an action by the plaintiff Kurt Puthe, Jr. (“Puthe” or plaintiff), brought pursuant to the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 688, claiming negligence and unseaworthiness on the part of the defenda...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER The plaintiffs are all female (Michael Fitzgerald, student coach of the women’s club ice hockey team, withdrew from this action), and former students at the defendant Colgate University (“Colgate”), located in Hamilton,' New York. They are also former members of the Colgate women’s club ice hockey team. The complaint was filed on April 10, 1990, and Colgate filed...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Perez is an illegal alien who pled guilty to reentry into the United States after deportation. *923His considerable prior record gave him the highest criminal history category of VI and he was sentenced by this Court to 46 months’ imprisonment — the top of the guideline range — followed by three years of supervised release with this Court. Appeal was taken from the sen...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, OPINION AND ORDER In 1988, plaintiffs, then Connecticut residents, purchased a 1988 Mazda automobile, registered it in Connecticut, and paid the state sales tax of 7.5 percent of the car’s value. In 1990, plaintiffs moved to Vermont, bringing the Mazda with them. To register the vehicle in Vermont, as they wish to do, they are required by Vermont law to pay a use tax of five p...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
On April 14, 1992, United States Magistrate Judge Sharon E. Grubin filed a Report and Recommendation that this Social Security disability case be remanded to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to obtain further evidence and apply appropriate legal standards. The Secretary does not object to this recommendation but urges that the remand be under sentence 4 of 42 U....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this case, employees claim they lost benefits when the plant where they worked was sold to another company. Plaintiffs, Leonard Gillis and Valdo A. Sargeni, are asserting claims against Hoechst-Celanese Corporation and the Hoechst-Celanese Retirement Plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1371, and the Delaware Wage Payment and Collecti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
George Lee Poe sues Holiday Inns, Inc. under the Texas Dramshop Act, Tex. Alco.Bev.Code Ann. § 2.02 (Vernon’s Supp. 1991), and for common law negligence. Poe sues for personal injuries he suffered in an automobile accident on October 18, 1983. Poe alleges that he was intoxicated at the time of the accident and that Holiday Inn negligently served him alcohol. The effective date ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM William and JoAnn Emrick sue Calcasieu Kennel Club, Inc. (CKC) for injuries their daughter, Ry Ann, incurred when she was struck by an automobile in the parking lot at a dog show hosted by CKC. CKC now moves to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction or to transfer. PERSONAL JURISDICTION The exercise of jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant requires that the defendant be amenable to...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 9, 1991, Garland Shane Hogan died in an accident at Malone Lumber Incorporated’s plant in Merryville, Louisiana where he worked. Hogan’s wife and son sued Malone Lumber in state court in Jasper, Texas for gross negligence in causing Hogan’s death. The Hogans assert causes of action under the Texas wrongful death and survival statutes, Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Co...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Optimal Health Care Services, Inc. sued Travelers Insurance Company for various state law claims related to medical care that Optimal provided to an employee of Texaco pursuant to an employee benefit plan issued to Texaco by Travelers. Travelers moved for summary judgment on February 28, 1992. Optimal did not respond. This court granted summary judgment to Travelers aga...
Views: 0
Page 14987
OPINION
This order addresses the motion to remand the instant action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) filed by plaintiffs Milo L. Pike and Henry M. Powers. For the reasons that follow, the court grants plaintiffs’ motion.
1. Background
Primarily in 1988, plaintiffs acquired approximately 440,000 shares of common stock, at a cost of approximately $8.8 million, in a bank holdin...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant brings this motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c), or alternatively, for summary judgment under Rule 56(b) dismissing the case. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants defendant’s summary judgment motion in part, and denies defendant’s summary judgment motion in part.
Factual Background
The relevant facts can be summarized brief...
Views: 2
Page 14994
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiffs commenced this action on February 25, 1992, alleging that defendants breached their duty to fairly represent plaintiff union members in connection with a sympathy strike against Morrell-Sioux Falls which members of Local 304A conducted in support of the Sioux City local.
Defendants have each moved for dismissal under Rule 12 on the basis that (...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING DECISION OF BANKRUPTCY COURT On October 5, 1988, Larry Pankey filed an original petition under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee, Western Division. On January 17, 1989, the Debtor was granted a discharge, and the case was closed on February 15, 1989. On October 6, 1989, Appellant, Tom Karr, filed a motion t...
Views: 1
OPINION
Edward F. Solomon appeals from the March 31, 1992, final judgment and order of the bankruptcy court in adversary proceeding No. SL 91-8605 determining the amount of his secured claim. At issue in this appeal is the bankruptcy court’s determination of the amount of attorney fees and interest allowable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 506(b).
I.
This matter arises out of the Chapte...
Views: 2
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This case takes us to the outer limits of the erosion of the doctrine of employment at will under Massachusetts law created by the enforcement of putative oral contracts and employer liability for discharges said to be contrary to public policy. Plaintiff John D. Sullivan (“Sullivan”) sues his former employer, Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Today we resolve the following challenges to the constitutionality of the Illinois death penalty scheme, Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 38, 119-1: (1) that the statute and jury instructions impose a presumption in favor of death in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution (Ground 5)
1
; (2) that the act is unconstitutio...
Views: 5
OPINION
On March 2, 1992, defendant Wilbart McCoy, Jr. entered a guilty plea to count two of a two-count indictment. Defendant pled guilty to Possession of a Firearm During a Drug Trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). At the plea proceeding', defendant admitted that he knowingly possessed a handgun (a R.G. Industries, model RG31, .38 special handgun, serial number Q182749) at the same...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled and numbered cause was called for trial before the Court without a jury on January 20, 1992, in the United States Courthouse in Sherman, Texas, and the Court having heard all the testimony and considered all admissible evidence, as well as the argument of counsel and their proposed findings and conclusions, hereby enters its findi...
Views: 0
OPINION This matter was tried before the undersigned on March 23 and 24, 1992 in Shreveport, Louisiana. Plaintiffs, Roy and Laura Bell, seek damages individually and on behalf of their minor children for damages sustained when Roy Bell was mowing a lawn on October 7, 1987. On that date, while mowing the lawn of Mr. J.P. Somner in the early morning hours, Roy Bell severed the big and second toes...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter is before the Court on motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue, submitted by each of the three defendants at bar. Plaintiffs, Rosalie and Michael Horvath, are Michigan residents who seek compensation for injuries which they allege arise from defendants’ negligent acts and omissions during defendants’ treatment of Rosalie Horvath’s right knee. Pla...
Views: 0
Page 15020
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Maruka Machinery Corporation of America (“Maruka”) moves, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss Counts V, VI, and VII in Merchants Publishing Company’s (“Merchants”) First Amended Complaint. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS the motion.
1
This action began about a year ago. Merchants, complaining of faulty printing presses it ...
Views: 1
RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
FACTS
Defendants move, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), (2), (4), (5) and (6), to dismiss the amended complaint.
This case is a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Michael Younger, a former inmate at the Bridgeport Correctional Center. Plaintiff’s original pro se complaint was filed against the State of Connecti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The plaintiffs have brought this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages for alleged violations of their First Amendment rights. The matter is before the court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. This action arises out of the plaintiffs’ arrest for violating a city noise ordinance. On four separate occasions in 1989 the four plaintiffs w...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, John W. Braxton, has brought this action against his labor union and former employer chiefly because he believes his union did not fairly represent him after United Parcel Service discharged him on December 27, 1990. Mr. Braxton seeks in this action to replay the internal political warfare within the International Brotherhood of Teamsters that resulted in the recent ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced action, Robert L. Pryor, (“appellant”) trustee of the bank
*373
ruptcy estates of the Great South Beach Construction, Inc. and Great South Beach Marine Construction (“debtors”) appeals, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), from a final order of the Honorable Cecelia H. Goetz, United States Bankruptcy Judge, entered in the United States ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action involves a public entity’s attempt to rescind an award of contract work to the lowest bidder, after the next to lowest bidder protested. The suit was originally brought in the Chancery Court of Prentiss County, Mississippi. At defendant Vanderheyden’s behest, it was removed to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441
et seq.
Thereupon, an expedited...
Views: 0
ORDER
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) brought this action as the receiver of Mt. Zion State Bank (Mt. Zion) against three former officers and directors of Mt. Zion. The FDIC took control of the bank on November 4, 1988. The FDIC claims that the defendants engaged in unsound loan practices causing the bank to suffer substantial losses and impairment of its assets totalling...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court pursuant to Auburn University’s (“AU”) submission of its new admissions policy for the 1993-94 school year. This Court, in its Remedial Decree of December 30, 1991, held AU’s admission policy violated Title VI and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and ordered AU to modify its current undergraduate admissions policy consistent w...
Views: 0
ORDER The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) seeks a warrant to enter the business premises and seize the property of an allegedly delinquent taxpayer. The magistrate judge refused to authorize the IRS to seize all “property belonging to said taxpayer,” but rather limited the IRS to seizure of property specifically identified in the declaration of Deborah Glover, the revenue officer. The IRS now see...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This is a petition for habeas corpus challenging petitioner's New York State court conviction on January 20, 1978 for murder and conspiracy, upheld on state appellate review in
People v. Theriot,
83 A.D.2d 796, 441 N.Y.S.2d 759 (2d Dept.1981),
leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied,
54 N.Y.2d 767, 443 N.Y.S.2d 1058, 426 N.E.2d 782 (1981).
Pe...
Views: 0
OPINION DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL VACATUR AND MODIFICATION OF COURT’S OCTOBER 17, 1991 ORDER ON FEDERAL STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
On June 20, 1991, the United States Supreme Court announced a new, uniform one-year/three-year statute of limitations for federal securities claims. Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2773, 115 L.Ed.2d 321 (1991). In a...
Views: 0
Page 15085
AMENDED ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the Claimant, Virginia Boschian’s, ore ten-us Motion to Admit Polygraph Examination, made in open Court on February 25, 1992, and upon Plaintiff, United States of America’s, Motion For Directed Verdict as to the issue of standing and alternatively, as to the issue of relation back, made in open court on February 27,1992. In ruling on said...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. Introduction-
On August 8, 1990,. plaintiffs John and Kathy Moore filed the instant action seeking recovery of attorney fees and costs incurred by them in a due process hearing and related proceedings to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400
et. seq.,
and specifically 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e) [hereinafter “IDEA”]. On the 4th of November, 199...
Views: 0
ORDER Introduction Plaintiffs, Shukrieh Abdallah and His-ham Abdallah, Illinois residents, filed a two-count complaint against defendants, Keith W. Slagg and Wisconsin Provisions Co., Inc. Slagg resides in Wisconsin, and Wisconsin Provisions Co. is a Wisconsin corporation with its principal place of business in Wisconsin. Facts On November 20, 1989, Slagg allegedly drove into Shukrieh’s car, causi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER By Order dated January 6, 1992, I assigned supervision of discovery to United States Magistrate Judge Mark D. Fox. Plaintiffs have raised objections to two discovery rulings rendered by Magistrate Fox on May 28, 1992: a) upholding objections by defendant IBM to requests for production of a portion of minutes of an IBM meeting, and b) permitting internal dissemination of a report o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER In this Miller Act case (based upon 40 U.S.C. § 270a et seq.), plaintiff seeks to recover from a surety (General Insurance Company of America) and a prime contractor (Meridian Construction Corp.) because a designee of a subcontractor failed to pay plaintiff for materials used in a postal construction job. The parties have consented to a non-jury trial before United States Mag...
Views: 1
AMENDED ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Counter-Defendant, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s, Motion For Reconsider-' ation And Clarification Of Final Order Of Remand (DE 11). The Court has carefully considered the merits of said Motion and the entire court record in this matter.
A brief recitation of the procedural posture of the above-styled cause is necessary. On ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this action, plaintiffs are American insurance companies and retroceded rein-surers of risks covered by the defendant reinsurer, a Venezuelan company:- Two casualty claims submitted by the insured have given rise to disputes between plaintiffs and defendant with respect to the parties’ rights and obligations under the reinsurance policy between them.
I...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
[[Image here]]
Like Stuart Little, the little mouse born to human parents in E.B. White’s children’s classic, the Perdido Key beach mouse faces many of the same perils Stuart did: House cats (Snowbell), domestic mice (Stuart’s parents’ fears that he would venture down a mouse hole), and the human threat (of having his tail cut off by a farmer’s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case involves a claim for review of denial of disability benefits, brought under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405 and 1383 as well as 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Plaintiff, who has no education, cannot read or write and speaks no English, was part of a class of applicants granted a further hearing on disability benefit applications as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in
Bowen v....
Views: 0
ORDER AND PINAL JUDGMENT Before the Court is Petitioner Williams’ petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This cause was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 1(d) of Appendix C of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, as amen...
Views: 0
Page 15116
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Simon Arnold (“Arnold”) has filed a petition (the “Petition”) under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 against the Illinois Prisoner Review Board (the “Board”). For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order, the Board is ordered to answer the Petition.
Procedural Background
On October 18, 1971 Arnold pleaded guilty to two counts of murder and received two concurrent pri...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM ORDER In this case filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), plaintiff challenges denial by the Secretary of Health and Human Services of his claim for disability benefits based on injuries due primarily to a 1988 motor vehicle accident. *1068Plaintiff had been a New York State corrections officer and has not worked since 1988. According to a medical assessment of June 13, 1990, plaintiff can...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This case is a private action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERC-LA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601
et seq.,
as amended by the Superfund Amendment and. Reau-thorization Act of 1986 (“SARA”), brought by the lesseé and operator of a landfill facility against thirty-three defendants, most of whom contributed to plaintiff’s
...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
Plaintiffs brought this action to challenge assertedly improper expansion of the activities of a gas compressor facility in Stony Point, New York and its operation in such a way as to produce excessive noise, vibration, and harm to their nearby properties. Defendant has moved for summary judgment.
Defendant’s facility is. subject to regulation by the Federal E...
Views: 0
OPINION
In this case
pro se
plaintiff Vincent Caputo, a prisoner at the Southern State Correctional Facility (“Southern State”) in Delmont, New Jersey, filed a class action on behalf of himself and his fellow inmates against defendants William Fauver, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections of the State of New Jersey; Warren Crawford, Legal Services Coordinator for the De...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the motion of Third Party Defendants to dismiss, or in the alternative, for a more definite statement. The motion has been briefed and is ripe for disposition.
*1241
Background
On May 6, 1992, Plaintiffs Jon and Carol Toberman filed a complaint against the captioned defendants. The complaint detailed counts of negligence and loss of co...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
On January 24,1991, plaintiffs, five
1
privately employed educators, filed this action alleging civil rights violations (Counts I and II) and pendent state law claim for breach of contract (Count III). Presently before the Court are defendants' motion for summary judgment
2
and plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment.
...
Views: 0
OPINION This matter comes before the Court on cross motions for summary judgment. In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 plaintiff seeks damages for an alleged violation of his Fourth Amendment rights when defendant forcibly entered plaintiff’s home to arrest him. Because his arrest in New Jersey was 1) authorized by the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:160-6 to 35 (the “Extradition...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION The Secretary of Labor (hereinafter “the Secretary”) initiated this suit in May, 1991, charging defendants with violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” or “FLSA”). This court has jurisdiction to hear the case pursuant to Section 17 of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 217, and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 134...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this disturbing diversity action to recover money damages for personal injury, the plaintiffs Fredericka Farris and Sara Fellez, adult sisters (ages 44 and 47) living in California and Hawaii, respectively, charge the defendant John W. Compton, their older brother (aged 51) with having sexually abused them during their childhood and adolescent years while growing up toge...
Views: 1
DECISION
The Plaintiff United States of America hereby seeks to enjoin the Defendants from continuing their pharmaceutical manufacturing and shipping operations until such time as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finds them to be in compliance with applicable federal law and regulations. On September 21, 1992, this Court issued a temporary restraining order, which order was extended...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On June 15, 1992, defendant Lawrence Lokuta filed a motion for summary judg
*83
ment in the above-eaptioned case. Plaintiffs John Hamilton and Jo-Bet, Inc. [“Jo-Bet”] filed a response June 30, 1992; and defendant filed a reply August 7, 1992. Additionally, on...
Views: 0
Page 15156
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant Beaty’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. Plaintiff filed this medical malpractice case alleging that jurisdiction existed because of diversity among the parties.Defendant Beaty claims that he is a domiciliary of Tennessee, as is Plaintiff, and, consequently, total diversity does not exist. On Septembe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM I. INTRODUCTION Before the court is a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in behalf of Wayne Hawthorne. The petitioner entered a plea of guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). United States v. Hawthorne, No. 91-142-Cr.-T-10(b) (M.D.F1. Aug 7,1991). He now argues that his prior conviction cannot serve as the basis ...
Views: 0
Page 15168
DECISION AND ORDER
On March 20, 1992, defendants, a school district and its superintendent, moved for partial summary judgment on plaintiff Lawrence Terry’s claim that his due process rights were violated when defendants temporarily suspended him from his position as principal. For reasons discussed below, the motion is granted.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Lawrence Terry (“...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are defendants’ motion for summary judgment and plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Donald Brumm brings this action against the Bert Bell NFL Player Retirement Plan (“Plan”), its trustees and its administrator under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Plaintiff currently receives $750.00 per month in disabilit...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action for damages brought by the Plaintiffs Edward I. Glenn and Robert
*1291
T. Glenn against Exxon Company, U.S.A. (“Exxon”). The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant unreasonably withheld its consent to assignment, transfer or sale of the Plaintiffs’ automobile service station lease to a third party, thereby violating 6 Del.C. § 2909(5). Plaintiffs origi...
Views: 2
OPINION AND ORDER
August 1, 1991, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) published in the Federal Register final regulations regarding the use and evaluation of various medical evidence used by adjudicators in Title II and Title XVI disability determinations. 56 Fed.Reg. 36,932-70 (1991) (to be codified at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.-1502-416.993) (the August 1, 1991 regulations...
Views: 0
AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER Defendants the United States of America, Small Business Administration, Robert Miller, Curtis Charter, Anthony McMahon and Ann Knauff moved on November 12, 1991, to dismiss this action on various grounds. Defendant James Deshazer joined in this motion on February 12, 1992. For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On May 23, 1991, pro se ...
Views: 0
ORDER
The defendant, Hyster Company, has moved, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.
62(d)
1
2
,
to stay enforcement, of the court’s order to arbitrate with the plaintiff union and has sought leave to file a $25,000.00 supersede-
*1375
as bond in support of its motion. The plaintiff opposes the stay as inappropriate under Rulé 62(a). Alternativel...
Views: 0
*1368
ORDER
The plaintiff, Independent Lift Truck Builders Union (“Union”) and the- defendant, Hyster Company, are parties to a collective bargaining agreement (“the Agreement”). The Union has sued Hyster to compel Hyster to arbitrate a grievance. According to the Union, Hyster violated the Agreement by unilaterally making changes to its retiree benefits plan. Hyster has moved to...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Tony Robinson has brought this lawsuit against his employer, Fikes of Alabama, Inc., and the company’s president, J.W. Brown, claiming that Fikes failed to provide Robinson with group medical insurance. Robinson rests his complaint on several theories of state law: breach of contract; negligence; and misrepresentation, deceit, and fraud. Robinson initially filed his lawsui...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion
in limine
to preclude Defendant from introducing evidence that plaintiff Paul Kern’s co-worker was negligent. Defendants have submitted a response, and the motion is now ripe for consideration.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Paul J. Kern alleged in his complaint that on July 28, 1989, he was injured at his work place when a fell...
Views: 0
Page 15182
ORDER
This litigation arises out of the 1988 sale to plaintiffs of a distribution warehouse business, Manchester Manufacturing, Inc. (“MMI”), located in Colebrook, New Hampshire. Plaintiffs, Manchester Manufacturing Acquisitions, Inc. (“Acquisitions”), Gary A. Dinco, and Felix J. Weingart, Jr.,
1
bring this civil action against Sears, Roebuck and Company (“Sears”), Dylex Limite...
Views: 1
ENTRY
Before the Court is a dispute over the meaning of an insurance policy — specifically whether a homeowner’s policy that State Farm (“Plaintiff”) issued to Gregory Thornton requires Plaintiff to provide a defense for Gregory and Nancy Thornton
*1447
(collectively the “Thorntons”) in a suit filed on behalf of Rachel Nicole Vaughn a/k/a Euniceeah Thornton (“Ms. Vaughn”) in ...
Views: 0
ENTRY
Kinko’s Graphics Corporation (“Plaintiff”) moves the Court for an order of prejudgment possession against Earl C. Townsend, Jr. (“Townsend”) and Townsend & Townsend (collectively, “Townsends”). Plaintiff is the owner of a building (the “real estate”) located at 150 East Market Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. Townsends presently occupy the second floor of the real estate pursuant to a ...
Views: 0
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prohibit defendants from continuing to restrict plaintiffs pursuant to the Right of First Refusal/Compensation Rules of Plan B. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary res...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendant Randall Terry has served and filed nine separate motions in connection with his forthcoming criminal contempt trial before this Court.
Defendant’s motions are:
1. Motion to Take Deposition of Governor Bill Clinton;
2. Motion to Recuse;
3. Motion to Disqualify the Attorney General from Appointment as Prosecutor;
4. Motion for Bill of Particulars;
...
Views: 0
Page 15249
Defendants G. Fred Ours (“Ours”) and Disciplinary Board of the Louisiana State Bar Association (“Disciplinary Board”) separately filed motions to dismiss plaintiffs claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. In the alternative, they each ask the court to abstain, find defendants immune from suit, or grant summary judgment. Ours also filed a motion to dismiss for lack ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 5 (1992)
Lawrence ALTEN, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
ATLANTIC FINANCIAL FEDERAL, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 87-8343.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
October 6, 1992.
Gerard Egan, Philadelphia, Pa., for intervenors Eugene Aaron, Beggy Abrams Charlotte Baumgarten & Maurice Fox.
Steven M. Coren, Steven E. Berkowitz, Philadelphia, Pa., for Bay Cities National Bank.
J...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This lawsuit is by S & S Machinery (“plaintiff”) against Masinexportimport (“defendant”), a machine tool trading company wholly owned and controlled by the Romanian government, to recover damages resulting from the purchase of defective equipment. Plaintiff was successful at trial and on July 10, 1991 we entered judg
*1110
ment in its favor against defendant...
Views: 0
The Cable Doctor, Inc. and Kenneth Sanders (collectively “Cable Doctor”) move to dismiss the complaint of Manhattan Cable Television, Inc. (“MCTV”) under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Fed.R.Civ.P. The complaint alleges that Cable Doctor installed an additional outlet for an MCTV subscriber for a fee which allowed that subscriber to receive the cable signal provided by MCTV on a second television set at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court upon defendants’, motion for summary judgment and plaintiff’s cross-motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability only. Plaintiff brings suit alleging various constitutional violations by defendant A.T. Lemonds, a detective for the Cape Girar-deau Police Department. Plaintiff seeks injunctive and monetary relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 198...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and the Ohio Public Interest Research Group bring this citizen action, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1365, against Vygen Corporation for violations of the Clean Water Act. Both environmental groups have moved for partial summary judgment on the question of liability. Vygen has moved for summary judgment as well. For the reasons stated...
Views: 1
ORDER AND REASONS
Jefferson Parish School Board and other defendants have filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and in the alternative, have filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Geraldine Moody (“plaintiff”) filed an opposition to both motions. In a subsequent motion, plaintiff notified the Court that she wishes to dismiss with ...
Views: 1
Page 15308
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court to consider the motion of the Plaintiff for a preliminary injunction, Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(a), and the motion of the Defendant to dismiss, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Haffey is one of three candidates for election to the Office of Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court. Unlike the other two candidates, Plai...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT, AND ORDER VACATING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Neil J. Farkas, D.O. and Neil J. Farkas, D.O., P.C. (“Dr. Farkas” or “Plaintiff”) commenced this action in Wayne County Circuit Court on December 21,1991. In his two-count Complaint, Dr. Farkas alle...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff commenced this action on August 1, 1990, seeking to recover, under various federal and state law theories, the costs plaintiff allegedly has incurred or will incur to clean up the alleged chemical contamination of certain property located in Niagara Falls, New York (the “Site”). Jurisdiction is predicated on 28 U.S.C. § 1331, § 113(b) of the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendant pied guilty to importation of 244.1 grams of heroin from Amsterdam. Under a plea agreement she may not move for. a downward departure. The court may, however, depart on its own motion. United States v. Ramirez, 792 F.Supp. 922, 922 (E.D.N.Y.1992). Such a departure is required. Defendant is a United States citizen living in Los Angeles. She is 27 years old. *8...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Plaintiff Rent Stabilization Association brings this action on behalf of its members to challenge certain provisions of the New York City Rent Stabilization Law, and the rent stabilization regulations of the New York State Divisio...
Views: 0
Page 15325
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This case arises from a complicated set of twists and turns in the professional lives of the plaintiffs as well as the impact of certain entrepreneurial maneuverings by outside parties upon the plaintiffs’ post-professional lives. Raymond and Roberta
*832
Auwarter brought this lawsuit to obtain a lump sum benefit which they contend is due them un...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This civil forfeiture action is brought by the plaintiff, United States of America, in rem under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7)
1
against the following defendant real properties: premises known as 717 South Woodard (“the 717 South Woodard property”), premises known as 245 and 247 North Second Street (“the Food Market property”), premises known as 209-211 and 213-217 No...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
I. BACKGROUND
This diversity action arises out of a fire that occurred on May 24, 1988 in three buildings located at 102, 104, and 106 South 13th Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The buildings were originally constructed as separate structures, but a passageway was added connecting the second floor levels of 102 and 104 South 13th Street. Plaintiff Commonwealt...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 11, 1991, plaintiff Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe (tribe) filed a complaint seeking a declaration that keno and pick bingo are class II games and not class III games under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2721. Jurisdiction is premised on the existence of a question arising under federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
After an
ex parte
presentation to the court, the United States obtained a warrant of seizure and monition, permitting it to seize and encumber the property located at 8215 Reese Road in Harvard, Illinois. 8215 Reese Road is the home of John and Maura Wangler (“Wanglers,” “Claimants”). The Wanglers claim that because they were denied a pre-seizure no...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. The court heard oral argument on November 28, 1991 in Albany, New York. For the reasons stated below, the court grants defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment and denies plaintiffs’ motion.
I.BACKGROUND
This action is premised on defendants’ refusal ...
Views: 0
*1184
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants Zuber and Burlington Northern Railroad Company’s motions for summary judgment (filings 90 and 97). Although confronted with a small mountain of paper, I conclude that the defendants’ motions should be granted. The straightforward legal issue, uncomplicated by disputed material facts, is whether the so-called...
Views: 2
ORDER This cause is before the Court pursuant to Local Rule 15(a) on the Bill of Costs of Defendants Mitchell Company and Mitchell Equities and the objection thereto of Plaintiffs Alexandria Associates, Ltd., and Anthony J. Lasala. Having found that Plaintiffs’ Response Objecting to Defendants’ Itemization of Costs is untimely, the Court declines to review the taxation of costs by the clerk pursua...
Views: 0
The instant motion to remand this action to state court requires the court to decide whether the indemnity agreement at issue is an employee welfare benefit plan within the meaning of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461. Concluding it is not, the court remands the case to state court.
I
Plaintiff Thomas A. Floerchinger (“Floerchinger”)...
Views: 0
Page 15393
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This lawsuit stems from disciplinary proceedings instituted against the plaintiff James M. Parker by the local bargaining unit of his union. In response to those proceedings, he brought this suit against five defendants: his co-worker who filed the grievance against him; three members of the committee which investigated her complaint; and the chair of the committee whic...
Views: 1
Page 15394
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. BACKGROUND From September 1, 1983 to July 31, 1989 and from February 1, 1990 to July 31,1990, plaintiffs Youava Vang and Vang Chang Heu (hereinafter “plaintiffs”) were recipients of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (“AFDC”) benefits, which made them categorically eligible for food stamp benefits. Complaint at 117. In May 1989, plaintiffs reported the purchase of...
Views: 0
Page 15397
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter has come before the Court at a hearing on September 2, 1992 upon the motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment of Defendants the City of Romulus, the City of Romulus Police Department, and Officer John Doe. This is a civil rights action arising out of Defendant Financial Federal Credit’s r...
Views: 0
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation entered on March 3, 1992 by Magistrate/Judge Thomas G. Wilson. The Magistrate/Judge recommended that the Secretary of Labor’s Petition for Adjudication in Civil Contempt and for Enlargement of the Preliminary Injunction be denied. Rule 6.02 of the Rules of the United States District Court for t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Currently before the court is plaintiffs motion to strike the affirmative defenses of defendants Robert Kerr, Sam Powell, and Anna B. Schuhknecht, and the motion for summary judgment filed on behalf of Anna B. Schuhknecht and Robert Kerr. The parties opposing each motion have responded and the motions are now ready for decision.
I. BACKGROUND.
This action was ...
Views: 5
ORDER Before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint, which alleges termination of plaintiff’s employment in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons stated below, the defendants’ motion is granted. FACTS Plaintiff Jerry Coleman (Coleman) was employed as a deputy sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, beginning in 1978. Coleman was arrested by the Chicago polic...
Views: 0
Page 15402
805 F.Supp. 930 (1992)
William BASHAM and Norma Basham, Plaintiffs,
v.
Rocco FREDA, Director of Section Eight Housing of Hillsborough County, Florida;
Kevin McConnell, Director of Department of Housing Standards and Enforcement of Hillsborough County, Florida;
and
Frederick Karl, Administrator of Hillsborough County, Florida, Defendants.
No. 92-1210-CIV-T-17C.
United States District Court, M.D. F...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The plaintiff below in the adversary proceeding in the Bankruptcy Court, and who is also the bankruptcy debtor, has appealed the dismissal of his complaint and amended complaint in that proceeding. He contends that the Bankruptcy Court erred by refusing to find that a penalty assessed against him by the Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter “IRS”) pursuant to ...
Views: 0
Page 15413
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED.
FACTS
This is an
in personam
admiralty action brought by plaintiff, cargo claimant, against defendant, vessel owner, for damage to plaintiff’s cargo of steel rebars allegedly sustained while en route on defendants’ vessel f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The subjects of this memorandum opinion and order are cross motions for summary judgment filed on December 20,1991. This suit arises from defendant’s refusal to comply with plaintiff’s request that defendant “apply for and obtain a private road easement to document his right of access across lands within the National Forest System and to extinguish any claim o...
Views: 2
ORDER
The matter before the court the appeal of Centura Bank (“Centura” or “bank”) from the judgment and order of the United States Bankruptcy Court granting the trustee’s motion for summary judgment and denying Centura’s motion for summary judgment. Jurisdiction over this proceeding is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 158. The parties have briefed their respective positions and the matter i...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This case is before me on Linda Petrino’s (“former trustee”) appeal from the bankruptcy court’s orders denying her fees and costs and imposing sanctions for violation of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11. The court below found that the fee application was “excessive, unjustified, and totally unsubstantiated” and denied the application in its entirety. After a sanctions hearing, the ban...
Views: 0
*32 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Debtor Denise Rachel Jordan appeals the bankruptcy court’s April 28, 1992 judgment. In that judgment, the bankruptcy court granted the objection of the Colorado Student Loan Program (CSLP) to Jordan’s motion to confirm her Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan and ordered her to file a revised plan. Jordan argues that the CSLP did not have standing to object to the plan ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
There are currently three sets of motions relating to substantive matters before the court. First, several of the defendants have moved for summary judgment based on the perceived incapacity of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) in its corporate role. Second, defendant LaForge has moved for summary judgment on the basis of the statute of limitations. Finally, the ...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 883 (1992)
Bryant K. WHITE, Plaintiff,
v.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant.
No. 91-1371-K.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
September 15, 1992.
*884 *885 Bryant K. White, pro se.
David J. Waxse and Barbara A. Harmon, of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Overland Park, Kan., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PATRICK F. KELLY, Chief Judge.
Mr. White, an African-American and former ...
Views: 1
ORDER Before the Court is defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Complaint. Defendant seeks to dismiss this action for: (1) lack of subject matter jurisdiction, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1); (2) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6); or (3) because the issues in the case are moot. Plaintiff has responded with objection. For the reasons that follow, defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the court is defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 17). In an *201order dated March 6, 1992, the court noted that plaintiff had not responded-to defendants’ motion for summary- judgment. Plaintiff was advised that if no response was filed, the court would proceed to decide whether summary judgment should be granted to defendants based on the uncon-troverted fac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff complains of the medical treatment he received for an eye condition, and seeks damages for alleged violations of the eighth amendment. Plaintiff names numerous defendants, which the court finds can be separated into two broad categories. There are defendants employed b...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of defendants Johnson County Jail Principal Administrator and Johnson County Jail Staff for summary judgment (Doc. 26) and on the motion of Robert D. Hanni-gan for dismissal (Doc. 21). Plaintiff has filed a response to each motion, and this matter is now ripe for review. Plaintiff is presently an inmate in the custody of the Secret...
Views: 0
OPINION
A group of employees commenced this action against their employer and their union under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185. This lawsuit' constitutes what has become known as a “hybrid” action in that plaintiffs allege (1) that their employer (McGraw Edison and Cooper Industries, Inc., “the company” or “the employer”) has violated the terms an...
Views: 0
*825
OPINION
We have before us the appeal of appellant, Sunbeam-Oster Company, Inc. (“Sunbeam-Oster”), and the cross-appeal of ap-pellee, Lincoln Liberty Avenue, Ltd. (“Lincoln Liberty”). Lincoln Liberty filed a claim for rent in a bankruptcy proceeding involving Sunbeam-Oster’s predecessor, Allegheny International, Inc. The bankruptcy court allowed this claim. Sunbeam-Oster now ...
Views: 1
OPINION
Petitioner, Troy Toulson, an inmate at Trenton State Prison, Trenton, New Jersey, seeks habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In support of his petition, *353he challenges both the fact and duration of his incarceration on the following grounds: (1) the admission of evidence at trial of statements petitioner made without the assistance of counsel violated petitioner’s federal...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a petition for habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is an inmate in the custody of the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Corrections. In this petition, Smith challenges his 1986 conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, of one count of rape in violation of K.S.A. 21-3502 and one count of aggravated criminal sodomy in ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for dismissal, or in the alternative, summary judgment (Doc. 12). Plaintiff, a former inmate at the Leavenworth County Jail, Leavenworth, Kansas, proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In this action, plaintiff contends he was subjected to unconstitutional conditions of conf...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motions for summary judgment.1 Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pau-peris on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is incarcerated at Lansing Correctional Facility (LCF) in Lansing, Kansas. He complains that he was denied due process and equal protection in being disciplined for destroying state property...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility, was convicted in September, 1986 of one count of burglary and one count of possession of burglary tools. On October 28, 1986, after imposition of the Habitual Criminal Act, he was sentenced to nine (9) ...
Views: 0
Page 15459
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff, an inmate in.the custody of the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Corrections, proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges his constitutional rights secured by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments were violated by discipl...
Views: 0
*196
ORDER
Before the court are defendant Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.’s (“Toyota Motor Sales”) motion for reconsideration of this court’s order remanding the case to state court, and plaintiff Michael Stemmons’s (“Stemmons”) motion to clarify this court’s remand order.
1
For the following reasons, the court denies the motion for reconsideration, denies the motion ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff Jo Ann De-Francesco’s motion for attorney’s fees.
1
For the reasons that follow, the motion is granted and plaintiff is awarded $26,421.60 in fees, $2,106 in expenses, and $120 in costs.
BACKGROUND
This case involves lengthy administrative and court proceedings over plaintiff’s claim for social security disability benefits for which...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Found guilty of importation and possession of heroin with the intent to distribute it, defendant objects to Probation’s Guideline calculation penalizing him for' committing perjury at his jury trial. For reasons • stated below his contention must be sustained even though he repeatedly told material untruths.
I. FACTS
Defendant is 35 years old and a citizen o...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction to restrain defendant from accepting interstate wagers on horseracing absent plaintiffs approval and on defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff alleges that defendant has accepted and plans to continue accepting wagers ...
Views: 3
Page 15466
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS UPON REMAND FROM THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS This matter comes before the court pursuant to an May 1,1992 order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit remanding this case for further findings. On September 10, 1991, this court conducted a trial on the merits of this case at the Iowa Men’s Reformatory at Anamosa, Iowa. On November 5,1991, the c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This action involves a demand by plaintiff Janet Dickerson for the immediate alienation and distribution to her of a portion of her former husband’s pension assets under the terms of a divorce decree. Plaintiff and defendant Southern Electrical Retirement Fund (“SERF”) have filed cross motions for summary judgment. The Court referred the motions to United States Magistrate Judg...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court are the objections of plaintiff-counterdefendant AM International, Inc. (“AMI”), defendants-counterclaim-ants DataCard Corporation and Addresso-graph Farrington, Inc., and counterclaim-ant DBS, Inc. (collectively “counterclaim-ants”) to Magistrate Judge Ronald A. Guzman’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”). For the following reasons, the court adopts the Report. T...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Some of the defendants (Kumm, Bach, Kaiser, Kellner, and Vavrina) (sometimes referred to as the “moving defendants”) have moved (Vol. 5, filing 43) to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, contending that statutes of limitations bar the assertions in count II and count- IV of the second amended complaint (Vol. 5, filing 20). I shall deny the motion as...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Dr. Marcia Wasserman filed this action on January 19, 1990, alleging in her complaint that defendants’ negligence caused her to suffer numerous injuries. Specifically, plaintiff was injured in a traffic accident on Rockland Avenue in Staten Island on November 27, 1988 at approximately 8:10 p.m. Plaintiff’s westbound car apparently crossed the center line at ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 8, 1992, plaintiff Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”) filed a verified complaint against Robert S. Kramer (“Kramer”) alleging the following causes of action: 1) breach of contract; 2) conversion of trade secrets, customer lists and confidential business information; 3) breach of fiduciary duty; and 4) unfair competition. Along wit...
Views: 3
ORDER On November 21, 1991, Medical Engineering Corporation filed a motion to reopen the trial record in this case to receive additional evidence. The basis for the motion is that American Medical Systems, Inc. has taken a position in other litigation between the parties (Medical Engineering Corporation v. American Medical Systems, Inc. No. 3-91-CV-348 (D.Minn.), which is allegedly inconsistent wi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is the motion for summary judgment of defendant Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”). For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
This action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“the ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621
et seq.,
arises from Lilly’s decision to terminate the employment of the plaintiff, Jimmy G. Moore ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 792 (1992)
Diosdodo Z. MATEO, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
The M/S KISO, et al., Defendants.
No. C-90-2357 DLJ.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
March 9, 1992.
*793 Marvin Stender, Esq., of McTernan, Stender & Walsh, San Francisco, Cal., and Richard Dodson, Sole Practitioner, Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiffs.
Frederick W. Wentker, Jr., and Phillip Dalton, of Lillick &...
Views: 0
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Cohen’s Report and Recommendation is hereby accepted and adopted by this court. Plaintiff’s complaint, therefore, is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
August 13, 1992
LAWRENCE P. COHEN, United States Magistrate Judge.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss (# 10) was referred to this court for rep...
Views: 1
After a jury trial, defendant Rawle Hinds was convicted of a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The facts produced at trial were straightforward, and the jury was justified in finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. FACTS When Mr. Hinds presented himself on December 10, 1991, at the Peace Bridge in Buffalo, New York, to an Immigration Inspector, he claimed to be a citizen, of Barbados and pres...
Views: 0
Page 15482
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — Institutional Division, L.H. Beaird and J.E. Neeley (Docket Entry # 17) and the Motion for Dismissal of Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff Frank S. Ale-man (Docket Entry # 21). Defendants seek summary judgment on the grounds that Aleman failed to...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendant Subaru of America, Inc.’s
1
(“Subaru of America") notice of removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446. For the following reasons, the court
sua sponte
remands the case to the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.
2
FACTS
According to the complaint, plaintiff Maria Navarro (“Navarro”) was a passenger in a 1982 Subaru ...
Views: 1
*1064 OPINION RE SENTENCING BACKGROUND On or about December 13, 1991, in the vicinity of 241 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York, an armored truck operated by the I.B.I. Security Service was parked while the two guards assigned to the truck attempted to deliver a tray containing $800,000 in cash from the Federal Reserve Bank to the Cho Hung Bank of New York. When one of the guards exited the t...
Views: 1
OPINION
In this § 1983 action by plaintiff pro se Mario Herrera (“Herrera”) against defendants Charles J. Scully, superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility et al. (collectively, “the Scully defendants”), Herrera has moved pursuant to Rules 11, 36(a), and 37, Fed.R.Civ.P., and 28 U.S.C. § 1927 for an order (1) determining the sufficiency of the Scully defendants’ responses to Herrera’s R...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION OBJECTING TO PLAINTIFF’S PROPOSED RULE 32(a)(2) USE OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS OF WITNESSES BENNETT, HUGHES, AND LUCIANO
The Court has before it for decision at this time Defendant’s Motion Objecting to Plaintiff’s proposed use of deposition transcripts of John Bennett, Thomas Hughes, and Debra Luciano pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil P...
Views: 0
ORDER AFFIRMING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Individual Objections to the Report and Recommendation Dated May 12, 1992 in the Instant Case. THE MATTER was referred to the Honorable Barry L. Garber, United States Magistrate Judge. A Report and Recommendation dated May 12, 1992, has been filed, recommending that this action be DISMISSED WIT...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, who is currently an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted on October 5, 1983, of one count of felony murder and two counts of aggravated robbery. He was sentenced to life imprisonment on the murder conviction and fifte...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility, Lansing, Kansas, was convicted on June 11, 1987, of three counts of kidnapping and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions on October 28, 1988. Petitio...
Views: 0
Page 15507
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court after response by the parties to the court’s order to show cause why the matter should not be remanded to the Riley County District Court because the United States District Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction through the improvident removal of this case by the plaintiff/counterclaim defendant Radio Shack Franchise Dept. (“Radio Shack”). B...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis on a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff complains that he was denied adequate and proper medical care while incarcerated in the Leavenworth County Jail in Leavenworth, Kansas. Plaintiff seeks damages for defendants’ alleged negligence, medical malpractice, infliction of mental and physical cruelty, and impo...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 328 (1992)
The CANDLEWOOD OBSTETRIC-GYNECOLOGIC ASSOCIATES, P.C. RETIREMENT TRUST, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
SIGNET BANK/MARYLAND, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. HAR 91-2581.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
October 5, 1992.
Holly Lindeman, Brocato, Price and Bushel, Baltimore, Md., for plaintiffs.
Steven K. Fedder and Russell J. Pope, Treanor and Pope, Fallston, Md., Ava E. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is the motion for summary judgment brought by defendants Asuncion R. Agosti and William B. Agosti (“the Agostis”) pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Agostis are the parents of codefendant Buck T. Rogers (“Mr. Rogers”). Plaintiffs Roy A. Niemann, Jr. and Beverly S.N. Niemann (“the Niemanns”) initiated th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before us on appeal from a final decision by the defendant Secretary of
*1319
Health and Human Services denying the plaintiff Terry L. Anthony’s claim for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income. The parties have submitted cross motions for summary judgment.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On November 15, 1988, the plaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on a civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this action. He claims his constitutional rights were violated during parole revocation proceedings and seeks damages and lost wages. Defendants have filed a Martinez report and Answer, which includes a request for dismissal of th...
Views: 0
OPINION
This is an action by plaintiffs Theodora Kantonides (“T. Kantonides”) and her husband Andreas Kantonides (“A. Kanto-nides”) (collectively, the “Kantonides”) against defendant KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (“KLM”). Jurisdiction appears to be appropriate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Currently before the court is the motion of KLM for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 21,1992, the Plaintiff, Ma-rubeni America Corporation (“Marubeni”), invoking this Court’s Admiralty and Maritime jurisdiction, filed a Verified Complaint against the cargo ship M/V UNITY,
in rem.
Based on the Complaint, this Court promptly issued a warrant
of
arrest for the ship, and the vessel was arrested the same day. On September 2...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case comes before the court on defendant’s objections to her pre-sentence report. Donna L. Italiano entered a plea of guilty to distributing cocaine base and conspiring to do so. These charges grew out of her arrest on October 3, 1991. On that date, she and her co-defendant, Edward Brown, were seen on a Philadelphia street corner standing near a black Cadillac. Several pe...
Views: 0
Page 15535
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court is Allegheny International’s appeal from the bankruptcy court’s determination that certain claims filed against it by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company are entitled to priority under section 507(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code. For the following reasons, we will affirm the decision of the bankruptcy court. I. BACKGROUND The relevant facts of this case are ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss based upon lack of personal jurisdiction, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2); ' improper venue, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3); and improper service of process, Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5). Plaintiff has filed an
*675
objection to Defendant’s motion, asserting that jurisdiction, venue, and service are proper. In the al...
Views: 0
*103OPINION The matter before the court is the motion of defendant, Alfred Lemmon, to continue release status pending appeal (#74). BACKGROUND Lemmon was found guilty by jury of three offenses involving unlawfully making, transferring and possessing silencers, and possessing a sawed-off shotgun. Lem-mon was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment of thirty months to commence on September 30, 199...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In this six-count action, Plaintiff seeks various benefits from Defendant under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 [“ERISÁ”], 29 U.S.C. § 1002
et seq.,
and 26 M.R.S.A. § 625-B and 626 (1988), governing severance pay and cessation of employment. Defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment on all counts...
Views: 0
OPINION The matters before the court are: 1) the motion of defendant United States Forest Service for summary judgment (#42); 2) the motion of defendant Mt. Hood Meadows, Oreg., Ltd. for summary judgment (#48); and 3) the motion of plaintiffs for summary judgment (# 50). UNDISPUTED FACTS Mt. Hood Meadows, Oreg., Ltd. (Mt. Hood Meadows) has had a special permit from the United States F...
Views: 0
ORDER TRANSFERRING DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND OTHER EXPENSES TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT INTRODUCTION On August 4, 1992, defendant Nickels and Dimes (“Nickels and Dimes”) filed its Application for Attorney’s Fees and Other Expenses (the “Application”) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B). Nickels a...
Views: 1
RULING On September 17, 1991 plaintiff, Larry Legrande, filed a complaint against Louis Sullivan, the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secre*1441tary), for improper denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. Plaintiff alleges that defendant’s decision constitutes an abuse of discretion and is not supported by the evidence. Plaintiff has exhausted his admi...
Views: 0
Page 15559
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter is presently before the court on the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant, Sargent & Greenleaf, Inc., (“Sargent & Greenleaf”) pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff Providence & Worcester Railroad Company (“Providence & Worcester”) initiated this diversity action seeking damages for a train derailme...
Views: 1
ORDER
On October 23, 1991, the Court heard defendant Admiral Insurance Company’s (“Admiral”) motion to dismiss; defendant Great' American Surplus Lines Insurance Company’s (“Great American”) motion for judgment on the pleadings; defendants Worldwide Insurance Agency, Inc. (“Worldwide”) and Security Services Insurance Company, Ltd.’s (“SSIC”) motion to extend time to respond to the Second ...
Views: 0
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM On July 6, 1992, defendant Ramon Hernandez-Coplin pled guilty to four counts of the Indictment in Criminal No. 92-090 and to six counts of the Indictment in Criminal No. 92-173, both charging violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. According to the Presentence Report (PSR) in Criminal No. 92-090, on April 16, 1992, at approximately 9:00 P.M., a U.S. *658Cust...
Views: 2
Page 15567
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Dial-A-Mattress International, Ltd., Dial-A-Mattress Operating Corporation (“Dial-A-Mattress Operating”), Napoleon Barragan, Luis Barragan (“Barragan”) and Joseph Yicens have moved to dismiss or stay this action brought against them by Sweet Dreams Unlimited, Inc. (“Sweet Dreams”), at least pending the resolution of arbitration proceedings that have been insti...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, Dwayne Craft (“Craft”), commenced this civil rights action against defendant, Pace South Division (“Pace”), improperly sued as Pace of South Holland. Plaintiff contends that Transit - Management of Harvey, Inc. (“TMOH”), the predecessor of Pace, violated his Fourth and *1352 Fourteenth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure and his right to pr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This internal union dispute has been intense. It has also been a moving target, with new revelations and new issues popping up as the case has progressed. The various issues have generated a number of motions, and a progression of events have, we understand, caused most of them to become moot. It is our understanding that only two issues now need to be resolved. The first is ...
Views: 0
Page 15590
OPINION
This case is before the court regarding two matters. One is a motion by the plaintiff to compel the payment of a supersede-as bond in satisfaction of a settlement agreement between itself and the defendant-in-bankruptcy. The other is an appeal by the intervenor-defendant from the finding of the bankruptcy court that the settlement agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant-...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion to dismiss filed by defendants Aigner Corp., American National Can Co., The Dexter Corp., Duplicolor Products Co., Graham Paint & Varnish Co.; Inc., Illinois Bronze Paint Co., Motorola, Inc., Prefinish Metals, Inc., Reynolds Metals Co., Roll Coater, Inc., S & C Electric Co., Sherwin Williams Co., Valspar, Inc., Whittaker Co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He complains that when he was transferred from the custody of Bourbon County officials to the custody of the Kansas State Department of Corrections, that Bourbon County official...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Facts
Sometime prior to August, 1988, plaintiff Jack Ameriglio-Dunn developed what he believed to be a unique idea for a “Travel Bank,” which would combine the services of a bank and travel agency in arranging and financing vacation t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION Michael Hamas was a pilot working out of West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, until 1981, when he took disability retirement. He died in 1988. This case concerns the issue of whether his estate is entitled to a $50,-000 death benefit pursuant to the terms of life insurance provided by his employer. In attempting to collect the death benefit to which they believe they are entitled, how...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Defendant Sunday River Skiway Corporation has moved to dismiss all counts of *540 Plaintiffs’ Complaint arguing that they have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges that Sunday River was negligent in failing to groom and clear the trail (Count I) and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This anti-trust action, which was instituted on November 26, 1991, by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on behalf of itself and the School District of Philadelphia, is presently before this Court pursuant to the Defendants’ Joint Motion for Summary Judgment. That motion is denied for the reasons set forth below.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF THE CASE
T...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15624: United Brotherhood of Carpenters Joiners v. Tile Helpers Union Local 88
Page 15624
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action concerns the disaffiliation of the members of a local union from its pre
*603
vious parent, the Tile, Marble, Terrazzo, Finishers, Shopworkers and Granite • Cutters International Union (AFL-CIO) (the “TMT International”). After the members of Tile Finishers Union Local No 88 (herein called “old Local 88”) disaffiliated from the TMT Internation...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the court on a motion to remand it to the Circuit Court of Kenton County, Kentucky, whence it was removed. The motion to remand raises important issues of statutory construction involving the 1988 amendments to the removal statutes. In particular, there is a significant issue on which there is a conflict of authority: Whether the 1988 amendment to 28 ...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated November 7, 1991, 778 F.Supp. 153, familiarity with which is assumed, granted the motions of certain claimants to dismiss the complaint of Gleneagle Ship Management Co., Inc. (“Gleneagle”) for exoneration from or limitation of liability and to strike Gleneagle's affirmative defense in a related case asserting the...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Dime Savings Bank (Dime) appeals from an order of the Bankruptcy Court (Chief Judge Mahoney) reimposing the automatic stay under section 362(a), Title 11 of the United States Code, and setting aside a foreclosure sale. Dime argues that the foreclosure sale complied with the laws of New York State and with Judge Mahoney's earlier order lifting the automatic st...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This is an appeal from a bankruptcy court order. This court has jurisdiction
*741
over it under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a). The appeal presents the question of whether the signature of one spouse on a promissory note establishing a loan makes her personally liable for a debt as a co-debtor
1
when her spouse files for bankruptcy under Chapter 13 of the Ban...
Views: 0
Page 15647
OPINION AND ORDER I. Introduction This case involves an action for termination of exclusive distributorship agreement in violation of local law 75 of June 24, 1964, as amended, 10 Laws of Puerto Rico Annotated (“L.P.R.A.”), § 278 et seq. (“Law 75”). The Court is called upon to decide the validity of the motions filed by defendant the Burdick Corporation (“Bur-dick”) and co-defendant Siemens-Elema ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This case challenges the repudiation by the Resolution Trust Fund Corporation (“RTC”), as conservator of Franklin Savings Association (“Franklin”), of an indenture and bonds issued thereunder by Franklin. Plaintiff IBJ Schroder is the indenture trustee (the “Trustee”) for the bondholders. The Trustee, joined by plaintiff-intervenor-bondhold...
Views: 0
■MEMORANDUM ENTRY ON COMPLAINT OF FORFEITURE This matter came before the court on the complaint of the United States of America (the “Government”), seeking forfeiture of $12,900 seized from the Claimant, Albert Collins, on February 18, 1992. The trial in this matter was held on September 2, 1992. Collins failed to appear, although his attorney assured the court that Collins was aware of the date, ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on defendants' motions for summary judgment. For the reasons fully discussed below, the Court finds that plaintiff has presented enough evidence to establish the existence of -several genuine issues of material fact so as to preclude entry of summary judgment. Therefore, the case must proceed to trial.
The Facts
Plain...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. St. Louis Twin Oaks Associates I, L.P. (Twin Oaks), filed this diversity action against Executive Office Network, Ltd. (Executive), for rent due under a lease. The record establishes the following. On March 26, 1980, Twin Oaks leased office space to Executive from July 1, 1980 to September 30, 1990. T...
Views: 0
804 F.Supp. 1129 (1992)
BIB MANUFACTURING CO., Plaintiff,
v.
DOVER MANUFACTURING CO. and Roger A. Draft, Defendants.
No. N 91-0074 C.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, N.D.
October 9, 1992.
*1130 *1131 Lionel Lucchesi, Polster, Polster & Lucchesi, St. Louis, Mo., Robert Clayton, II, Clayton & Rhodes, Hannibal, Mo., for plaintiff.
John D. Hussman, Mark T. Keaney, Lewis, Rice &am...
Views: 0
804 F.Supp. 1141 (1992)
Joan J. WEBER, Plaintiff,
v.
ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY, Defendant.
No. 89-1753 C (5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
October 14, 1992.
*1142 Clyde E. Craig and Brian Spector, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
F. Douglas O'Leary, Moser & Marsalek, St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
LIMBAUGH, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Joan J. Weber, brought this actio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Anthony Anderson (“Anderson”), currently confined in the Menard Correctional Center, has tendered a self-prepared Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) against the City of Chicago, its former Police Superintendent Leroy Martin, several Chicago Police Officers and four private .citizens: “Dr. Hill,” from Oak Park, Illinois; “John Doe,” an unknown to...
Views: 0
807 F.Supp. 218 (1992)
SATELLITE BROADCASTING CABLE, INC., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
TELEFÓNICA DE ESPAÑA, S.A., et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. 90-1662(PG).
United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico.
October 13, 1992.
Miguel J. Rodríguez Marxuach, San Juan, PR, for plaintiffs.
Arturo J. García-Solá, San Juan, PR, for defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
PEREZ-GIMENEZ, District Judge.
I. Introduction
Th...
Views: 2
Page 15669
OPINION AND ORDER
I. Introduction
Before this Court is an issue of first impression in this Circuit: the propriety of service of process by mail on a non-resident, foreign defendant pursuant to section 10(a) of the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters (“the Hague Convention or Convention”). This is an issue that has caused ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiff, Billy Glen Harwell, a Tennessee citizen, filed this action
1
against American Medical Systems, Inc., a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of business in Minnetonka, Minnesota. The plaintiff’s claims arise out of the malfunction of an inflatable penile prosthesis-that is manufactured by AMSI. This prosthetic device was surgically implanted i...
Views: 0
Davidson was a customer of Drexel, who maintained a non-discretionary bond brokerage account there from September 1987 through approximately June 1989. In June 1989, when his account executive, Edward Buliavac moved from Drexel to Bear Stearns & Co., Davidson followed and transferred his Drexel account to Bear Stearns.
In the following year, on February 13, 1990, Drexel filed a petition un...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants move pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss both counts of this ERISA and fraud action. Alternatively, they move, pursuant to Rule 9(b), to dismiss plaintiffs’ fraud claim for failure to plead fraud with sufficient particularity, and, pursuant to Rule 12(f), to strike plaintiffs’ requests for punitive damages and a jury trial on the ERISA cause of action. ...
Views: 1
Page 15679
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff moves to withdraw the reference of this action to the United States bankruptcy court. The issue is adequately briefed and oral argument will not materially aid its resolution. Because plaintiff has shown good cause for withdrawing this reference pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d), her motion is granted. Plaintiff was appointed to the panel of Chapter 7 bankruptcy...
Views: 1
Page 15686
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary injunction enjoining Defendants in their official and individual capacities and their officers, successors, agents, servants, employees and attorneys and persons acting in concert with them from prohibiting Plaintiffs and other students and faculty members of the school district from wearing to school...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
We are now considering defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). We will examine the motion under the well-established standard.
Lobov v. Lalley,
809 F.2d 220 (3d Cir.1987). Defendant seeks dismissal on various grounds. We will discuss them
seriatim.
I. DERIVATIVE ACTION DEMAND REQUIREMENT
A.
Adequacy of the Demand
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court are defendants’ motion to dismiss the class action portion of plaintiff’s complaint, plaintiff’s opposition, defendants’ reply, plaintiff’s response to the reply, and defendants’ motion to strike the response. Also before the Court is plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint and defendants’ opposition thereto. Plaintiff filed suit, individually and as representat...
Views: 0
OPINION Pro se Defendant and judgment debtor Marcello Valenzano (“Valenzano”) has moved, pursuant to Rule 60(b), Fed.R.Civ. P., for reconsideration of the Court’s Opinion of May 21, 1992, granting Plaintiff and judgment creditor Brian Petersen’s (“Petersen”) motion for summary judgment. See Petersen v. Vallenzano [sic], No. 89 Civ. 5346 (RWS), 1992 WL 116427, 1992 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 6922 (S.D....
Views: 0
ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
In this medical malpractice and negligence action, the plaintiff Rita Williams seeks damages for injuries she sustained when she jumped from the second floor of the Memphis International Airport Terminal Building.
Plaintiffs action is based upon two independent theories of negligence. First, plaintiff asserts that several health care individuals and entities
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The above-referenced prosecution is before the Court to decide defendant’s motion for suppression of a firearm. Defendant allegedly threw the firearm out of the window of his car when it appeared that he was being followed by an unmarked police car. Defendant was arrested for firearm offenses after the detectives pulled him over and recovered the firearm from the street. The g...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On May 29, 1992, defendant, James E. Benjamin, served notices to take the oral depositions of four individuals at the offices of Mr. Benjamin’s counsel in Evansville, Indiana. The notices identified the proposed deponents as “Mr. Beam,” “Vince Panepinto,” “Dominic Martell” and “Mr. Martinez,” and stated that the depositions *89were being taken pursuant to "Federal Rules of Ci...
Views: 0
ORDER
In her complaint, plaintiff alleges that defendant
1
violated section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, because defendant refused to provide reasonable accommodation for plaintiffs mental illness. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss or, alternatively, for summary judgment. In a previous order, the court notified the parties that because defendant pre...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommen
*1537
dation that the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ determination that the claimant was not entitled to be paid, by Medicare because her medical costs had been covered by her primary insurer under 42 U.S.C. § 1395 be affirmed. The claimant has timely filed objections to the Report an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On May 22, 1992, pro se petitioner, Willie James Billops, an inmate at the Westville Correctional Center, filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The return filed by the respondents on August 17, 1992, demonstrates the necessary compliance with Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir.1982). The necessary record with reference to the prison disciplinary ...
Views: 1
OPINION Defendant G. Blake Chanslor (“Chanslor”), individually and as trustee of the G. Blake and June L. Chanslor Revocable Trust (the “Trust”), has moved to dismiss to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b) for lack of personal jurisdiction. For .the reasons given below, the motion is denied. The Facts The facts are assumed as set forth in the pleadings and complaint. Cha...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In June 1991, ERISA trustees brought this action to recover pension contributions and delinquency charges against both the individual defendant Louis Fine, and the corporate defendant, M. Fine Lumber Company, of which Louis Fine is the president. After settlement negotiations between the parties collapsed and the defendants failed to answer the complaint, a default judgment w...
Views: 1
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM
This case is before the Court on: (1) defendants’ Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Plaintiffs Expert Witness; (2) defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment; (3) defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for Failure to Comply with the Pre-Trial Order; (4) defendants’ Motion to Strike three of Plaintiff’s Affidavits; (5) plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendants...
Views: 0
*1189
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This cause is before this Court on the Motion of the Plaintiff, Dee Ann Pemberton, for Partial Summary Judgment, and the Counter-Motion of the defendant, State Farm Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter “State Farm”), for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
FINDINGS OF FACTS
On or about October 28, 1989, ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 663 (1992)
Keith MIROCHA and Phyllis Mirocha, Plaintiffs,
v.
TRW INC., Trans Union Corporation, ITT Consumer Financial Corporation, and Aetna Finance Company d/b/a ITT Finance, Defendants.
No. NA 91-68-C.
United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, New Albany Division.
October 2, 1992.
*664 *665 Roya A. Ghazi, Daniels & Associates, Louisville, Ky., for plaintiffs.
James E. Bourne...
Views: 4
MEMORANDUM DECISION BACKGROUND Plaintiff Amber Truck Lines (“Amber”)1 failed to withhold or pay employment taxes from the wages of its employees for certain quarters from 1985 through 1987. After an investigation and audit, the Internal Revenue Service (“I.R.S.”) determined that the individuals working for Amber were employees, not independent contractors, and that unpaid employment taxes were due...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Employers Mutual Casualty Company (“Employers”) for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial (Doc. 424); and the motions of Pacific Employers Insurance Company (“Pacific”) and P.B. Hoidale Inc. (“Hoidale”) for attorney fees. (Docs. 433, 428). The facts have been set forth previously. 789 F.Supp. 1117.
I...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This case comes before the court on Martin’s motion for review of the magistrate judge’s order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a). (Doc. 95) The magistrate entered an order on December 18, 1991, denying Martin’s motion to amend his complaint to add a claim for punitive damages. (Doc. 80) The magistrate denied a motion for reconsideration on June 30, 1992. (Doc. 94) STANDARD OF REV...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION
This case is ready for decision on the issue of damages. The court entered partial summary judgment against defendant Lodgistix, Inc. (Lodgistix) on the issue of liability by its Memorandum and Order dated August 1, 1991 (Doc. 45). 772 F.Supp. 540. Lodgistix’ motion for reconsideration was denied on September 10, 1991 (Doc. 49). 1991 WL 192113. A trial to the court was...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s motion for an order of voluntary dismissal, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41. (Doc. 49) Defendants have filed an objection to the motion. (Doc. 50) Because defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment in this matter, the court considers plaintiff’s request for dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), which provides: (a) Voluntary Dismi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The United States brings this action on behalf of the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) for judgment on two loans made to Bobby G. Bartlett and Virginia L. Bartlett and for foreclosure of two mortgages securing the loans. This court has subject matter jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1345. This matter comes before the court on the United States’ motion for summar...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This court issued an order on August 17, 1992, denying Kimbrells leave to amend their counterclaims to maintain an action for an accounting. The court found the Kimbrells had failed to allege either the existence of a fiduciary relationship or that a prior demand and refusal for an accounting had been made. The court granted the Kimbrells leave to supply the court with evidenc...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case comes before the court on plaintiffs’ motion (Doc. 27) to amend complaint, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15. The complaint seeks to add a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
The plaintiffs are two white males who were both employed by Boeing. Sloan alleges he was wrongfully discharged and Kalinowski
1
alleges ...
Views: 0
Page 15761
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER . This matter is presently before the court upon plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs, who are members of the Natural Law Party, seek to enjoin the Secretary of State.for the State of Kansas from enforcing K.S;A., 25-305, which requires that nomination, petitions for independent candidates be filed ninety-one days prior to the general election. Three of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This case is again before the court to undertake the “difficult” 1 task of determining whether the Defendant City of Durham’s (“City”) 1984 ordinance prohibiting all commercial, off-premises advertising signs except those along interstate or federally aided primary highways after a 5V2-year grace period violates the Fifth Amendment’s proscription, applicable to the states t...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this opinion, the Court is required to consider the prelude and postscript to employment, that is, the negotiations preceding its commencement and the consequences of its termination, and must determine the extent to which alleged wrongs
*240
then done to an employee may properly expose an employer to tortious liability. Specifically, t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER On September 2, 1992, a hearing was held on defendants Kaysville City and Robert L. Nace’s Motion for Summary Judgment before the Honorable Dee Benson. George K. Fadel represented the plaintiff. Karra J. Porter represented the defendants Kaysville City and Robert L. Nace. Gerald E. Hess represented defendants Davis County, Mary Haddock Robb and Lorine Ann Kemner. ...
Views: 0
Page 15767
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
These consolidated bankruptcy appeals present two issues of law: (1) Do bankruptcy courts have civil contempt power? and (2) Has the United States, by the terms of 11 U.S.C. § 106(c), waived its sovereign immunity from monetary relief? Issues of law are reviewed de novo on appeal.
In re Branding Iron Motel,
798 F.2d 396, 400 (10th Cir.1986).
These case...
Views: 0
*113
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of
*114
Subject Matter Jurisdiction, For Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, and For Failure to State a Claim Against the Defendant, filed on September 5, 1992. In its motion, Defendant submitted materials outside of the pleadings. Plai...
Views: 2
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Linda Benton’s Complaint for Judicial Review. Plaintiff seeks review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) denying her application for Social Security disability insurance benefits under Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Jurisdic*437tion is based on 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g). The Court has ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
This case is before me on cross-appeals from a decision of the bankruptcy court. In its ruling below, the bankruptcy court concluded that the trustee could properly avoid certain preferential transfers (total-ling nearly $400,000) the debtors, Meridith Hoffman Partners (“Hoffman”) and Meri-dith Millard Partners (Millard”) (collectively “the partners”), made i...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter came before the Court on Defendant Victor D. Cohen’s motion for guardian ad litem fees. This suit was brought by the Plaintiff against two corporate Defendants, Cubic Corporation and Cubic Defense Systems, Inc. and an individual, Victor D. Cohen. The complaint alleged violations of the Robinson-Patman Act, the Sherman Act, RICO, RICO conspiracy, common law fraud, unj...
Views: 1
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO WITHDRAW REFERENCE
This matter is before me on the motions by Linda M., Martin S. and Janet W. Blinder (“Movants”) to withdraw the reference of Adversary Proceeding No. 92-1388 RJB, in the SIPA liquidation of debtor Blinder, Robinson & Co., Inc. The Movants argue that they are entitled to a jury trial in the adversary proceeding and that it must be heard in this c...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I.. Background
This case was tried to the Court for ten days beginning August 24, 1992. I have jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (1980) and 1343(a)(4) (1979) and 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (1980). Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (1988) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) (1972). Each plaintiff...
Views: 2
ORDER This matter is before the court on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motion was filed on July 8, 1992. Defendant has filed a memorandum of law in opposition to the *577 plaintiff’s motion, and the plaintiff has filed his reply. The matter is now ripe for disposition. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS The parties are ...
Views: 1
*1084
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant moves to dismiss plaintiffs state law claims for lack of supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Defendant also moves to strike a portion of plaintiffs ad damnum clause to bring it into conformity with the damages allowed by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621,
et seq.
The issues are ad...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Pittston Company (“Pittston”), Jewell Ridge Coal Corporation (“Jewell Ridge”), and Thames Development, Ltd., initially brought suit for declaratory judgment against Fon Rogers, II, trustee of Lon B. Rogers Bradshaw Trust No. 2 (“the Trust”), and against Fon Rogers II, Marylon R. Glass, and Martha R. Plaster (“Rogers”), as beneficiaries of the Trust, Vansan...
Views: 3
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
I.Background
Defendant, Salli Anderson, contracted with plaintiff, United Van Lines, Inc., to move her household goods from Upland, California to Ladson, South Carolina. Golden Eagle Moving Services, Inc. began the move on March 26, 1991. Defe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on motions by Paul Silvers and Michael Mintz to dismiss the conspiracy charges against them on the basis of double jeopardy (Docs. 115 and 116). Both defendants contend the conspiracy charged in this case is part of an overall conspiracy charged and ultimately dismissed with prejudice in their case in Florida. Mintz and Silvers pled guilty in...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this declaratory judgment action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 by Security Benefit Life Insurance Company (“SBL”), a mutual life insurance company domiciled in Kansas. The defendant, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), is the receiver of Life Savings of America, F.S.B. (...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on motion by Reebok International Limited and Reebok International Ltd. (“Reebok”) for a preliminary injunction to prevent Payless Shoesource, Inc. (“Payless”) from “purchasing, importing, distributing or selling shoes infringing Reebok’s federally registered trademarks or trade dress or from making, using or selling shoes infringing Re...
Views: 1
ORDER AND OPINION
This matter comes before the Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(4), on appeal from a jury trial before a United States Magistrate Judge. The appellee, William B. Tatterson, a greenhouse operator, obtained a judgment for $165,000.00 in this action on an insurance contract which insured his crops and buildings from “direct loss” due to “weight of snow,” claiming damages...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the court upon a motion by plaintiff, Virginia Militello, for an order reversing the determination of the Magistrate Judge filed in this matter on January 7, 1992. In that order, the Magistrate denied plaintiff’s request for a transcript, to be paid for by the federal government, of proceedings on this matter before the New Jersey Office of Administrative ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This matter comes before the court upon a motion by defendants to dismiss the complaint, or in the alternative, to stay the case pending arbitration. For the following reasons, I deny defendants’ motion to dismiss but grant their motion to stay.
I. Motion to dismiss
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), “the court must accept as true all factual allegations...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant, Harmony Mill Limited Partnership, seeks an order for summary judgment against plaintiffs David C. Miley, Sr. and April P. Miley, his wife, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for alleged injuries sustained when Mr. Miley fell in the shower in an apartment own...
Views: 3
OPINION
In this matter, the United States (“the Government”) is attempting to denaturalize defendant Sergis Hutyrczyk (“Hutyrczyk”), because his naturalization allegedly was procured in violation of the Displaced Persons Act. While the Government brought several counts against Hutyrczyk, it seeks with this motion summary judgment on Count I only. That Count alleges that since Hutyrczyk as...
Views: 0
Page 15797
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The court, pursuant to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and LR 72.1(d)(2) (E.D.Mich. Jan. 1, 1992), has reviewed the magistrate judge’s May 11,1992 report and recommendation as well as defendant’s May 26, 1992 objections filed thereto. After conducting a de novo review, the court accepts the magistrate judge’s report an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion to select another judge to try this case is granted. Although
*612
a motion to recuse would have had to be denied and the federal judiciary has declined to recognize the defendant’s general right to peremptorily challenge a judge in any case, the special nature of a capital case argues that such a right be afforded where death is a poss...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Appellants/Claimants
1
appeal from a Memorandum Decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Liflind, C.J.) (the “Bankruptcy Court”),, dated March 6, 1990, and amended March 7, 1990, holding that the Bankruptcy Court had subject matter jurisdiction to make a threshold determination regarding the allowance or ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is defendant O.H. Materials, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order. FACTS This case is one of several cases before this court which are related to a CERCLA cleanup operation that occurred upon the property of plaintiffs, Amtreco...
Views: 0
ENTRY
The parties to this action dispute whether the R & W Corporation (“R & W”), formerly Able Trucking, Inc., and William L. Uhl (the “Defendant”) (collectively the “Defendants”) have violated the provisions of an agreement which the Defendants entered into pursuant to the sale of a part of
*1468
R & W to the Plaintiff. Both sides have moved for summary judgment on Count I ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the court are a motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Smith,. Jackson, and Ford (“federal defendants”) and a motion for leave to amend the complaint filed by plaintiffs.
1
After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order.
FACTS
This case was originally...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner, Michael James Boothe, was convicted of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree (N.Y.Penal Law § 265.03) in February, 1985. The Appellate Division affirmed his conviction in August 1990, People v. James, 164 A.D.2d 921, 559 N.Y.S.2d 755 (1990), and leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals was denied in February, 1991, People v. James, 77 N.Y.2d...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The plaintiff, a federal prisoner formerly in the custody of the Massachusetts Department of Correction (“DOC”), sought the assistance of defendants in pursuing a separate cause of action against various DOC officials. He alleges that the defendants’ actions violated his civil rights. Specifically, he asserts that the Superior Court of Plymouth County stymied his efforts ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 272 (1992)
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
James E. NORRIS, Mary E. Houser, and Jeana Duane, Defendants.
No. IP 91-427-C.
United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division.
July 9, 1992.
*273 John W. Hammel, Yarling Robinson Hammel & Lamb, Indianapolis, Ind., for plaintiff.
James E. Norris, pro se.
Barbara J. Germano, Price & Shula, Indianapolis, Ind...
Views: 0
Page 15812
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Tanning Research Laboratories, Inc. (“Tanning Research") and H.T. Marketing, Inc. (“H.T. Marketing”) bring this action against defendants Worldwide Import & Export Corp. (“Worldwide”), Joseph Calcagno and Thomas Scotti, the sole shareholders, directors and officers of Worldwide, and other unknown individuals and companies. Plaintiffs’ claim is that defendan...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is a motion by codefendants Héctor Laureano Rivas (“Laureano”), Miguel Pagan (“Pagan”), and Edwin Rosario Franguie (“Rosario”) to dismiss this section 1983 1 2action against them on the grounds that it is time-barred. In order to address their motion, a chronology of the pertinent events in the processing of this claim is necessary. The incident which gave rise t...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before this court is defendant’s, National Manufacturing Company, motion for stay of proceedings and referral to the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICG). This motion is in response to plaintiff’s, Lifs-chultz Fast Freight, Inc., complaint seeking
*1060
certain “undercharges” for shipments plaintiff carried for defendant. Defendant seeks referral to th...
Views: 0
Page 15820
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court
1
on two motions for partial summary judgment: one filed by the Plaintiffs, Peter Helman (“Peter”) and Lori Helman (referred to collectively as simply “Plaintiffs”); and a second filed by the Defendants.
2
Briefs have been submitted and the Defendants have submitted an “Annex” to their motion for summar...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE: ATTORNEYS’ FEES
I. INTRODUCTION
Both Plaintiff Julius L. Finkelstein (“plaintiff”) and Defendants Louis P. Berg-na and the County of Santa Clara (“defendants”) object to the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil filed on July 31, 1992 (the “Recommendations”). As Chief Judge Henderso...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Last September, when Defendants moved to dismiss this action, they urged this Court to spare them the expense and burden of discovery, arguing that Plaintiffs had no evidence to support their allegations. Defendants insisted that Plaintiffs were prosecuting this case solely on the basis of a hope that, during discovery, they would unc...
Views: 1
Page 15823
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION This action stems from events surrounding a student demonstration against the Vietnam War in early 1970. Plaintiff Malcolm Emory was arrested at that protest and subsequently convicted by a jury on the charge of assault and battery on a police officer. More than twenty years later, Emory filed this action in five counts alleging malicious prosecution, assault and battery,...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment in this action for collection on a life insurance policy. Plaintiff, Jacqueline Carol Rodríguez Diaz (“Rodriguez Diaz”) originally filed this complaint in the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Bayamón Part.
1
Defendant, Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company (“Mutual”), removed
2
th...
Views: 0
1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15863: United States v. Forfeiture, Property, All Appurtenances & Improvements
Page 15863
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the motion of claimant John Amescua Garcia styled Introduction of Claimant, Petition for Counsel’ and Additional Time. Upon consideration of all pleadings, motions and applicable law, the Court is of the opinion that the motion is of merit and should be GRANTED in part. The motion is otherwise DENIED without prejudice to refiling at a later date ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
I
BACKGROUND
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (“Commonwealth”) seeks reimbursement from the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) for payments made into a pension reserve fund during fiscal years 1985 and 1986.1 The Commonwealth alleges an underrecovery of $32.2 million in federal funds. The HHS Division of Cost Allocation (“DCA”) disallowed these payments, and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff class, permanent resident aliens in the United States, brought this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief alleging defendants, officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), violated their rights under federal law and the United States Constitution by withholding permanent resident alien cards, Form 1-151 or 1-551, (“green cards” in the ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
After a jury trial, the defendant Zan Machine Company, Inc. (“Zan”) was found to have committed eight violations of the False Claims Act (“the Act”), codified at 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-33. The jury also determined that, as a result of these False Claims Act violations, the Government sustained actual compensatory damages in the sum of $26,363.63.
The main iss...
Views: 3
OPINION AND ORDER
Nacional Financiera, S.N.C. (“Nafinsa”), an industrial development bank and instrumentality of the Mexican government, seeks a declaratory judgment that it is not liable to a Delaware corporation, Americom Airlease, Inc. (“Americom”) for attorneys’ fees and expenses exceeding $666,000. Americom and its lender PacifiCorp Credit, Inc. (“PacifiCorp”), an Oregon-based financ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs commenced this action against William K. Reilly, in his capacity as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9659 to compel defendant to perform his non-discretionary duties under 42 U.S.C. § 9604(c)(9). See Plaintiffs’ Complaint at ¶ 1. Presently before the court are three motions. In the first moti...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL • This matter was heard on oral argument in Pocatello on July 13, 1992 with counsel for the parties appearing upon the United States’ motion to dismiss, under Rule 12 for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Petitioner had filed an action seeking a writ of mandamus against the Bureau of Indian Affairs regarding a low interest ...
Views: 0
Page 15874
805 F. Supp. 26 (1992)
CENTRAL TRANSPORT, INC.,
v.
The INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO
and
The Teamsters National Freight Industry Negotiating Committee.
No. 92-CV-71942-DT.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
September 17, 1992.
*27 Timothy K. Carroll, Detroit, Mich., Stephen Cabot, Esq., James Brogan, A. Christopher ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Defendant, claiming this Court lacks jurisdiction, has moved to dismiss the complaint, which seeks a review of an action taken by the Foreign-Trade Zones Board. The parties have filed extensive briefs which have been thoroughly considered, along with the Administrative Record.
Under the terms of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 1934, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 81a-81u (Supp.199...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Thirteen individuals, related either by blood, marriage, or close friendship, invested in a number of condominium units hoping to cash in on the real estate boom of the mid-1980s. Unfortunately, the real estate tides turned in the late 1980s, and the investments went sour. Alleging numerous violations of state and federal law,
1
the plaintiffs have brough...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 189 (1992)
Ralph DUHON, et ux.
v.
CONOCO, INC., et al.
Civ. A. No. 91-1144-LC.
United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division.
June 18, 1992.
Charles A. Riddle, Marksville, La., for plaintiffs.
James R. Morris, Lake Charles, La., for defendants.
REASONS FOR RULING
TRIMBLE, District Judge.
Ralph Duhon ("DUHON"), the plaintiff herein, is a divorced father of six, ...
Views: 2
ORDER
After careful consideration of the Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment and the Government’s response, the Court shall consider this motion to dismiss as a motion pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for new trial and a Rule 12 motion for dismissal of the indictment, in light of the procedural posture of this action. Rule 33 holds that
[t]he co...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This civil rights case was filed by the Boston Police Superior Officers Federation (“Federation”) and William T. Broderick, the Federation’s president, against the City of Boston and officials of the Boston Police Department (“BPD”). The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in a pattern of harassment and retaliation designed to punish and chill Broderick’s ex...
Views: 2
ORDER
I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Summarized below are the allegations found in the amended complaint of plaintiff Stychno, which are necessary for a complete understanding of the instant matter.
On December 30, 1980, the defendant, Ohio Edison, conveyed property used by it as an electrical power generating and transmitting station to Nestor Stychno and William Marsteller. The plai...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Defendant Black & Decker filed a Motion to Strike or Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claim for Compensatory/Punitive Damages and Demand for Jury Trial, arguing that the 1991 amendments to the Civil Rights Act do not apply in a sex discrimination case pre-dating the amendments. Because of the judicial presumption against retroactive application of statutes, the Court finds that the amendmen...
Views: 0
OPINION
I. Introduction
The present action is one of a number of actions between AFN, Inc. (“AFN”) and Schlott, Inc. arising out of the business relationship between those parties relating to computerized loan origination (“CLO”) systems. Defendants Schlott, Inc., National Homenet, Inc., Home Mortgage Network, Inc. and Matthew Broderick have moved to dismiss AFN’s complaint for failu...
Views: 7
805 F. Supp. 1142 (1992)
V. Rachel LERCH, Plaintiff,
v.
CITIZENS FIRST BANCORP., INC., Defendant.
Harriette ROTH, et al., Plaintiff,
v.
Richard G. KELLEY, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 90-3538.
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
August 11, 1992.
*1143 *1144 Lester L. Levy, Robert C. Finkel, Wolf Popper Ross Wolf & Jones, New York City, Peter S. Pearlman, Cohn Lifland Pearlman Herr...
Views: 5
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter came before the Court on September 18, 1992. The Court, , having considered the materials on file both in support of and in opposition to the motion, having considered the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, FINDS and ORDERS as follows:
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Norman Walters (“Walters”) is a ...
Views: 0
RULING
This consent case comes before the Court on the motion of the plaintiff for a jury trial on his sex discrimination claim. The plaintiff, Matthus M. West, filed his complaint against Pelican Management Services Corporation (“Pelican”) on April 2, 1991, asserting sex discrimination, age discrimination and overtime pay claims arising from his prior employment with Pelican as a real es...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On May 1, 1992, Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) agents found cocaine in a canvas bag carried by Defendant David Harrison Yearwood (“Yearwood”). Year-wood moved to have physical evidence and statements suppressed, claiming Fourth Amendment violations. Magistrate Judge W. Thomas Rosemond conducted a hearing and, based on testimony, exhibits, and oral argument by the atto...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1033 (1992)
Mrs. Helen KABBANI, Plaintiff,
v.
INTERNATIONAL TOTAL SERVICES, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-0391-LFO.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
October 15, 1992.
Martin F. McMahon, Malea Kiblan, Law Offices of Martin F. McMahon, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Mark A. DomBroff, Judith K. Rayner, Alan B. Havis, Katten, Muchin, Zavis & DomBroff, Washington, D.C...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This diversity action arises from an alleged oral fee-sharing agreement between attorneys. Plaintiff Jack S. Kaplan brings this single-count complaint against the law firm of Pavalon & Gifford, alleging breach of contract. Presently before the court is Pavalon & Gifford’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the motion.
...
Views: 2
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Tyrone Chavers, currently incarcerated at the Green Bay Correctional Institution, seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 from defendants Abrahamson and Doe in “their individual and official capacities.” Mr. Chavers’ civil rights complaint is accompanied by a petition to proceed in forma pauperis. This petition will be granted.
In order to authorize a litigant to proceed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Disposition of the above-captioned case follows orders of dismissal from Chief Judge L.T. Senter in two other lawsuits filed by either plaintiff, Dr. McFadden, or his patient, James McCullough, against a different workers’ compensation provider, American Motorist Insurance Company (“American”):
McFadden v. American Motorists Insurance Company,...
Views: 0
*1517
DECISION AND ORDER
On July 16, 1990, pro se plaintiff Steven S. Cannaday, Sr., currently in federal custody in the United States penitentiary, Atlanta Georgia, filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. On Septembe...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 1, 1990, United States Bankruptcy Judge Francis G. Conrad filed a Memorandum of Decision regarding whether certain real property located in Windsor County, Vermont (the Carriage House Property) was property of the debtors’, James Gabelhart and Ruth Gabelhart’s, estate.
In re Carriage House, Inc.,
120 B.R. 754 (Bankr.D.Vt.1990). For the following rea...
Views: 0
ORDER This is a personal injury action in which the plaintiffs allege that a minor child was injured when she was burned as the result of an allegedly defective or negligently designed adjustable butane lighter manufactured by the defendant. Pending before the court is the defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of whether the defendant had a duty to manufacture a child-pro...
Views: 0
804 F.Supp. 1134 (1992)
Keith SPERRY, Plaintiff,
v.
BAUERMEISTER, INC., Defendant.
No. 90-2308 C (5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
October 14, 1992.
*1135 *1136 Robert M. Susman, Raskas, Ruthmeyer, Pomerantz, Wynne, Garavaglia & Susman, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
David E. Larson, Kristine S. Focht, Watson, Ess, Marshall & Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.
...
Views: 0
ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION '
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on a report and recommendation issued by Magistrate/Judge Charles R. Wilson on June 19, 1992. This Court specifically referred the Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction to the assigned magistrate/judge. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the Magistrate/Judge recommended that the motion for preliminary...
Views: 0
Page 15948
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES AND EXPENSES
This cause is before the Court on the joint application of defendants’ counsel— MANG, RETT, & COLLETTE of the Florida Bar, and ALSTON & BIRD of the Georgia Bar — for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses. It is opposed as to award and amount by plaintiff’s counsel — PAUL A. NELSON.
This action was brought by Plaintiff, THOMAS P. O’REAR, originally na...
Views: 0
ORDER
Currently before the court is a motion to dismiss Ohio Edison’s third party complaint. (Docket # 56) The moving parties are two third-party defendants, Summit-Warren Industries and Harold F. Glunt. This motion requests prejudicial dismissal of the entire third party complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12, subdivisions (b)(6) and (c). This motion is the exclusive su...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Before this Court is the pro se petition of Arturo Polanco (“petitioner”), brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (habeas corpus), requesting that this Court vacate the sentence imposed upon him on December 1, 1986. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied and the petition is dismissed in its entirety. BACKGROUND On January 17, 1986, petitioner Polanco pleaded...
Views: 0
OPINION
The plaintiff, Thomas Dooley, has brought an action against numerous defendants alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, Title 18, United States Code, sections 1961
et seq.
(“RICO”), and supplemental state law claims. The motions presently before the Court include the motion of defendants Westland Group pic and Westland Helicopters,...
Views: 0
Page 15956
OPINION
Debtors, Carl C. Funk, Jr. and Dolores M. Funk, appeal from an Order of the Bankruptcy Court dated June 22, 1992, (Honorable Rosemary Gambardella, Judge) denying an application pursuant to 11 U.S.C.A. § 1307(d)1 to convert debtor’s *119Chapter 13 case to a case proceeding under Chapter 11 (11 U.S.C.A. § 1101 et seq.). On the same day Judge Gambardella signed an order staying her denial pe...
Views: 0
Page 15961
ORDER AFFIRMING IN PART AND REVERSING IN PART FINAL ORDER OF BANKRUPTCY COURT The United States of America and Glenn Scott Warner have filed cross-appeals from the order dated November 16, 1989 of the Bankruptcy Court. The United States submits that the Bankruptcy Court erred in applying 11 U.S.C. § 506(d) of the Bankruptcy Code to void the undersecured portion of a federal tax lien on Warner’s...
Views: 0
OPINION
, Currently before the court is the motion of plaintiff TM Marketing, Inc. (“TM Marketing”) to confirm an arbitration award (the “Award”) in favor of TM Marketing, and to direct that judgment be entered requiring defendant Art & Antiques Associates, L.P. (“A & A Associates”) to pay all amounts due under the Award and to pay attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by TM Marketing in bri...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs’ complaint arises out of the death of Ashwell Cockey. The decedent was employed by Western Atlas International, Inc., which provided certain benefits to its eligible employees. Included among the benefits was accidental death insurance coverage provided under two group policies issued to ...
Views: 1
ORDER
Plaintiffs R.A. Barton and her husband and two sons charge defendants American Red Cross and Eoline McGowan, M.D., with negligent and wanton failure to screen properly for HIV-infected blood that was given to Mrs. Barton in a transfusion.
1
The Bartons seek relief under the Alabama Medical Liability Act (AMLA), Ala.Code 1975 § 6-5-542.
2
This cause is before th...
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment in this action brought by Plaintiff under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Carol Willis was employed as a Registered Nurse by Defendant University Health Services (UHS) at University Hospi
*1558
tal in Augusta, Georgia, from December 1987 until January 2, 1990.
During 1989 and January 19...
Views: 0
ENTRY DISCUSSING ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1988
On March 7, 1990, Plaintiff Kennedy filed a twenty-seven page Complaint, which, among other things, purportedly sought to enforce a provision of § 1983. Plaintiff filed a twenty-eight page First Amended Jury Demand and Complaint for Damages and Attorney Fees on April 7, 1990. Plaintiff filed a Mo...
Views: 1
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS On September 2, 1992, the court heard the motion of plaintiffs T.W.A.R., Inc. (“TWAR”), The Extension Connection (“TEC”), The Phone Works, and Dennis E. Love for an order compelling production of documents from defendant Pacific Bell. Plaintiffs appeared by their counsel Richard Rosenberg, and defendant appeared by *106its counsel Lisa ...
Views: 1
*1247
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In these two consolidated actions, each party has asserted against the other claims of breach of contract, fraud, and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage; they also seek recovery under various equitable theories. The plaintiff in the first action is Marilyn Miglin, Inc. (“Miglin”); the defendants in that action, Gottex Industries, ...
Views: 1
Page 15982
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation submitted in this ease and any objections filed thereto. The Report and Recommendation is hereby accepted as the findings and conclusion of the Court. Accordingly,
It Is Ordered that defendant’s second motion for summary judgment, filed on October 29, 1990, is granted onl...
Views: 0
ORDER This is an action challenging a jeopardy assessment made against a nonresident alien by the Internal Revenue Service. Background On June 1, 1992, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) made a jeopardy assessment against the plaintiff, a citizen of Sweden and a resident of the United Kingdom, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6861. On September 18, 1992, the plaintiff filed this action under 26 U....
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with pendent state law claims. Before the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants Richmond County Hospital Authority, University Health Service, Tina Johnson, and Jim Sheppard; and the Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants Richmond County, Sheriff Charles Webster, Captain Ray Myers, and North River Insur...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 333 (1992)
SUNBELT TELEVISION, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
JONES INTERCABLE, INC., Defendant.
No. CV 91-3506 WDK.
United States District Court, C.D. California.
July 9, 1992.
*334 Maxwell M. Blecher, Ann I. Jones, Blecher & Collins, P.D., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff.
Jeffrey R. Pilkington, Davis, Graham & Stubbs, Denver, Colo., James I. Ham, Quinn, Kully & Morrow, Los Angele...
Views: 0
Page 15991
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
The issue raised by defendant’s motion-in-limine concerns the admissibility in this employment discrimination action of the written decision rendered by an administrative law judge of the California Unemployment Compensation Appeals Board.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed the underlying complaint pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights *103Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs James P. Conde, Rhonda Conde, Ryan Conde, Autumn Conde, and Kimberly Conde bring this action alleging that Defendant Velsicol Chemical Corporation (“Velsicol”) caused them personal injuries and deprived them of the economic value of their home when Swat Exterminators applied Velsicol’s Gold Crest C-100 insecticide to their home. The Condes allege that their ex...
Views: 2
Virgin Air, Inc. (“Virgin Air”) commenced this action on December 18,1991 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. It made no jury demand at that time. On motion by Virgin Atlantic Airways (“Virgin Atlantic”), the case was then transferred to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Virgin Atlantic answered the complaint on April 28, 1992 and, together with Virgin En...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action is irreparably intertwined with a lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court of Kane County. On May 24, 1991, plaintiff Bonnie S. Beverly brought suit against David J. Reinert, seeking dissolution of a partnership and injunctive relief. The sole asset of the partnership is a house which Reinert and Beverly purchased collectively by means of an Illinois Land Trust....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Court has before it the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (entered January 14, 1992; Docket Entry No. 41), petitioner Edward R. Halton’s objections and exceptions to the Report and Recommendation (filed January 24, 1992; Docket Entry No. 42), and the respondent’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (filed January 28, 1992; Docket Entry No. 42). Also before...
Views: 0
ORDER ON THE PETITION OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENFORCE THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE SUMMONS AS TO KAREN W. BERRY Before the court is the petition of the United States to enforce an Internal Revenue Service summons on Karen Berry, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a). On January 15, 1990, the Internal Revenue Service began a civil investigation concerning the tax liability of Dr. Karen Berry...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING PETITION OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENFORCE THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE SUMMONS Before the court is the petition of the United States to enforce an Internal Revenue Service summons on John Berry, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402(b) and 7604(a). On January 15, 1990, the Internal Revenue Service began a civil investigation concerning the tax liability of Dr. John Berry and his wife, Dr...
Views: 0
Appellant is a former officer and employee of Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc. In February 1990, Sorenson was named as a defendant in a multi-defendant lawsuit brought by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, based on activities that Mr. Soren-son allegedly engaged in while an employee of Drexel. He was charged in the com...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM The Court has before it the defendant’s motion to suppress (filed July 17, 1992; Docket Entry No. 15), supplement to motion to suppress (filed August 7, 1992; Docket Entry No. 21) and several memoranda in support and in opposition thereto. 1 For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants the defendant’s motion to suppress and the defendant’s supplement to the motion to suppress....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs originally brought this personal injury action in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County against a hospital, several doctors in the emergency room of the hospital, plaintiffs’ incompetent’s primary care physician, and United States Health Care Systems of Pennsylva
*1288
nia, Inc. (“U.S. Health Care”), a health maintenance orga...
Views: 2
OPINION
These consolidated cases involve three separate orders issued by defendant Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“the PUC”) allocating costs upon plaintiff Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) for maintenance of four highway bridge structures that pass over railway lines owned and operated by SEPTA.
1
SEPTA claims that this assignment of costs ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that defendant police officers beat and kicked him while he was in custody following his arrest on October 24, 1981. Defendants now move, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order dismissing this action due to plaintiffs failure to prosecute. I Plaintiff filed this complaint on Nov...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the court is defendant TWA Credit Union’s
1
motion to dismiss. A motion to dismiss brought under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) shall be treated as a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, when the motion incorporates matters outside the pleading. Since defendant TWA Credit Union has attached three exhibits to its motion, the motion will be ...
Views: 0
804 F.Supp. 1147 (1992)
Bruce SHELTON, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
No. 91-1639C(5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
October 16, 1992.
*1148 Robert J. Albair, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Eric Tolen, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for U.S.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LIMBAUGH, District Judge.
Plaintiff has filed this complaint against the United States of Amer...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I A dispute has arisen between the United States Attorney and Herald Price Fahringer, Esq., as counsel now seeking to represent a convicted defendant, Vincent DeGerolamo in connection with resentencing following a remand for that purpose by the Court of Appeals on January 14, 1992. Gerald DeGerolamo (“Gerald”), also convicted in this case and sentenced to a term of imprison...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action arises out of plaintiff’s claim that defendant has infringed its trademark for a water gun.
The case is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
This dispute revolves around two water guns, one licensed by the plaintiff and called “The Totally Rad Soa...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
On October 1, 1991, I granted summary judgment in favor of defendant Goodyear Aerospace Corporation (hereinafter “Goodyear”)
Irvin Industries v. Goodyear Aerospace Corp.
774 F.Supp. 849. On August 3, 1992 the Court of Appeals reversed that decision and remanded for further proceedings “consistent with this opinion.”
Irvin Indus. v. Goodyear Aerospace Cor...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
This diversity action involves allegations of default on a performance bond. The plaintiff, The Town of Clarkstown (“Town”), entered into an agreement with Village Green Properties, a developer, whereby Village Green Properties was to make certain public improvements at the Village Green Condominium complex. In a related transaction, on January 7, 1987 Village Gree...
Views: 1
I
Appellants in this case challenge the authority of the Bankruptcy Court in a Chapter 11 case to grant the debtor
ex parte
extensions (a) of time to pay rent for up to 60 days and (b) of time to assume or to reject leases until confirmation of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11, in both cases subject to reversal or modification upon application of the landlord. The parti...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I Following a conviction, defendant Earl Thompson was remanded to custody based on further criminal activity. On July 28, 1992, bail in the amount of $100,000 was set, posted by Ms. Margaret Gelb, secured by a mortgage and confession of judgment executed August 11, 1992, which provided that judgment would be granted for the United States if the defendant Thompson “fails to ab...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
Plaintiffs moved, initially by
ex parte
order to show cause with the conceded purpose of blocking then-pending discovery, to remand this litigation involving common law fraud, securities, and RICO claims.
The motion to remand is based on (a) asserted defectiveness and untimeliness of the notice of removal, including late consent of one defendant, an...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves to file an amended complaint based on evidence discovered since the filing of the original complaint. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff William Barrett is a Canadian citizen and president of William Barrett Numismatics Limited (“Barrett Numismatics”), a corporation orga...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The Government has charged defendants with conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine in violation of Title 21, United States Code, section 846. Defendants Piedrahita and Betancruz
1
(the “defendants”) have moved to dismiss the indictment due to prosecutorial misconduct and insufficient evidence. In the alternative, de...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 609 (1992)
Luther ARTIS, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES INDUSTRY and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and Hitachi-Zosen Clearing, Inc., Defendants.
No. 85 C 10116.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 20, 1992.
Miriam N. Geraghty, James R. Potter, Kinoy, Taren, Geraghty & Potter, Chicago, Ill., for Luther Artis.
Max G. Brittain, Jr.,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW REFERENCE TO BANKRUPTCY COURT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ENJOIN THE BANKRUPTCY COURT
This matter is before this court on the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) motion, made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d), to withdraw the reference to the bankruptcy court of two related adversary actions filed in the bankruptcy court. This motion is denied...
Views: 1
ORDER This civil action was remanded by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit for further proceedings and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law to resolve the contention of plaintiff Kenneth S. Saladin that dismissal of this civil action with prejudice on account of settlement was not proper. On April 30, 1992, an evidentiary hearing was held. A transcript of t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO RE- • CONSIDER, DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE, AND MISCELLANEOUS DISCOVERY MOTIONS These motions represent the final pretrial salvos fired in the course of heated and prolonged litigation between Plaintiffs Data General Corporation and Data General Service, Inc. (collectively, Data General) and defen...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 610 (1992)
GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, a Georgia corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
FIRST WISCONSIN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, a Wisconsin corporation, et al., Defendants.
No. 82 C 6768.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 21, 1992.
*611 *612 Steven L. Bashwiner, Mary Ellen Hennessy, Katten, Muchin & Zavis, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Timothy Fra...
Views: 0
794 F.Supp. 1076 (1992)
Miguel DeGRANDY, Mario Diaz-Balart, Andy Ireland, Casimer Smericki, Van B. Poole, Terry Ketchel, Roberto Casas, Rodolfo Garcia, Jr., Luis Rojas, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Javier Souto, Justo Luis Poso, Alberto Cardenas, Rey Velazquez, Luis Morse, Alberto Gutman, Karen E. Butler, Sgt. Augusta Carter, Jean Van Meter, Anna M. Pinellas, Robert Woody, Gina Hahn, Bill Petersen, Terry...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 1062 (1992)
Aida L. MORALES, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
Civ. No. 89-0492 (JP).
United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico.
October 8, 1992.
*1063 *1064 Ramón L. Walker Merino, Old San Juan, P.R., Diego Pagán Gutiérrez, Hato Rey, P.R., for plaintiffs.
José F. Blanco Torres, Assistant U.S. Atty., Hato Rey, P.R., for defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
PIERA...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is a diversity action arising out of an automobile accident that occurred in Blount County, Tennessee. Pending is the motion of United Services Automobile Association (USAA), served with process as the plaintiffs’ uninsured/underinsured motorist carrier under T.C.A. § 56-7-1201, et seq., to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Rule 12(b)(2), Federal Rules o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER UPON RECONSIDERATION AND ON 28 USC § 1292 APPLICATION In this litigation growing out of a failed business relationship between plaintiffs and the insurer-defendant, plaintiffs objected to rulings of United States Magistrate Judge Mark D. Fox requiring plaintiffs to produce in discovery: (1) tape recordings of conversations of non-parties in anticipation of litigation, (2) verbatim...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL On June 19, 1992, defendant Patrick Ru-giero was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute, or possess with intent to distribute, cocaine and'heroin. Also on June 19, 1992, and in the same proceeding, defendant Ara Basmadjian was convicted of conspiracy to distribute, or possess with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin, and of distributio...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM ORDER I This is a petition for habeas corpus by a state prisoner seeking relief from a conviction for criminal possession and sale of a controlled substance, 14 ounces of cocaine. According to the prosecution’s proof, a cooperating defendant arranged the transaction involving petitioner, who appeared with what turned out to be the narcotics. The drugs were then driven to a parkin...
Views: 0
Page 16156
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I
This petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on behalf of petitioner Samuel Brown, presents many arguments grouped into twenty-one (21) points, many of them overlapping, as grounds for requiring reversal of his state court conviction. I defer decision on the grounds discussed in part IV of this memorandum order,...
Views: 1
Page 16159
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on Plasser American Corporation’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 50) Redwine filed this suit in October, 1990, seeking damages under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) for injuries sustained when he fell from the walkway of a ballast cleaning machine. Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directs the entry of summary ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION a AND ORDER
The subjects of this memorandum opinion and order are plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, filed April 12, 1991, and defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment, filed April 26, 1991. At request of the court, both parties submitted supplemental briefs, filed March 11, 1992, in support of their respective motions. The parties are in agreement as to all ...
Views: 0
Page 16162
*1414AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER On August 20,1992, the petitioner filed a Motion Pursuant to Rule 60(b) for Relief From Judgment and a Motion for Expedited Hearing or Stay of Execution. An order establishing an expedited briefing schedule was entered. Oral argument was heard on September 8, 1992 beginning at noon. The matter is ripe for decision. Procedural History Petitioner was convicted on two...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion to quash service of process and to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
The plaintiff, Richard Thompson, is an attorney who resides in Kansas. He claims in this action that the defendant breached an oral contract to pay plaintiff certain fees and ...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
At issue is plaintiff American Casualty Company’s (“American”) motion filed March 3, 1992, for partial summary judgment on the “Insured vs. Insured” exclusion provision in the director and officers’ liability insurance policy. American filed its designation of undisputed facts on March 9, 1992, as directed by the Court. Defendant FDIC responded in opposition on ...
Views: 0
Page 16171
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Presently before the Court are two cases relating to the extent, priority and validity of various parties’ interests in a residential apartment complex known as Holme Circle Apartments, located at 2740-2800 Axe Factory Road, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (“the Property”).1 The issue before the Court is the impact on these cases of the filing of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition by...
Views: 0
*1294
MEMORANDUM
Is a non-resident defendant subject to personal jurisdiction in Pennsylvania on the basis of allegedly defamatory statements he made, while outside Pennsylvania, during the course of a single unsolicited telephone conversation which emanated from Pennsylvania? I find that, under all the circumstances of this case, to do so would offend due process notions. Theref...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action arises from the sale of a parcel of land used as a mobile home park,
*1211
Millcreek Estates. Plaintiff, the purchaser of the property, has sued defendants for (1) fraudulent misrepresentation, (2) negligent misrepresentation, (3) breach of contract, (4) violation of the federal Clean Water Act, and (5) violation of RICO. Defendant has moved t...
Views: 0
OPINION
INTRODUCTION
On August 15, 1991, Judge Brotman issued a published opinion granting plaintiff’s motion for class certification with respect to plaintiff’s Lanham Act claim and denying certification for the plaintiff’s claims under the New Jersey Racketeering Act, RICO, and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. Maguire v. Sandy Mac, Inc., 138 F.R.D. 444 (D.N.J.1991). Judge Brotman found that t...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This action arises from the breach of a settlement agreement. In 1983, plaintiff Carpenter Technology Corp. entered into a settlement with defendant Armco, Inc. which resolved a patent validity suit filed by Carpenter against Armco in 1982. In 1990, Carpenter filed the present action alleging that Armco breached the settlement agreement (“the 1983 Agreement”) by accordi...
Views: 1
Page 16188
MEMORANDUM
In this case the Court is called upon to decide the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Expert Witness Dr. McCay Vernon pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(4)(B). A number of papers have been submitted by the parties in reference to said motion.1 The Court has considered these papers and *67finds that there is no need for a hearing. See Local Rule 105.6 (D.Md.1989). Plaintiffs argue that Defendan...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is the Motion of Defendant, Haynsworth, Baldwin, Johnson and Greaves, P.A., to compel complete responses to interrogatories and request for production of documents, the response and memorandum of Plaintiff, Stabilus, in opposition to Defendant’s motion, and Defendant’s reply to Plaintiff’s memorandum in opposition.
The action brought by plaintiff is...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
The plaintiffs move for summary judgment in the form of declaratory relief and a permanent injunction in an action to review a governmental administrative order blocking the plaintiffs’ ships as assets controlled or owned by the Yugoslavian government. For the reasons that follow, the motion is DENIED. The facts have twice been stated in other written opinions, and need ...
Views: 0
Before the court is the Motion of Resolution Trust Corporation [RTC] to Dismiss Counterclaim for Lack of Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter under Rule 12(b)(1) and Motion for Summary Judgment under Rule 56(a). Defendants have filed an opposition. The matter is before the court on briefs, without oral argument.
FACTUAL SCENARIO
On August 23, 1983, Anne Barrios Gau-thier, Wendell H. G...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 30 (1992)
"Jane DOE", Plaintiff,
v.
ALTON TELEGRAPH and Bellview News Democrat, Defendants.
No. 92-1268.
United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Peoria Division.
September 30, 1992.
Gary E. Peel, Peel, Walters & Roosevelt, Edwardsville, Ill., for plaintiff.
Joseph E. Martineau, Eric D. Paulsrud, and Robert Hoemeke, Lewis, Rice & Fingersh, St. Louis, Mo., for defendants.
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Defendants on May 28,1992. For the reasons set forth below this Motion is DENIED.
*1070
BACKGROUND
The Plaintiff, Merrill S¡ Wright, brings this action derivatively on behalf of the Bosch Trucking Company, Inc. Defined Benefit Pension Plan and Trust, (“the Plan”), under 29 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(1). T...
Views: 0
Page 16212
OPINION AND ORDER
The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) has asserted excise tax claims under 26 U.S.C. § 4971 against the LTV Corporation (“LTV”) for three separate years, 1984, 1985, and 1986. LTV seeks to expunge the tax claims as invalid under the automatic stay of the Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(5)). In the alternative, LTV seeks to subordinate the § 4971 excise tax claims to t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ MOTION TO DISMISS and the MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO RULE 12(b)(1) AND (6) OF THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE which were filed on March 23, 1992. The plaintiff has not filed a response to this motion. Pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion for dismissal may be made by the defendants, alleging “lack o...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 17 (1992)
Glenda SAUNDERS
v.
Paul RIDER, et al.
Civ. A. No. 92-1926.
United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.
October 16, 1992.
Israel M. Augustine, Jr., Israel M. Augustine, Jr. & Associates, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff.
*18 Martin Alan Stern, Adams & Reese, New Orleans, La., for defendants.
ORDER AND REASONS
FELDMAN, District Judge.
Before the Court is the plainti...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company (hereinafter “Union Pacific”) and defendants United Transportation Union (hereinafter “United”) and Kent Madison’s cross-motions for summary judgment (Filing Nos. 12 and 13). Union Pacific filed this action pursuant to 45 U.S.C. § 153, First (q), seeking to review and set aside an arbitration aw...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, this motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
The Plaintiff, Jason Bernard, filed a two count complaint for money damages on December 12, 1991. Count I was brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the Defendant, United Township High School District, violated the Plaintiff’s First and Fou...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Life Industries Corporation (“plaintiff”), filed suit against Ocean Bio-Chem, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Starbrite Distributing, Inc. (“Starbrite”) (collectively “defendants”), for infringement of plaintiff’s rights arising under the Federal Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1051
et seq.,
commonly known as the Lanham Act. Specifically, this acti...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM ORDER
I.
This action arises from plaintiff Wilbert Allen’s termination in October 1982 as director of the City of Yonkers Community Development Agency and as commissioner of the City of Yonkers Department of Community Development (“YCDA”). Plaintiff alleges that these terminations violated 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. and § 1983, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 4...
Views: 3
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On October 16, 1990, plaintiffs Charles and Glenna Ward (“Ward”) filed their complaint against defendants Westinghouse Canada, Incorporated and Westinghouse Electric Corporation (“defendants”) in California state court. The Wards’ complaint alleges that defendants manufactured and distributed a computer system which Charles Ward had u...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 35 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Alberta MAULDIN, Defendant.
No. CV-92-H-1916-S.
United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, S.D.
October 22, 1992.
Jack W. Selden, Sharon D. Simmons, U.S. Attorney's Office, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff.
Alberta Mauldin, pro se.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
HANCOCK, District Judge.
The issue before the court arises under Title XXXVI of t...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Introduction
The United States commenced this action seeking forfeiture of the funds on deposit in account number 11008117 at the Great Eastern Bank (“Account” or “frozen account”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981. Claimant Hadson Toko Trading Co., Inc. (“Hadson”) subsequently moved this Court, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and Rule 12 of the Local Rules of t...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Government’s Motion in Limine, filed June 11, 1992, to bar introduction of psychological expert testimony or limit the introduction thereof to the issue of whether the defendant was insane at the time of the offense is before the court.
Defendant filed notice of his intention to introduce expert testimony relating to his mental disease on May 29, 1992. All thre...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is claimant Genora Locklear’s motion to recover temporary possession of real property titled to claimant but currently held in custody of the United States Marshal pursuant to civil forfeiture proceedings brought under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7). Claimant asserts that she is an innocent owner within the meaning of section 881(a)(7) and should be permitted to remain on th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Having considered the motion, memoranda in support and in opposition, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) is well-taken and should be granted.
In his amended complaint, plaintiff challenge...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
In this case the Court is called upon to decide whether Maryland recognizes a common law action for the alleged gender-motivated discharge of a pregnant woman whose employer, a small business, is not subject to federal and state civil rights statutes. Before the Court is a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs complaint filed by defendant Magnum Entertainment, Inc. (“Magnum”).
...
Views: 2
RULING ON MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES
The plaintiff, an Hispanic woman, filed this civil rights action challenging her termination from the Stratford Police Department on the grounds that she was terminated because of her sex and national origin in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and in violation of her rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaint...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER
This dispute arises out of certain bonds that were issued in 1986. The City of Galt and City of Galt Public Finance Authority (“Galt”) seek a preliminary injunction against defendants (“IRS”) prohibiting the IRS from declaring the interest on the bonds as taxable or from seeking to collect a rebate from Galt of certain monies known as arbitrage. For the reasons st...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER I. Background In March, 1990 Defendant signed an Apprenticeship Contribution Agreement (“the Agreement”) which was to be effective as of November 1, 1989. In exchange for the opportunity to have its trainees formally indentured by the North and East Bay Counties Roofing/Waterproofing Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee’s (“JATC”) training program, Defendant agreed to...
Views: 0
Page 16258
*734
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants have moved for summary judgment against John Smith (“Smith”), who claims a violation of his constitutional rights because he was allegedly punished for speaking out against the deliberate flouting of the Chicago Clean Indoor Air Ordinance by defendants — fellow members of the Chicago Police Department. Smith has responded to that m...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY ■ INJUNCTION
This cause is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion and Memorandum for Preliminary Injunction filed October - 6, 1992, and Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction filed October 15; 1992. Based upon Plaintiff’s Motion and Memorandum for Preliminary Injunction and Defendant’s Response to Plainti...
Views: 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon defendant Lexdale, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of a justiciable case or controversy. The court heard oral argument on defendant’s motion. After reviewing the complaint, motion to dismiss and responsive memoranda, and considering the argument of the parties, the court grants Lexdale’s motion to dismiss for the following reasons.
I. Fac...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Fred E. DeWitt, a prisoner at the Rhode Island Adult Correctional Institutions (ACI), seeks habeas corpus relief under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that he was denied due process when the Superior Court of the State, of Rhode Island corrected an illegally imposed suspension of a portion of his life sentence. Petitioner seeks to reinstate the partial ...
Views: 1
RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff alleges a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and related state law claims. Defendants A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. (“Edwards”), Kieran Kilbride, and Timothy Smith move to dismiss.
I.
Background
The following facts, alleged in the amended complaint, are accepted as true f...
Views: 2
ORDER
On March 2, 1992, plaintiff Mary Alice MacNabb (“MacNabb”) initiated this action. • MacNabb’s second amended complaint filed June 22, 1992 named as defendant, Stephen S. Hass, M.D., Carl C. Mac-Cartee, M.D., and Richard M. Grossman, M.D., P.A., a Maryland Corporation. The second amended complaint alleged that defendant terminated MacNabb’s employment in its District of. Columbia off...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Maria Fernandez (“Plaintiff” or “Fernandez”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to challenge the final determination of the defendant, Louis W. Sullivan, Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Defendant” or the “Secretary”), that Plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work, and thus is not disabled, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR DIRECTED VERDICT
This Memorandum and Order memorializes the oral rulings entered by this court
*494
upon defendants’ motion for a directed verdict.
1
A.
Count 1
Count 1 alleges misrepresentations in connection with the sale of securities in violation of Section 2 of the Securities Act of 1933.
The security in t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, plaintiffs, the Town of Kirkwood and the Town Board acting for and on behalf of its Water Districts and Extensions (collectively “Kirk-wood”), seek a summary judgment order establishing the strict, joint and several liability of the defendants Gorick Construction Co., Inc., Alfred P. Gorick, Sr., and Diane K. Mekel as Executrix of the Est...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on appeal from the following two orders of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Florida:
(1) Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Directed Verdict and Final Judgment, entered July 31, 1991; and
(2) Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment and to Amend Complaint, entered October 3, 1991.
...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 37 (1992)
Lucious SMITH and Debra Smith, his wife, Plaintiff,
v.
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., a corporation, and National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Defendants.
No. 91-77-CIV-T-17B.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.
October 19, 1992.
Carol C. Murphy, Lakeland, Fla., David Wilson, III, Winter Haven, Fla., for plaintiff.
A.J. Melkus, Melkus & Hunter, P.A...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1007 (1992)
BURGER KING CORPORATION, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants,
v.
James R. AUSTIN, Loretta W. Austin and Austin Food Corp., Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs.
No. 90-0784-CIV.
United States District Court, S.D. Florida.
October 9, 1992.
*1008 *1009 T. Joan Lawrence, Steel Hector & Davis, Miami, Fla., for plaintiff.
Stephen M. Jampol, Rock & Leits, Atlanta, Ga., Stuart H. Sobe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
(RULE 60 APPLICATION)
I
This action concerns plaintiffs claim to the ownership of a painting by Claude Monet entitled “Champs de Ble a Vetheuil” (the “Monet”), which was stolen from plaintiff in 1945 and purchased in good faith by the defendant in 1957 from third-party defendant Wildenstein & Co. On April 20, 1987, after a bench trial, I issued a decision includ...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. The Court grants the Motion finding that at this time there is no controversy ripe for judicial review.
The federal government contemplates leasing an unused Naval Reserve Center to the Miami Coalition for the Homeless in accordance with Title V of the McKinney Act. 42 U.S.C. § 11411.
Plaintiffs ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 994 (1992)
BURGER KING CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
Nasif R. MAJEED, A & M Fast Foods, Inc., Reginald Underwood, Anna J. Hollis, Leroy Kelly, Dorothy Allen, Leedot Enterprises, Inc., Rubin Dale McCollum, Adrienne M. McCollum, John Davis, Judith G. Davis and Ferryboat Associates, Defendants.
Carole HALL, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
BURGER KING CORPORATION, Defendant.
Nos. 92-1572-CIV, 89...
Views: 0
ORDER
Memorandum. The written report and recommendation are hereby accepted and the conclusion is made in order of this court.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HONORABLE RICHARD OWEN
GRUBIN, United States Magistrate Judge:
This is an action brought under the Social Security Act (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3), to review a final decision of the Secretary of Heal...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Robert Feldstein filed the present Section 1983 complaint against defendants New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (“DCA”); Mark Green, Commissioner; and Karen Miller, Chief Hearing Officer, on May 7, 1992. The complaint, which asserts that defendants violated Feldstein’s rights by causing him to be dismissed from his position at DCA and by maintaining stig...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ motion will be granted, and defendant’s motion will be denied. FACTS Plaintiffs James Wolff and Cheryl Wolff operate a video rental store known as the A-V Room in Monticello, Minnesota. Plaintiffs Richard Hanson and Margaret Hansen operate a video rental store known as 3rd Street Video in...
Views: 0
Page 16288
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION TESTIMONY AND PRODUCTION OF SUBPOENAED DOCUMENTS (# 19)
INTRODUCTION
In 1989, the defendant (hereinafter, “Manufacturers”) began to consider offering a guaranteed investment contract (“GIC”) and an enhanced guaranteed investment contract (“enhanced GIC”) to investors. However, it had no experience in operating GIC or enhanced GIC funds and sough...
Views: 4
805 F. Supp. 1157 (1992)
APOLLO TECHNOLOGIES CORP., Plaintiff,
v.
CENTROSPHERE INDUSTRIAL CORP., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-3712 (AJL).
United States District Court, D. New Jersey.
September 25, 1992.
*1158 *1159 *1160 *1161 *1162 *1163 *1164 *1165 Martin H. Samson, Michael J. Silverberg, Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim & Ballon, New York City, David M. Hyman, Crummy, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinge...
Views: 1
OPINION
Presently before the court is the motion by plaintiffs, Kaselaan & D’Angelo Associates, Inc. and Hill International, Inc., to disqualify John J. Rosenberg, Esquire, and Varet, Marcus & Fink, P.C., as counsel for defendant William “Chip” D'Angelo, pursuant to the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 1.9(a)(1), 1.9(a)(2), 1.9(b) and 1.10(a). For the reasons stated herein, plainti...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. For the reasons stated below, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be GRANTED. I. Plaintiff originally filed this action in Texas state court seeking to recover certain insurance policy proceeds and asserting other state-law statutory and common-law causes of action. Thereafter, Defendants filed a Third-Party Complaint ag...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the court is the government’s pretrial written proffer of evidence, submitted pursuant to United States v. Santiago, 582 F.2d 1128 (7th Cir.1978), summarizing the evidence that the government expects to adduce at trial to establish that a conspiracy existed; that each of the defendants participated in the conspiracy; and that the co-conspirator statements s...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
George Newman (“Newman”), JGN Corporation (“JGN”), George Boldt, individually and as trustee of the George B. Boldt, Inc. Profit Sharing and Retirement Trust (“Boldt”), Donald Armstrong (“Armstrong”), and George Robinette, III (“Robi-nette”), collectively referred to as “plaintiffs,” bring this action against Comprehensive Care Corp. (“CompCare”), Ronald Do-zoretz
...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 557 (1992)
RISTVEDT-JOHNSON, INC., a Tennessee Corporation, and Cummins-Allison Corp., Plaintiffs,
v.
BRANDT, INC., a Wisconsin Corporation, Defendant.
Civ. A. Nos. 88-C-3834, 91-CV-07016.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 19, 1992.
*558 *559 *560 Stephen G. Rudisill, Edward L. Foote, Robert J. Crawford, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs.
Thomas W. Ehrmann, David ...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 20 (1992)
Jimmy DUPREE, Plaintiff,
v.
LUBBOCK COUNTY JAIL, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 5:91-CV-165-C.
United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Lubbock Division.
September 24, 1992.
Jimmy Dupree, pro se.
Sunny Horton Ratliff, Lubbock, Tex., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
CUMMINGS, District Judge.
ORDER
Came to be heard in the above-styled and -numbered cause, on M...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1053 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Larry Lane BATEMAN.
Crim. No. 92-62-01-D.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
September 24, 1992.
Memorandum Order on Motion for Reconsideration October 19, 1992.
*1054 Arnold H. Huftalen, Asst. U.S. Atty., Jeffrey R. Howard, U.S. Atty., Concord, N.H., Bruce Taylor, Sp. Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Child Exploitation & Obscenit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This ease concerns a charge against the United States Postal Service of discrimination based on gender and national origin. The plaintiff, who was a part-time temporary clerk in the Postal Service, contends that she was initially discharged and subsequently denied employment because of her Hispanic “origin” and because she is a female.
BACKGROUND
The plainti...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 68 (1992)
THE NATION MAGAZINE, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-2303 (JHG).
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
October 23, 1992.
*69 Katherine A. Meyer, Eric R. Glitzenstein, Harmon, Curran, Gallagher & Spielberg, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
Elizabeth A. Pugh, Michael J. Haungs, Civ. Div., Federal Programs Branc...
Views: 1
805 F.Supp. 1041 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Larry Lane BATEMAN.
Crim. No. 92-62-01-D.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
September 23, 1992.
*1042 Arnold H. Huftalen, Asst. U.S. Atty., Jeffrey R. Howard, U.S. Atty., Concord, N.H., Bruce Taylor, Sp. Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Child Exploitation & Obscenity Section, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Mark F. Sullivan, Exet...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant seeks an order pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dismissing the complaint in this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the following reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss the action is denied.
BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant pled guilty to knowingly and intentionally possessing cocaine with intent to distribute. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Her offense carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(iii). The Sentencing Guidelines call for a sentence of between 70 and 87 months. Because of defendant’s subservience to her husband who was himself pri...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
In August 1990, Anthony Mansolillo, a Rhode Island resident, purchased some Rhode Island real estate from Capitol Bank and Trust Company (“Capitol”), a Massachusetts bank. Capitol allegedly promised to provide complete acquisition and construction financing for the property. In December 1990, Capitol was declared insolvent, and the Federal Deposit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Now before the Court are cross-motions for partial summary judgment on Policy •No. 37 017 139 (“the policy”)
1
filed by realigned plaintiffs
2
Estate of Stevenson T. Sherman, Timothy S. Sherman and Estate of Elizabeth Ann Sherman (“the Sher-mans”) and realigned defendants S. Donald Sherman and Irene H. Sherman (“defendants”).
3
The parties’ disp...
Views: 0
Page 16347
MEMORANDUM
This Court is called upon to decide defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Because plaintiff’s claims are barred by res judicata, defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be GRANTED, and judgment will be entered in its favor as to all counts.
I. Facts
Plaintiff Serita Weathersby (“Weathers-by”) was ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.INTRODUCTION
This case was tried to the Court on August 10-11, 1992. Plaintiff appeared through counsel, James H. Rice of Midwest City, Oklahoma. Defendant appeared through counsel Dennis M. Duffy and Jay P. Golder both with the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. Having heard testimony of witnesses and considered all properly admitted exhibits, the Court e...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Now before the Court are (i) defendant’s motion for summary judgment, or alternatively for dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and (ii) plaintiff’s motion for sanctions against Barbara Jones. For the reasons stated herein, this Court will, by separate order, GRANT defendant’s motion and DENY plaintiff’s motion.
I. DE...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff, Marie Giordano (“Giordano”), brings this Title VII suit against defendant, William Paterson College of New Jersey (the “College”), based on charges of sexual discrimination. The alleged violations include termination of employment and sexual harassment by male co-workers including Sergeant Robert Jackson (“Jackson”), Acting Chief Peter Ryerson, (“Ryerson”) and Lieutenan...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
In this case the Court is called upon to decide the motions for summary judgment filed by defendants Safeway, Inc. (“Safeway”) and the United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 27 (the “Union”). This action for compensatory and punitive damages arises under 29 U.S.C. § 185 (1982) (section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947). The Court has considered the paper...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This is a civil forfeiture action brought by the Government against Joseph Beauty *324Supply pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981. By Memorandum and Order dated October 14, 1992, this court denied claimant Jose Vargas’ motion to reconsider and vacate an order entered by Judge Freeh (in the emergency motions part of this court) authorizing seizure of the leasehold of Joseph Beauty Suppl...
Views: 2
ORDER
This case arises out of an employee welfare benefit plan established between an employer, DWS, Inc., and an employee bargaining group, Professional Helicopter Pilots Association (hereinafter referred to as “PHPA”). The plaintiffs consist .of the following: PHPA, an organization representing flight instructors, whose members were eligible to participate in the plan; Contractor Flight...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiff, an employee of a defense contractor, filed this action against the Department of Defense (“DOD”) seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against revocation of his security clearance. Defendants move to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), or in the alternative, for failure to state a claim upon which r...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by the plaintiffs on August 12, 1992. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED. On June 7, 1990, the plaintiffs, Edward Undraitis, Joseph Undraitis, and Wilma Langloh, were injured when their vehicle was struck after a collision between the defendants, James Luka and John Szanto. Luka is a resident of Kansa...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 42 (1992)
FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO., Plaintiff,
v.
Tim BRANCH, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-21-VAL (WDO).
United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Valdosta Division.
October 22, 1992.
*43 Robert C. Martin, Jr., William C. Pound, Columbus, Ga., for Ford Motor Credit Co.
Robert Cyril Wilmot, Tifton, Ga., for Tim Branch, a/k/a Tim V. Branch.
John S. Sims, Jr., Tifton, Ga., for Ray ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Several cable television companies have brought this lawsuit challenging the legality of two municipal ordinances, 9-90 and 48-90, enacted by the City of Montgomery, Alabama. Plaintiffs Storer Cable Communications, ESPN, Inc., Satellite Services, Inc., and Turner Network Television contend that the ordinances contravene a number of federal constitutional provisions and statutes as w...
Views: 2
OPINION
In this diversity action, David Couture alleges the T-cell lymphoma from which he is afflicted was caused by his exposure to herbicides manufactured and marketed by the defendant chemical companies. Couture’s complaint advances several bases of recovery predicated upon various theories of tort law recognized in the State of Montana, including the theory of strict liability in tort...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1058 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Larry Lane BATEMAN.
Crim. No. CR-92-62-01-D.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
October 2, 1992.
*1059 Arnold H. Huftalen, Asst. U.S. Atty., Jeffrey R. Howard, U.S. Atty., Concord, N.H., Bruce Taylor, Sp. Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Child Exploitation & Obscenity Section Washington, D.C., for U.S.
Mark F. Sullivan, Exeter, N....
Views: 0
*995
OPINION
Several pending motions now await the court’s decision. Defendants move to dismiss the amended complaint under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,-and, in the alternative, for summary judgment under Rule 56. Plaintiff opposes these motions and cross-moves for partial summary judgment on her second cause of action to reeovér the leaseh...
Views: 2
Page 16371
OPINION & ORDER
The Court has before it cross-motions for summary judgment filed by the parties in this case. For the reasons set forth below, the motion of the United States is hereby *416GRANTED while the motions of claimants are hereby DENIED.
In 1990, a joint investigation conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration discovered that Ramón Torres Gon...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Judy-Philippine, Inc. (“Judy-Philippine”) has moved to amend its complaint pursuant to Rule 15 and for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed. R.Civ.P. For the reasons set forth below, this motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Prior Proceedings
In an Opinion dated December 23, 1991, familiarity with which is assumed,
Judy-Philippine, Inc. ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner P/R Clipper Gas (“Clipper Gas”), seeks an order directing respondent PPG Industries, Inc. (“PPG”), to join a pending arbitration involving Clipper Gas and Georgia Gulf Corporation (“Georgia Gulf”). PPG opposes the request for consolidation. For the reasons stated herein, Clipper Gas’s petition to compel consolidated arbitration is granted.
FACT...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are Plaintiff-Appellant Sherman Holdridge’s Appeal Brief, filed May 1, 1992, the appeal brief of Defendant-Appellee, the Attorney General, dated July 2, 1992, and Holdridge’s Reply Brief, filed July 30, 1992. I. BACKGROUND This is an appeal from a non-jury trial before a United States Magistrate Judge. Proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the mag...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this diversity case, plaintiffs USG Corporation and USG Interiors, Inc. (USG) seek indemnification from defendants (Brown), pursuant to a merger agreement, for costs incurred as a result of alleged violations of environmental laws and regulations prior to the merger date. Before us now is USG’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability under Article 4(d) of the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this commercial action where the parties’ citizenship is not diverse, the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction depends upon whether plaintiff owns an interest in what may be characterized as a “security” under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(10). Contending that plaintiff does not, defendants move to dismiss the amended complaint unde...
Views: 0
OPINION This is a motion requesting that sanctions be imposed upon defendant Jacquard Lace Company, Ltd. and its attorney, Avrom Vann, Esq. The motion for sanctions is granted to the extent described hereafter. FACTS The basic facts giving rise to this lawsuit are set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, Milltex Industries Corp. v. Jacquard Lace Company, Ltd., 922 F.2d 164 (2d Cir.1991)...
Views: 0
ORDER On June 5, 1992 and June 9, 1992 this court dismissed Counts I, II and XI-XVII of the plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This court also exercised its power under Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U.S. 800, 96 S.Ct. 1236, 47 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976) and dismissed Counts III-X and XVIII-XXIII of the complaint without prejudice and with leave t...
Views: 0
ORDER
We have before us defendant’s motion to consolidate counts, filed on September 15, 1992, Docket Document No. 30. The motion was the object of informal argument *1046at the status conference held on September 21, 1992. The motion requests that the government be required to consolidate and reduce its selected units of prosecution with regard to Counts 2 through 21, and 22 through 37, or a tot...
Views: 0
*168
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In a 24-count superseding indictment, the government charges defendant Roy William Harris with conspiring to violate the wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and the bank fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1344. The government also charges Harris with substantive violations of § 1344; the money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(2); the wire fraud ...
Views: 3
OPINION
Before the Court is the motion by counterclaim-defendant, the Regents of the University of California (the “Regents”), to dismiss the counterclaim filed against it by defendants on the basis of sovereign immunity pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment. Additionally, before the Court is the motion of defendants, Alza Corporation (“Alza”) and Marrion Merrell Dow Inc. (“Marrion Merrell D...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Court, having carefully reviewed Magistrate Judge Carol E. Heckman’s Report and Recommendation of August 13, 1992, as well as the pleadings and materials submitted by both parties; and no objections having been timely filed to the
*128
Magistrate Judge’s Report in the above-captioned matter, it is hereby
ORDERED, that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Mag...
Views: 0
Page 16400
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Pursuant to § 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 185 (“the Act”), plaintiffs, United Paperworkers International Union and United Paperworkers International Union Local 5 (“the Union”) and William R. Mac-Dougal (“MacDougal”), bring this breach of contract action against defendant International Paper Company (“the Company”). The U...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant in the above-captioned sex discrimination action moves for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff was employed by Federal Express Corporation from November 5, 1987 until August 1, 1988 as a part-time courier.
See
Complaint ¶¶ 4, 9. Her job duties included delivery and pi...
Views: 1
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Appellants’ appeal of the Order of the Bankruptcy Court of the Northern District of Georgia, Rome Division on May 19, 1992, and Appellants’ Motion for Oral Argument.
*883
Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 158(a).
Appellants make two claims in their appeal: (1) that the Bankruptcy Court erred in ruling that interest accr...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Inn Chu Trading Company, Ltd. (“Inn Chu”) brings this diversity action against defendant Champion Products, Inc. (“Champion”) alleging breach of contract and fraud, and against defendant Sara Lee Corporation (“Sara Lee”) for aiding, abetting, and directing Champion’s fraud and tortious interference with contractual relations. Defendants move to dismiss the complaint purs...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff William Fortune brings this action individually and as Executor of the Estate of Paul Paroski pursuant to Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132(a)(1)(B), (a)(2), (a)(3), (e)(1) alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence in procuring an insurance contract. In lieu of answering the complaint, defendant ...
Views: 3
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The Consent Decree provides...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this action to confirm an arbitrator’s decision concerning an employer’s liability upon withdrawal from a multiemployer pension plan, the Court must consider the assessment of liability under section 4221 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1401....
Views: 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (the “Washington district court”) transferred this case to the Southern District of Florida by Order dated October 3, 1991.
See
Order, No. C86-1204D (W.D.Wash. Oct. 3, 1991). Defendant moves to dismiss, primarily on the...
Views: 2
Page 16445
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Loral Fairchild Corp. (“Loral Fairchild”) brings this action against Defendant Sharp Corp. (“Sharp-Japan”) and others alleging patent infringement. This case originated in the Eastern District of Virginia. In October 1991, Loral Fairchild first attempted to serve (hereinafter referred to as “First Service”) Sharp-Japan pursuant to Virginia’s ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The plaintiffs, Bob Marshall Alliance and the Wilderness Society, instituted the present action challenging the propriety of the federal government’s issuance of several oil and gas leases in an area of the Lewis and Clark National Forest known as Deep Creek. Specifically, the plaintiffs allege the issuance of the leases violated the Nationa...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court are the motions to dismiss of defendants James O’Grady (“O’Grady”), Dr. John Raba (“Dr. Raba”), Lt. Doris Warren (“Warren”), and Sgt. Nadine Jones (“Jones”). For the reasons that follow, the court grants O’Grady’s motion, grants Dr. Raba’s motion, and denies Warren’s and Jones’s motions. FACTS This is a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for .the violation of t...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants in the above-captioned action move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b). For the reasons that follow, that motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, a former inmate in the Mid-Orange Correctional Facility,
1
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against parole officers James White and James McElwee, and t...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY • JUDGMENT
On July 31, 1992, defendants filed a motion pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6), 12(c) and 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff filed a response August 26, 1992; no reply was filed. Oral argument was heard October 15, 1992.
BACKGROUND FACTS
. Plaintiff Thomas Edward Brown, a black male, had been the assistant di...
Views: 0
OPINION
In an opinion issued March 25, 1992, familiarity with which is assumed, the court denied defendant Pia Johanson’s motions to *326dismiss and for summary judgment. De.fendant1 thereafter failed to answer the complaint, and, on June 2, 1992, the Clerk of the Court noted her default.2 Pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2), F.R.Civ.P., plaintiff Gordon Grant has now moved for a default judgment. Defendan...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 634 (1992)
Derrick WILLIAMS, Plaintiff,
v.
Michael O'LEARY, et al., Defendants.
No. 89 C 6455.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 27, 1992.
*635 Derrick Williams, pro se.
Philander Scott Neville, Jr., Chicago, for plaintiff.
Thomas A. Morrissey, Gregory Abbott, Atty. General's Office, Chicago, for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ASPEN, District Judge:...
Views: 0
*1351
ORDER
This matter came before the Court at an oral hearing on October 7, 1992 for the resolution of two issues.
This action was brought by
qui tam
Plaintiff, Alfred J. Pedicone, pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729,
et seq.
While this matter has had a complex factual history, for purposes of the resolution of the two issues before th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This ERISA case raises what appears to be a novel issue in this Circuit, namely, whether a participating employer in'a mul-tiemployer employee benefit fund is obligated to continue making contributions when the Trustees reduce benefit levels as the result of the abrupt and catastrophic departure of the major employer from the Fund.
In the instant case, the plaintiff ...
Views: 1
RENEWED ORDER OF DETENTION For the reasons stated in an Entry filed contemporaneously with the Order, the Court ORDERS that the defendant be detained pending trial on the following terms and conditions: The defendant, CHARLES DEHART JONES, is hereby committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff filed her complaint in this matter on October 7, 1991. On October 22, 1991, defendants, filed an answer. Pursuant to defendants’ October 29, 1991 motion, this case was consolidated with a preceding case having the number 91-75222. On July 31, 1992, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Following entry of a stipulat...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff has filed a motion to enforce the judgment in this case (document #71). Plaintiff alleges that the Federal Defendants in this case have subverted and disobeyed both the letter and the spirit of the court’s October 10, 1991 granting the permanent injunction. See
Sherman v. Griepentrog,
775 F.Supp. 1383 (D.Nev.1991). The court agrees. Whether by overt instruction ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court are defendant District of Columbia’s motion to dismiss, defendant Walter B. Ridley’s to the oppositions and replies thereto. “[A] complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state.a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45, 7...
Views: 0
.MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), brought this action alleging race discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17.. Having concluded that Special Agent (“SA”) Van Meter was not entitled to a jury trial under the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Van Meter v. Barr, 7...
Views: 0
ORDER
Presently before the Court is defendant’s Motion to Produce Evidence (doc. no. 46) and Amended Motion to Produce Evidence (doc. no. 57): A brief reprise of the pertinent facts follows.
This is a products liability action involving the alleged failure of a tie rod ball stud in a 1979 Chevrolet Chevette. The ultimate
*405
issue is whether the stud broke as a result o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Loral Fairchild Corp. commenced this action against defendants Victor Company of Japan, US JVC Corp., Nikon Corporation, Nikon, Inc., Murata Machinery Ltd., Murata Business Systems, Inc., Oki Electric Industry Co. Ltd, Oki America, Inc., Ricoh Company, Inc., and Ricoh Corporation pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 271 & 284 alleging that the defendan...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT GEORGE A. WRAY’S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL
INTRODUCTION
On October 5, 1992, the court heard arguments and an evidentiary hearing in connection with a motion for new trial filed by Defendant George A. Wray (“Wray”). Wray seeks to overturn the judgment of the trial which was held commencing on February 11, 1992. Wray did not attend the trial, and contends that he ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
BACKGROUND
The court takes jurisdiction over this case pursuant to the diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's motion for summary judgment. A contract by which the plaintiffs employed the defendant to exterminate termites on their property is at the center of this dispute. The plaintiffs seek to recover for termi...
Views: 0
TRIAL OPINION Plaintiffs William G. Becker, Jr. (“Becker”) and Patricia B. Becker 1 instituted this action against the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) on March 16, 1990 seeking a refund of federal income taxes for the 1982 tax year plus interest. This action arises from an investment entered into by Becker in a mining venture. The primary issue presented for resolution is whether this inve...
Views: 0
Page 16519
TRANSFER ORDER
This litigation presently consists of three actions pending in the following federal districts: two actions in the Northern District of Georgia and one action in the Southern District of Georgia.1 Before the *394Panel is a motion by defendants Embraer-Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A. and Embraer Aircraft Corporation to centralize the actions, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, in t...
Views: 0
Page 16523
OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Mark R. Zofcin, individually and in his capacity as administrator of the estates of his wife and two children, brought this action against Defendants Joseph Dean, Chrysler Corporation (“Chrysler”), and U-Haul Center of Kingston, Pennsylvania, U-Haul Company of Central Pennsylvania, and Amerco Leasing Company (collectively, “U-Haul”) seeking damages for personal injuries...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Appellant, a committee of subordinated bondholders, appeals from an order and memorandum decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Blackshear, J.), approving a break-up fee arrangement among appel-lees, the debtor and a prospective purchaser. For the reasons set forth below, the challenged order is affirmed.
I.
Appell...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER
A putative plaintiff class of approximates ly 40,000 non-union salaried retirees of the General Motors Corporation (“GM”) sues under the Employee Retirement Income Se
*932
curity Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). They seek a judgment which would require GM to furnish them with basic health care-coverage at no cost to them for their life-times,■ and for the: life-times ...
Views: 0
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION.
This matter is before the court pursuant to Defendants’ Motion to Quash Notice of Videotape Deposition of Dr. Doro and Brief in Support of Motion to Quash Videotape Deposition of Dr. Doro filed on May 28, 1992. The Plaintiff filed her Resistance to Motion to Quash Notice of Videotape Deposition of Dr. Doro on June 9, 1992.
The issue presented by these motions is whether a p...
Views: 0
OPINION
I.
Plaintiff Sunshine Cellular (“Sunshine”) is a Maryland general partnership which provides nonwireline cellular telephone service in a Pennsylvania service area known as “Pennsylvania 8.” Defendant Vanguard Cellular Systems, Inc. (“Vanguard”) is a North Carolina corporation which provides nonwireline cellular telephone service for a cluster of service areas known as the “Pe...
Views: 1
Prior to trial, plaintiff Jan Purgess (“Purgess”) moved
in limine
to exclude evidence regarding any of his cases which were not identified at the time of his discharge from The Hospital for Special Surgery (“HSS”).
1
Defendants Nigel Shar-rock (“Sharrock”) and HSS opposed that motion and, pursuant to Court instruction,
*1105
included in their trial memorandum ...
Views: 0
ORDER The Court has before it the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation entered March 9, 1992 (Docket Entry No. 82); plaintiff’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (filed March 23,1992; Docket Entry No. 84) and response of the defendants, Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System and its Board of Trustees (filed April 2, 1992; Docket Entry No. 87). The plaintiff’s objections ra...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This is a breach of contract action pursuant to Connecticut common law, the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. § 38a-815 et seq. (“CUI-PA”), and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. § 42-110a et seq. (“CUTPA”), commenced by Nicki All-mendinger and Philip Allmendinger (the “Allmendingers”) against Aetna...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Plaintiffs, the City of New Orleans and the New Orleans Unión Passenger Terminal Committee (NOUPT) filed a motion to remand to the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana based on improper removal procedure and lack of diversity jurisdiction. The motion was subsequently taken on the papers by the court. Having reviewed the pleadings, memoran-da...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the motion of the defendant to disqualify plaintiff’s counsel for conflict of interest. Factual Background This is a declaratory judgment action between two insurers regarding the payment of defense costs and attorneys fees incurred in an underlying tort action in Kansas state court (Clark v. U.S.D. No. 383, No. 88-C-197, Riley Cou...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Currently before this court is the plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration of this court’s Order of August 24, 1992. The plaintiff seeks to have this court reconsider its decision regarding his Motion to Dismiss the defendant’s Abuse of Process Counterclaim and the Motion to Strike the defendant’s Eighth Affirmative Defense. In accordance with Local R.Civ.P. 20(g), the plaintiff ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before the Court is the appeal of Enterprise Energy Corporation (“Energy” or “Enterprise Energy”) from a Bankruptcy Court order, dated March 18, 1992, which denied Enterprise Energy’s motion to require Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation (“TCO”) to assume or reject an execu-tory settlement agreement.
BACKGROUND
On July 31, 1991 (the “petition Date”), Columbia Gas Syste...
Views: 1
OPINION
Currently before the court is defendant’s motion, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss the first count of. plaintiffs’ complaint. For the following reasons, the motion will be granted.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On or about August, 1971, plaintiffs, Drs. Howard and Vera Easling, purchased the Pennypoint Park Apartments (“Penny-point”). Plaintiff’s Comp...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Appended to this Memorandum Opinion is a separate opinion of Judges Murnaghan and Motz in which they differ from the undersigned with regard to the persons who may assert the legislative privilege. In all other aspects, however, they concur in the opinion as set forth below.
This matter is before the Court for resolution of certain discovery disputes between the...
Views: 0
OPINION
The amended complaint in this case,1 Docket Item (“D.I.”) 4, alleges violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations provisions of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq. (“RICO”), and tortious interference with contract rights in violation of section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, and state common law. On April 17, 1991, this Court ...
Views: 0
*958
OPINION
Pending before the Court in this patent infringement case is a motion by the Plaintiffs, Kabi Pharmacia AB and Pharmacia, Inc. (hereinafter referred to collectively as “Pharmacia”) to disqualify the law firm of Morgan & Finnegan from representing the Defendant, Alcon Surgical, Inc. (“Alcon”). Docket Item (“D.I.”) 55. The Plaintiffs assert that Morgan & Finnegan has r...
Views: 0
Page 16609
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs are members of a class of employees of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania who do not belong to the state employees’ union. The defendants are certain Commonwealth officials and Council 13, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (“Council 13” or the “Union”). This action is a constitutional challenge under Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, 475 U....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs have filed an opposition brief, Defendants have filed a reply brief, and Plaintiffs have filed a surreply brief. The motion is now ripe for consideration.
Background
The captioned action arose from a two car accident which occurred on April 30, 1987. ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Before this Court is an appeal of a bankruptcy court decision brought by creditor-appellant, Martin Dollinger (“Dollinger”). The bankruptcy court had ruled that Dol-linger’s claim of nondischargeability was barred for failure to file his complaint or an extension before the lapse of the bar date. For the reasons set forth below, the bankruptcy court’s decision is affirmed.
BA...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs Robert Rodgers and Stephanie Rodgers allege in this diversity action
1
that Robert Rodgers was wrongfully demoted and deprived of a promotion by his former employer, Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”). They further allege that Rodgers was insulted and threatened by his immediate supervisor, Peter Barrasse, Jr., the Distr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an action for patent infringement brought by Optical Recording Corporation (“ORC”) against Capitol-EMI Music, Inc. and Capitol Records, Inc. (“Capitol”). Pri- or to the filing of this action on July 22, 1992, by ORC, Defendant Capitol Records, Inc. filed on July 2, 1992, a declaratory judgment action against ORC in the United States District Court for the Southern Dis...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending are Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ briefs regarding the right to a jury trial under § 510 of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1140. The Court concludes that there is no right to jury trial, and also concludes that Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages should be dismissed.
In 1981 the Plaintiffs were laid off by Defendant Kaiser Aluminum. The Plaintiffs were never...
Views: 0
ORDER AND OPINION This case comes before this Court on defendant, United States’, motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs, Arlington R. Miller, III (“Arlington III”), Arlington R. Miller, Jr. (“Mr. Miller”), and Mary D. Miller (“Mrs. Miller”) brought this action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671, et seq., against the United States seeking damages for harm to ...
Views: 1
Page 16616
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment.
1
For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
I. BACKGROUND.
This matter is properly before this Court under the diversity jurisdiction prescribed by 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the court are motions for summary judgment and/or dismissal by the “State Defendants,”
1
by the “County Defendants,”
2
by defendants Leider, and by defendants Veach.
3
*647
For the reasons stated below, the court will grant summary judgment for the State and County defendants on plaintiffs’ claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Richard F. Millard filed this action against the United States government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680,1 seeking damages for injuries to his back allegedly sustained on February 6, 1988 while he was unloading mail from a tractor-trailer truck docked at the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania post office.2 At the time of the accident, Mill...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, defendant’s motion to dismiss and opposition to plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, plaintiff’s opposition thereto, and defendant’s reply. Upon careful consideration of the entire record, the Court dismisses most of the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and, due to lack of venue in the ...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 386 (1992)
Mary Catherine SPANN, Plaintiff,
v.
NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 91-A-1321-S.
United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, D.S.
July 27, 1992.
*387 Leah O. Taylor, Taylor & Roberson, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff.
Alan C. Livingston, Lee & McInish, Dothan, Ala. and J. Mark Hart, Spain, Gillon, Grooms, B...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the court for consideration of the United States’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. Also pending before the court is plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. *1398 Because the court finds that the United States’ motion to dismiss is due to be granted, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is due to be denied a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This cause comes before the Court pursuant to the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Wyeth Laboratories, Inc. Having reviewed the motion and the parties’ authorities, exhibits and memoranda in connection with same, the Court finds as follows: I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Plaintiffs in this case, Beverly Wind-ham and her husband, Mikell Windham, are adult re...
Views: 2
ORDER Before the court is petitioner Mitchell S. Janik’s (“Janik”) motion for expungement of record of an eleven-year-old case. For the following reasons, the motion is denied. FACTS Originally arrested by local police, Jan-ik’s state charges were later dropped. On October 27, 1981 a federal grand jury indicted Janik, a deputy sheriff in Cook County, Illinois, for possessing two unregistered guns ...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Bruce Hardwood Floors (“Company”) brought this action pursuant to section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, 29 U.S.C. § 185 (1988), seeking to vacate an arbitrator’s award in a grievance submitted to arbitration by Defendant Southern Council of Industrial Workers, Un...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS The defendant, Hewlett-Packard, moves for partial summary judgment on the grounds that Laitram failed to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 287 and is barred from recovering any damages for the alleged infringement of United States patent No. 4,860,234 for the period prior to the filing of the Complaint. The motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND The facts of this case have been recited in det...
Views: 3
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to join *595indispensable parties filed May 21, 1992 and Plaintiffs response thereto filed June 9, 1992.
BACKGROUND
On April 10, 1992, Plaintiff filed a complaint to determine the priority of liens, for declaratory relief, and for conversion. Plaintiff i...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON RES JUDICATA/COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL GROUNDS
I.
Background
Plaintiff Douglas Miller (“Miller”) was employed as a detention officer by the Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department from December 1980 until September 24, 1987. During the course of his employment, four disciplinary actions were taken against him. The last action ...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND DISMISSAL OF CLASS ACTION This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ motion to dismiss filed April 9, 1992. Responses thereto were filed April 28, 1992 and May 13, 1992. A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to relief. Conley v. Gib...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Presently before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction submitted by the Defendants, Illien Adoptions International, LTD., Anna Belle Illien, Ann F. Bell, and Paula Budnitz. The Court has considered said motion, the opposition thereto, and accompanying memoranda and documents. The issues have been fully briefed. No hearing is deemed necessary. Local R...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff brought this action to recover damages which, she alleges, were caused when the defendants sexually molested her during her early childhood, when she was in their foster care. The defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking dismissal on the ground that the claims are time-barred by the applicable (Pennsylvania) two-year statute of limitations. 42 ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER The court has before it a Motion to Suppress filed by defendant Jose Antonio Torres. Defendant seeks to suppress evidence found in the search of a vehicle driven by defendant. He argues that the detention and search of the vehicle violated his fourth amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Factual Background On January 29, 1992, defendant (a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL This case is before me on an appeal from an adverse decision by the Secretary of Human Services (“Secretary”) denying certain benefits to June H. Ryder (“claimant”) because her husband, Robert Ryder, (“husband”) receives a veteran’s pension which is augmented by surviving spouse benefits. In the ruling below, the Appeals Council determined that the augmented portio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Ronald Lee Dunston appeals from a judgment of the bankruptcy court excepting from discharge his $35,000 debt to Joy Evans, his mother. The bankruptcy judge found the debt nondischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code. That section states:
(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of 'this title does not discharge...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
This matter is before me on plaintiffs application for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) (EAJA). Plaintiff seeks an original award of $3,573.75 and a supplemental award of $749.25. The latter represents time defending the fee application in this court. The government objects and asserts that plaintiff was not the prevailing part...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION In this case the Court is called upon to decide the motion to dismiss counts I and II of plaintiffs’ complaint filed by defendant Oliver Weldon Nelson, the motion to dismiss count I of plaintiff’s amended complaint filed by defendants Robert Jones and William Lewis, and the motion to dismiss the amended complaint filed by defendant Logan Widdowson. For the reasons set forth b...
Views: 0
ORDER On October 30, 1991, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Answers were filed, the parties proceeded with extensive discovery, and the case is now before the court on cross motions for summary judgment. The court has read and carefully considered the motions, the submissions of the parties, including all deposi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the court on the renewed motion of defendant, Dr. Stuart Cohen, for summary judgment. Plaintiff, Kimberly Marie Snawder, filed this product liability action alleging that she contracted poliomyelitis from an oral polio vaccine administered by Dr. Cohen twenty-one years ago. Snawder claims that Dr. Cohen failed to warn her, or her mother, of the known d...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
Hewlett-Packard Company, a defendant in this patent case, moves this Court under Rule 56 for a partial summary judgment that the manufacture, use or sale of its Models 17B, 17BII, 27S and 42S calculators (“the accused calculators”) does not infringe any claim of plaintiff’s United States Patent No. 4,547,860 (“the ’860 patent”). For the reasons that follow, the defendant’s motio...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The present cause of action is an appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 and B.R. 8001(a) and 8002(a). Claimant/appellant L.P.O.M. Group appeals a final order of the bankruptcy court granting the debtor’s motion for summary judgment on March 6, 1992. This is one of several bankruptcy appeals pendi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion for permission to file a brief in excess of twenty-five pages of plaintiff Residents Against Industrial Landfill Expansion (“RAILE”) (Court File No. 33); the motion for summary judgment of RAILE (Court File No. 20); and the cross motion for summary judgment of defendant Diversified Systems, Inc. (“Diversified”) (Court File No. 2...
Views: 1
OPINION
This matter comes before the court upon a motion by plaintiffs for Class Certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. In this action, plaintiffs allege that defendants engaged in securities fraud, violating federal and state laws, and causing damages to the plaintiffs. The class they seek to represent consists of:
all persons or entities who purchased the common stock of Citizens First Banc...
Views: 1
OPINION
This action comes before the court upon defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). Because the court finds that Dr. Untracht’s claims are barred by prior manifestations of this same litigation, defendants’ motion is granted.
I. Procedural and Factual Background
This dispute arose from plaintiff’s suspension from staff privileges on the Garden...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
We are considering an appeal from the Order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court dated July 1, 1992. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158.
I.
Background
On February 13, 1991, debtor Roger Reisinger, both individually and as sole proprietor of McLinn Auto Body Supply, voluntarily filed a petition in bankruptcy.
*650
Reisinger had purchased the busine...
Views: 0
Page 16725
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is defendant Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority’s (“SEPTA”) Motion to Compel Deposition Answers pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(2). Plaintiffs have not answered defendant’s questions claiming that the information is privileged. For the following reasons, defendant’s Motion is GRANTED.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This issue a...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Señor Daniel de las Carreras (“Carreras”) sought a subpoena for documents located here in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, through Letters Rogatory, for his prosecution of a civil stock fraud action in the Argentine Courts. This Court issued the requested subpoena on September 25, 1992. Presently before the Court is Aydin Corporation’s Petition to Quash or Modify Subpoen...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is the government’s motion to vacate the plea agreement it entered into with defendant Mario Claiborne. For the reasons set forth below, we grant the government’s motion.
I. Background
Mario Claiborne was arrested on June 14, 1991, and subsequently charged in the thirty-seven count, superseding indictment with violations of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 579 (1992)
PEORIA SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
ACCREDITING COUNCIL FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION AND TRAINING, a Virginia Corporation, Defendant.
No. 92-CV-5793.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 30, 1992.
*580 Robert J. Napleton, Motherway & Glenn, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Michael T. Hannafan, William E. Blais, Michael T. Hannafan & Associa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The United States, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7), seized 9760 17th Street, Zion, Illinois in an in rem forfeiture action. Hazel M. Stevens (“Mrs. Stevens”) brought a claim contesting the seizure and requesting its return to her, as a person with an ownership interest in the property. The government now moves to strike Mrs. Stevens’ claim, alleging that she has fail...
Views: 0
Page 16757
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
After removal of this action from the Circuit Court of Cook County to this District Court by or with the consent of all defendants, plaintiff William Sliwa (“Sli-wa”) has moved to remand the case to the state court, a motion opposed by all the defendants. Certain of the defendants (Craig Richart and Connecticut General Life Insurance Company, collectively refe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, John W. Cook (Cook) and Robert L. Moore (Moore), allege that their former employer, Lee College, unlawfully discriminated against them in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621,
et seq.
Pending before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entr...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, David Meredith,
et al.,
(“plaintiffs”), bring this suit against Allsteel, Inc. (“Allsteel”) and Dan T. Cosgrove (“Cos-grove”) (collectively “defendants”) alleging violations of various sections of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”). Both the plaintiffs and defend...
Views: 2
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants’ motion to suppress evidence seized from defendant Busiello’s automobile is denied. Search and seizure of the vehicle and its contents were permissible under recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement — police community caretaking and exigent circumstances. I. FACTS Defendant Mundy, a hardworking trucker, had just won $5,000,000 in the Florida l...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s supplemental memorandum in support of its motion for summary judgment on Count 1 of plaintiff’s amended complaint, plaintiff's opposition and defendant’s reply. At a June 29, 1992 pretrial, the Court requested that the parties brief defendant’s affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction. Although the Court denied defe...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 75 (1992)
VIRGINIANS AGAINST A CORRUPT CONGRESS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Congressman James P. MORAN, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 92-2120-LFO.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
November 2, 1992.
*76 Richard A. Samp, C. Douglas Welty, Welty & Blair, Arlington, for plaintiffs.
Steven R. Ross, Michael L. Murray, Richard P. Stanton, U.S. House of Representatives, Washingto...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Gateway Bank (“Gateway”) has moved to dismiss the counts against it in the Third Amended Complaint of First Interregional Equity Corporation (“First Interregional”) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and (6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, Gateway’s motion is denied.
...
Views: 1
Page 16788
805 F. Supp. 619 (1992)
Abdul Hameed KASBATI, Petitioner,
v.
DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF the IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 92 C 5522.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 23, 1992.
Keil Marquis Larson, Stern & Larson, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
James G. Hoofnagle, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., United States Attorney's Office, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 866 (1992)
AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY and Columbia Casualty Company, Plaintiffs,
v.
James R. GLASKIN, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-B-683.
United States District Court, D. Colorado.
October 20, 1992.
*867 *868 Jack W. Berryhill, Berryhill, Cage & North, P.C., Denver, Colo.; and Chris Ballentine and Kristy C. Brown, Fisher, Rushmer, Werrenrath, Keiner, Wack & Dickson, P.A....
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I.
This case represents the second phase of summary judgment in a suit originally
*1144
brought by seventy eight (78)
1
present and former lieutenants of the Fairfax County Fire and Rescue Department (the “Department”) seeking compliance with the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201
et seq.
(“FLSA” ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on regularly for hearing on September 21, 1992, on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress. The government was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Paul Warner. Defendant Searle was represented by Rodney Snow of the law firm Clyde, Pratt & Snow. Counsel presented oral argument to the Court after which the matter was taken under advisement. ...
Views: 0
OPINION
This maritime cargo damage matter comes before this Court after a two-day bench trial on March 3 and 4, 1992. Post-trial briefs were submitted prior to oral argument on May 4, 1992. Plaintiff, Plywood Panels, Inc., (“PPI”) seeks to recover damages to cargo shipments carried by defendant carrier, Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. (“Hyundai”), from Indonesian ports to United States ...
Views: 2
*779ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff, United States of America (the Government), on July 2, 1992. Plaintiff filed its complaint requesting forfeiture of Defendant 1990 Silverado pick-up truck (Defendant truck) with its supporting affidavits December 20, 1991 and its complaint for forfeiture of Defendant $22,183.00 in U.S. currency (Defendant ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending is the Defendant’s motion to dismiss, or in the alternative for summary judgment.' Given the volume of exhibits and lengthy oral argument, the Court elects to treat Defendant’s request as a motion for summary judgment. The Court grants the Defendant’s motion and ORDERS this action dismissed and stricken from the docket of the Court. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ...
Views: 0
Page 16798
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before this Court on defendant’s motion, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, for summary judgment. In the underlying claim, plaintiff Sentinel Associates (“Sentinel”) alleges a breach of an “all-risk” insurance contract by defendant American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co. (“AMMI”). For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Debtor Ranch Partners, Ltd. appeals the bankruptcy court’s May 13, 1992 order prohibiting it from using post-petition rental income to pay reorganization-related attorney fees. Ranch Partners argues that it should be entitled to use its cash collateral to pay all of its attorney fees, not just those incurred in managing its property. The Resolution Trust Corporation...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
I. Background
Numerous purchasers .of Storage Technology Corporation (Storage Technology) securities filed 1934 Securities Exchange Act actions against Storage Technology and its principal directors and officers for securities fraud (collectively the securities action). In connection with these actions one of Storage Technology’s shareholders, Sally Felze...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON APPEAL
This case is before me on the government’s appeal of an order by the bankruptcy court requiring it to pay interest to Frontier on Frontier’s $1.38 million claim against the government under the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C.A. § 601 et seq. (1987 & Supp.1992) (“CDA”). The government claims that the bankruptcy court wrongly permitted Frontier’s claim...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1530 (1992)
Jacob A. MASS, Plaintiff,
v.
MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION, a Maryland corporation, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90 N 1786.
United States District Court, D. Colorado.
October 27, 1992.
*1531 *1532 Benjamin Sachs, Law Office of Kathleen Mullen, P.C., Denver, Colo., for plaintiff.
John R. Webb and Edwin P. Aro, Holme Roberts & Owen, Karen M. Barry, Associate Gen. Counsel, Legal...
Views: 1
ORDER AND NOW, this 16th day of March, 1992, defendant is hereby ordered to pay attorney’s fees in the amount of $3,186.14, to Community Legal Services, Inc., within thirty days. In conjunction with this order, I make the following findings: 1. Plaintiff, Jose L. Mendez, was found eligible for Social Security Disability benefits beginning May 10, 1967. 2. In July, 1982, defendant, Secreta...
Views: 0
Page 16822
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this bankruptcy appeal, the federal government requests me to reverse the bankruptcy court’s ruling denying its motion to allow a late proof of claim. The debtors, Thomas M. and Sandra L. Cole, concur in the government’s position. The bankruptcy court held that under the Bankruptcy Rules it did not have discretion to allow the government to file an untimely...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
On October 26, 1992, this court entered an Order (the “Case Management Order”): (1) denying two extensive discovery motions filed by the defendant; (2) denying in part the defendant’s motion to vacate the scheduling and discovery order setting the case for trial for November 4,1992 in order to take discovery in Sweden in anticipation of amending the answer and countercl...
Views: 1
Page 16827
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the various motions for summary judgment and/or dismissal. Several miscellaneous motions are also pending. The court has previously outlined the factual circumstances and procedural history of this litigation.
See
762 F.Supp. 1434, 1437-38 (per Theis, J.), and will discuss additional facts as they relate to the respective ...
Views: 4
Page 16842
Sandra Abrash, Norma Veridiano, Sandy Airbrush, Inc. (“Airbrush, Inc.”) and Art & Sole, Ltd. (“Art & Sole”) sue Byron Fox, and his law firm, Galvin Fox & Palmer
1
, alleging securities fraud, common law fraud, malpractice, and breach of contract. Plaintiffs contend that Fox induced Abrash and Veridiano to purchase securities in Airbrush, Inc. by making various misrepresentations in v...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action pursuant to Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”), and the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), to vacate á labor arbitration award. This action arises out of an indus-trywide economic strike of the building service employees union in New York in late April of 1991. Two members of Local 32B-32J (the “Union”), building service employe...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 716 (1992)
Barbara CALCHERA and Paul Whiteside, Plaintiffs,
v.
Gail PROCARIONE in his capacity as City Clerk of the City of Kenosha, Wisconsin and the City of Kenosha, a Municipal Corporation, Defendants.
No. 92-C-745 (JPS).
United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin.
October 28, 1992.
Terry W. Rose, Rose & Rose, Kenosha, Wis., for plaintiffs.
*717 James W. Conway, City Atty., ...
Views: 0
OPINION & ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the «IBT”) an(j the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the voluntary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The goals of the Consent D...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
A hearing was held before a three-judge panel of this Court on June 26, 1992, for a Show Cause Hearing against Attorney James G. Walker pursuant to Rule 1.3(A) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois. CDIL-LR 1.3(A). For the reasons stated in this Order, Mr. Walker is hereby suspended from the practice of law as a m...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is the plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Document No. 5). The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (1988). I. BACKGROUND The plaintiff filed this lawsuit to halt two timber sales in the Shawnee National Forest. During a hearing on the plaintiffs request for a temporary restraining order, the Forest Service informe...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1335 (1992)
Leonard DOWELL
v.
C.M. LENSING, et al.
Civ. A. No. 90-1230-A.
United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana.
October 19, 1992.
*1336 *1337 *1338 Eulis Simien, Jr., Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiff.
*1339 Doug Moreau, Dist. Atty., William H. Cooper, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., Baton Rouge, for defendant.
RULING ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
JOHN V. PARKER, Chief Judg...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 385 (1992)
TEXACO, INC., et al.
v.
LOUISIANA LAND and EXPLORATION CO., et al.
v.
LAFOURCHE PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, et al.
v.
TEXACO, INC.
Civ. A. No. 88-998-A.
United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana.
October 14, 1992.
*386 Gene W. Lafitte, Joe B. Norman, Liskow & Lewis, New Orleans, La., G. William Jarman, J. Carter Wilkinson, Kean, Miller, Hawthorne, D'Armond, McCowan & J...
Views: 0
OPINION
This court previously issued an order granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment. This opinion states the reasons for that order.
BACKGROUND
The named plaintiff represents a class consisting of recipients of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (“AFDC”), on whose behalf the state collects child support payments. Defendant Louis ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 735 (1992)
Susan M. MAXWELL,
v.
J. BAKER, INC., and Prange Way, Inc.
No. 4-90-941.
United States District Court, D. Minnesota, Fourth Division.
September 28, 1992.
*736 Earl D. Reiland, Daniel W. McDonald, Matthew J. Goggin, and Merchant, Gould, Smith, Edell, Welter & Schmidt, Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff.
James J. Foster, and Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, Boston, Mass. (Bru...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on defendant Kansas Bankers Surety Company’s (hereinafter “Kansas Bankers”) (Filing No. 44), and plaintiff Ralston Bank’s (Filing No. 47), cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
In this removed action from the District Court for Douglas County, Nebraska, plaintiff Ralston Bank seeks a declaratory judgment wit...
Views: 0
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT This cause is before the Court on the motion of Defendant, New York Life Insurance Company’s, for summary judgement pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P. This circuit clearly holds that summary judgement may only be entered when the moving party has sustained its burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact when all the evid...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 430 (1992)
SABINE INDEPENDENT SEAGOING OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
v.
SABINE TOWING AND TRANSPORTATION COMPANY.
No. 1:92-CV-161.
United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division.
October 14, 1992.
*431 Juliann H. Faustini, Davis & Shank, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
John H. Smither, J. Alfred Southerland, Vinson & Elkins, Houston, Tex., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases are all holders of commercial paper issued by Washington Bancorporation (“WBC”), the holding company which owned the National Bank of Washington (“NBW”). On May 7, 1990, WBC defaulted on all of its outstanding commercial paper, including approximately $35.2 million owned by the various plaintiffs in these actions. Plainti...
Views: 0
Page 16889
805 F. Supp. 390 (1992)
Georgiann L. GRACE, et al.
v.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR STATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, et al.
Civ. A. No. 84-414-A.
United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana.
November 2, 1992.
J. Rodney Ryan, Shelly D. Dick, Gary, Field, Landry & Dornier, Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiffs.
Richard P. Ieyoub, Atty. Gen., State of La., Wendell G. Lindsay, Jr., Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Lind...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court pursuant to the FDIC’s Memorandum in Support of Its Claim That Its Document Index Is Attorney Work Product Protected From Discovery Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(3); Defendant Luther H. Hodges, Jr.’s Response to the FDIC’s Memorandum; and the FDIC’s Reply Memorandum.1
On consideration of the arguments and authorities presented by counsel in their bri...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
(Preliminarily Denying Class Certification)
This matter comes before the court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification; Memorandum of NFL Defendants in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification; Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification; Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Surrebuttal Memorandum; Defendants’ Su...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER RE MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
BACKGROUND
We address here defendant C.R. Bard’s motion to compel (1) disclosure of communications between inventors and their patent counsel made in anticipation of filing the application of the patent in issue and (2) testimony by inventors and their patent counsel setting forth directly their understanding of several key technical phrases used in...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff filed this action against his former employer and his Pension Benefit Committee claiming that defendants misrepresented the tax benefits of an early retirement program. In his complaint, plaintiff asserts a claim for violation of fiduciary duties under ERISA and five separate state law claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, negligent misreprese...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 223 (1992)
Sharlene FELLOWS, Plaintiff,
v.
EARTH CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-207.
United States District Court, D. Vermont.
October 16, 1992.
*224 Deborah T. Bucknam, St. Johnsbury, Vt., for plaintiff.
Heather Briggs, Downs Rachlin & Martin, Burlington, Vt., for defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
PARKER, Chief Judge.
The underlying facts of this case are fully set fo...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 941 (1992)
Raleigh PORTER, Petitioner,
v.
Richard L. DUGGER, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Respondents.
No. 85-154-Civ-FtM-17.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Ft. Myers Division.
October 30, 1992.
*942 Martin J. McClain, Capital Collateral Representative, Deputy Chief Asst., Tallahassee, Fla., for petitioners.
Robert J. Landry, Peggy Ann Quince, Tampa, Fla., for r...
Views: 2
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS THE FOURTH AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT
Pending is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the fourth amended and supplemental complaint and memorandum. Docs. 166 and 167. The motion argues that the complaint does not allege a constitutionally protected property interest, the claims are not ripe, the complaint fails to state claims upon which relief may be granted, ...
Views: 2
Page 16910
805 F. Supp. 755 (1992)
William V. LYLE, Petitioner,
v.
Joseph L. SIVLEY et al., Respondents.
No. CIV 92-575 TUC RMB.
United States District Court, D. Arizona.
November 2, 1992.
*756 William V. Lyle, in pro per.
Roger L. Duncan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Tucson, Ariz., for respondent Joseph L. Sivley.
ORDER
BILBY, District Judge.
Petitioner William V. Lyle, currently incarcerated at FCI-Safford, has bro...
Views: 3
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR STAY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff Hanaina Enterprises, Inc. ("Hanaina”) motion for stay of administrative action, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2023. On August 31, 1992, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on this matter. For the reasons stated below, the Court denies Hanaina’s motion. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK Hanaina, a local ...
Views: 0
Page 16912
805 F. Supp. 227 (1992)
VERMONT GAS SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY, Employer's Surplus Lines Insurance Company, St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company and Associated Electric & Gas Insurance Services, Ltd., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 90-121.
United States District Court, D. Vermont.
October 19, 1992.
Leo A. Bisson, Jr., Bruce C. Palmer, Downs, Rachli...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motions to dismiss. The motions will be denied.
FACTS
These motions involve two separate actions. The first was brought by the Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 12, AFL-CIO, Retirement Plan (plan). The second action was brought by Russell Richards, R.L. Anderson, Anita Billings, Margare...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This long-pending and bitterly contested litigation has had a checkered history, beginning with the initial grant of preliminary injunctive relief in favor of plaintiffs qad.inc. and Pamela and Karl Lopker (collectively “qad,” treated as a singular noun) against original defendants ALN Associates, Inc. and its then principals Sally and Mike Allen (collectively...
Views: 0
Page 16936
MEMORANDUM OPINION The Secretary of Labor instituted this enforcement action when defendant refused to produce “All safety compliance audits for the years 1989, 1990, and 1991,” in response to an administrative subpoena duces tecum issued pursuant to section 8(b) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. 29 U.S.C. § 657(b). 1 Defendant International Paper argues that the subpoenaed material ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs John and Dorris Ash (“the Ashes”) sue Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. (“Dean Witter”) for the acts of William Baxter, a Dean Witter broker. According to the complaint, Baxter advised the Ashes to invest in a tax shelter without informing them that the investment had not been approved by Dean Witter. The Ashes incurred various losses when the IRS disallow...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 859 (1992)
AMERICAN ECONOMY INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
Ralph B. WILLIAMS, d/b/a Northwest Company, and Northwest Gas & Go, Inc., an Idaho corporation, Defendants.
Civ. No. 90-0505-N-HLR.
United States District Court, D. Idaho.
October 30, 1992.
*860 Michael E. Ramsden, Randall R. Adams, Quane Smith Howard & Hull, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, William R. H...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 642 (1992)
OCÉ-OFFICE SYSTEMS, INC., and Océ-Nederland B.V., Plaintiffs,
v.
EASTMAN KODAK CO., Defendant.
No. 92 C 2221.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
November 3, 1992.
*643 William O. Bittman, Pierson, Ball & Dowd, Washington, D.C., Jeffrey Singer, Paul E. Wojcicki, Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney, Ltd., Chicago, Ill., Bernard L. Sweeney, Birch, Stew...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action was tried before the Court on July 9, 1992. Plaintiff Polk County, Texas, seeks a judgment for money advanced to Defendant Kenneth Peters, M.D., pursuant to a Physician Recruitment Agreement. Plaintiff also seeks to recover attorney fees.
Defendant has advanced numerous defenses, including the illegality and voidness of the Physician Recruitment Agreeme...
Views: 5
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter was tried before the court November 12-16, 1991. Appearing for plaintiffs was W. David Holsberry, Esq. of Davis, Cowell and Bowe, San Francisco. Appearing for defendants was Patrick G. Grattan, Esq. and Steven C. Mitchell, Esq. of Geary, Shea, O’Donnell and Grattan, Santa Rosa. Both sides presented exhibits and testimony of witnesses. After the trial conclud...
Views: 2
Page 16952
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on the Defendant’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) F.R.C.P. The Plaintiff is a former employee of the Office of the Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and he is suing the Attorney General in her official and individual capacities, for an alleged violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The facts in this matter are not in dispute. The Plaintiff...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff seeks reversal of the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ’s”) determination that she is not disabled within the meaning of Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. 401 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq. Defendant seeks affir-mance of the ALJ’s order. The plaintiff's testi...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 890 (1992)
Yolonda B. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff,
v.
KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 89-1440-T.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
October 8, 1992.
*891 *892 Yolonda B. Williams, pro se.
Mark A. Vining, Western Resources, Inc., Wichita, Kan., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
THEIS, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's motion fo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion to review an order of Magistrate Judge Reid. Doc. 743. Plaintiffs seek review of the order entered by Magistrate Judge Reid on August 31, 1992, in which he denied plaintiffs’ motion to reconsider his previous order denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend.
On August 10, 1992, the Magistrate Judge denied plaintif...
Views: 0
*1395 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., alleging employment discrimination and sexual harassment. After trial to the court, the court found in favor of the plaintiff on her claim of hostile work environment sexual harassment and awarded her nominal damages. The court also found in favor of plaintiff on ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on third-party defendants’ motion to dismiss third-party plaintiff’s complaint against them for-contribution pr indemnity.
Plaintiff Kenneth Wandrey (“Wandrey”) brought this action for breach of contract in state court in Illinois. Wandrey .named as defendants William McCarthy (“McCarthy”), Service Business Forms, Inc., the Ganzer ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs brought this action against Don Couture alleging violation of civil *1409rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Plaintiffs also bring a state law claim for libel. This matter was tried to the court on August 17 and 18, 1992. The court heard the testimony of a number of witnesses and had the opportunity to evaluate their demeanor and credibility. The parties have now' filed...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending is the Defendant’s amended motion to dismiss. Based on the Eleventh Amendment doctrine of sovereign immunity, the Court GRANTS dismissal of all counts against the State of West Virginia. The Court also GRANTS dismissal of counts three and four with respect to Edward Hamrick and John Brown. The Court declines to address the Constitutionality of W.Va.Code §§ 5B-...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Motions of Defendant Eastover Bank for Savings for Partial Summary Judgment and to Strike Plaintiff Susie Joumigan’s Prayer for Compensatory and Punitive Damages and Demand for Jury Trial. Having reviewed the Motions and supporting and opposing memoranda, the Court is of the opinion that both Motions are well taken and should be granted.
I. BACK...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Petitioner moves this court to reduce her sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the reasons stated below her motion is granted but under different statutory authority. On May 13, 1991 petitioner in this action pled guilty to a violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5316(a). The offense to which she pled— failure to file a currency report when knowingly transporting monetary instruments ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1257 (1992)
Josephine L. CHERREY, Plaintiff,
v.
THOMPSON STEEL COMPANY, INC., Defendant.
Civ. No. N-91-2770.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
November 5, 1992.
*1258 *1259 Deborah Kay McCallum, Baltimore, Md., for plaintiff.
Brian Steinbach, and Banta, Cox and Hennessy, Chicago, Ill., and Lawrence E. Dube, Jr., and Dube and Goodgal, Baltimore, Md., for defendant.
*1260 ME...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 313 (1992)
LUDEN'S, INC.
v.
LOCAL UNION NO. 6 OF THE BAKERY, CONFECTIONERY AND TOBACCO WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF AMERICA; American Arbitration Association.
Civ. A. No. 92-1545.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
November 6, 1992.
*314 *315 Dana Stevens Scaduto, Harrisburg, Pa., for plaintiff.
Bernard N. Katz, Lynn P. Fox, Kenneth Egger (AAA), Philadelphia, Pa., for...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER On August 7, 1992, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claims for unlawful surveillance and invasion of privacy. For reasons stated below, the motion is granted. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In this action, filed October 1, 1991, plaintiff Brenda Wesley (“Wesley”) alleges that defendants WISN Division — Hearst Corporation (“WISN”), Paul Kronforst (“Kron...
Views: 0
REVIEW OF CLERK’S DENIAL OF BILLS OF COSTS
Presently before this court is the October 28, 1992 motion filed by all defendants for review of the denial of their Bills of Costs by this district court’s chief deputy clerk. This court agrees with the clerk’s decision.
On March 11, 1992, judgment was entered in both Civil Action Numbers 88-C-1079 and 88-C-1315, which had been consolidated for pretrial...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS
On October 23, 1992, Shell Oil Company (Shell) filed a Verified Complaint for Temporary, Preliminary, and Permanent In-junctive Relief against defendants: (a) the individual members of the Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee (PLC) 1, who were appointed to represent the claimants in a related class action2 against Shell Oil Company; (b) Jack Zewe, a former employee of Shell; and (c) Kris...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs bring this securities fraud action alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and pendent state law claims. This suit arises out of the 1986' sale of plaintiffs’ stock in Eagle Electric Manufacturing Company (“Eagle”), back to Eagle under a stock purchase agreement between ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 810 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA, Defendant.
No. C-91-4187 FMS.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
November 2, 1992.
*811 *812 Brian F. Heffernan, John R. Dunne, Paul F. Hancock, Sharon Bradford Franklin, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Div., Housing and Civil Enforcement Section, Washington, D.C., for U.S.
Alice C. Graff,...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 79 (1992)
Anthony A. STOKES, Plaintiff,
v.
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, INC., Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 90-0137.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.
November 4, 1992.
R. Kenneth Mundy, Karen E. McDonald, Mundy, Holt & Mance, P.C., Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Gary Brown, Washington, D.C., for defendant.
*80 MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOHN H. PRATT, District Judge.
This matter ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff The Trustees of Columbia University (“Columbia”) sues Local 1199, Drug, Hospital and Health Care Employees Union, RWDSU, AFL-CIO (“Local 1199”), a labor organization in New York City, for breach of a no-strike clause in their collective bargaining agreement. Local 1199 moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and (6) on the ground that C...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS The Court’s order of August 14, 1992, 143 F.R.D. 105, states at paragraph 7: The PLC shall not have any ex parte contact with any Shell employees, other than the employee-plaintiffs in this suit. If any Shell employee, other than a plaintiff, initiates ex parte contact with the PLC, the PLC shall immediately notify the Court and counsel for Shell. Failure to follow this order ris...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff
pro se
Henry Platsky brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985(3) and 1986 against Doris Kilpa-trick, Maria Pino,
1
Albert Cruz, Gregory Cohen, Donald Elliot, the Majestic Hotel, and the New York Urban Coalition Hous-. ing Group (the “Urban Coalition”) (collectively, the “Coalition defendants”); against Steven Cohen, Seth ...
Views: 0
Page 17025
MEMORANDUM This is a Freedom of Information action that comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Defendant United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) regularly submits to panels convened pursuant to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“GATT”) proposals to resolve specific trade disputes between the United States and other GATT member countries. USTR also receives d...
Views: 0
805 F.Supp. 585 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
$200,000, REPRESENTING the CONTENTS of a FIRST PENN-PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY ANNUITY ACCOUNT, Defendant.
No. 91 C 7268.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 8, 1992.
*586 Jonathan C. Haile, U.S. Attorney's Office, Chicago, Ill., for U.S.
Vito M. Evola, Chicago, Ill., for Richard and Shirley Skarup.
MEMORAND...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the Court is the Motion for Bail Time Credit of Petitioners Michael Brent Gentry and Kimberly A. Gentry. On October 4, 1989, Petitioners entered a plea of guilty to a two-count information charging them with conspiracy to distribute in excess of 100 grams of methamphetamine and using a firearm during a drug trafficking crime. The Court, on May 20, 1991, sentenced each petitioner to se...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 479 (1992)
D. KIRSCHNER & SONS, INC. and Alan G. Kirschner, Plaintiffs,
v.
CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY and Transportation Insurance Company, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-112.
United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Covington Division.
October 14, 1992.
*480 Kent W. Seifreid, Poston, Seifreid & Schloemer, Newport, Ky., for plaintiffs.
Stephen V. Freeze, Cincinnati, Ohio, S...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1411 (1992)
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
Claudetta PERSON, S. Jane Allison, Joyce Slavik, Paul L. Sova, Jr., Paula M. Sova and Shannon R. Sova, Defendants.
and
S. Jane ALLISON and Paula M. Sova, Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs,
v.
Claudetta PERSON, Joyce Slavik, Paul Sova, Jr., and Shannon R. Sova, Defendants and Cross Defendants.
and
S. J...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM In my Opinion and Order of April 3, 1992,1 raised and addressed, sua sponte, a jurisdictional issue that was neither argued nor pursued by the parties. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, however, yesterday ordered that the issue be briefed by today, for argument tomorrow, thus signaling its concerns on that question. I, too, am constantly mindful of my finite jurisdictional ambit, and ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 379 (1992)
Lyskoski WASHINGTON, Plaintiff,
v.
Dr. Gershon SILBER, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 91-0085-R.
United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Abingdon Division.
November 3, 1992.
*380 Fred Rowlett, pro se.
L. Thompson Hames and Merrimon B. McAdam, Roanoke, Va., Gayl Branum Carr, Richmond, Va., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WILSON, District Judge.
This is an action u...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1312 (1992)
AVTEC SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
Jeffrey G. PEIFFER, et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-463-A.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division.
November 4, 1992.
*1313 *1314 Michael L. Zupan, Hazel and Thomas, P.C., Alexandria, Va., for plaintiff.
David Gordon Fiske, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, Washington, D.C., Douglas James Cole, Taylor, Ne...
Views: 0
OPINION
The indictment in this case charges that defendant, John Cusack, and unindicted co-defendant Quality Steel, Inc. (“Quality Steel”) knowingly and willfully violated specified standards promulgated pursuant to the Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”), thereby causing the death of employee Hugo Castro, in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 666(e) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Section 666(e) o...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This action was tried before me without a jury from September 30 to October 6, 1992. The following contains my findings of fact and conclusions of law. Plaintiff Ethicon, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson and is a New Jersey corporation engaged in the business of manufacturing, selling, and distributing surgical and hospital sup...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DISMISSING DEFENDANT HURST’S COUNTERCLAIM, AND RENDERING ALL OTHER PENDING MOTIONS MOOT Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, which was filed in the • above-styled and numbered cause on November 8, 1991. Related to this motion is Plaintiff’s December 10, 1991 motion to strike the respon...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 436 (1992)
Willie Lee GRACE, Jr.
v.
KEYSTONE SHIPPING COMPANY.
No. 1: 91 CV 964.
United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division.
October 19, 1992.
*437 *438 Theodore R. Johns, Jr., Beaumont, Tex., for plaintiff.
Alan G. Sampson, Benckenstein Oxford & Radford, Beaumont, Tex., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR KEYSTONE SHIPPING ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court is the extradition request by the Republic of Mexico for one of its citizens here in the United States *1463 of America. Jose Cruz Contreras [hereinafter Contreras] was under indictment in Mexico for weapons smuggling and amassing of arms. On behalf of Mexico, the United States Government, as Petitioner, filed the extradition documents and represente...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 84 (1992)
Asa A. CLARK, IV, Administrator of the Estate of Matthew Clark,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, DEPARTMENT OF the ARMY.
No. 91-459-JD.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
September 30, 1992.
*85 Donald J. Perrault, Manchester, N.H., for plaintiff.
Gretchen Leah Witt, Asst. U.S. Atty., Concord, N.H., for defendant.
ORDER
DiCLERCIO, Acting Chief Judge.
Plaintiff Asa...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 448 (1992)
Donald MILLS and Eppie Mills
v.
UNITED STATES of America.
No. 1:92-CV-0320.
United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division.
November 5, 1992.
Randy Earl Drewett, Law Offices of McPherson & Drewett, Port Arthur, Tex., for plaintiffs.
*449 Robert J. Wortham, U.S. Atty. E.D. Texas, Tyler, Tex., Joseph A. Pitzinger, II, Dept. of Justice, Tax Div., Dallas, Tex....
Views: 4
ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the court upon cross motions for summary judgment filed by the parties. The parties agree that the sole issue presented is a matter of law and that no material facts are in dispute. The parties also agree that the question presented is one of first impression and that the defendant United States is requesting the court to “extend or modify” the precedent currently existi...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 919 (1992)
MUTUAL SERVICE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
FRIT INDUSTRIES, INC., et. al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-T-306-S.
United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, S.D.
October 13, 1992.
*920 Clyde C. Owen, Montgomery, Ala., for plaintiff.
Robert A. Huffaker, Rushton, Stakely, Johnston & Garrett, Montgomery, Ala., and James Donald Cowan, Jr. and Jonathan Arthur Be...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 90 (1992)
Kevin MYERS
v.
UNITED STATES of America.
Civ. No. 91-373-SD.
United States District Court, D. New Hampshire.
October 30, 1992.
*91 Edward T. Clancy, Dover, N.H., for plaintiff.
Elaine Marzetta Lacy, Asst. U.S. Atty., Concord, N.H., for defendant.
ORDER
DEVINE, Senior District Judge.
In this action arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq.,...
Views: 0
Page 17074
ORDER
Plaintiff Clifford Avery (“Avery”), an inmate at New Hampshire State Prison, filed a
pro se
42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against defendants Ronald Powell (“Powell”), Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Corrections, Michael Cunningham (“Cunningham”), Warden of the New Hampshire State Prison, and Patricia La-hey (“Lahey”), mailroom officer at the New Hampshire Sta...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT CAME ON TO BE HEARD this day the defendant’s Motion To Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) Fed.R.Civ.P. and the plaintiff’s Motion for Leave To Amend Her Complaint in this cause. After considering the motions, the responses and replies in opposition, and the pleadings of re...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Refer to the Interstate Commerce Commission and to Stay Proceedings in this Court. The Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motions.
BACKGROUND
Both Plaintiff (“Bowman”) and Defendant (“Evergreen”) are common carriers, as defined by the Interstate Commerce Act (“the Act”). Throughout 1989, Bowman provided transportation services to Evergreen on num...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 426 (1992)
BLACK FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION OF DALLAS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, Defendant,
v.
DALLAS FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, Intervenor.
No. 3:88-CV-2304-A.
United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division.
November 5, 1992.
*427 Roger Earl Albright, Cloutman Albright & Bower, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiffs.
Craig Lee Hopkins, Francisco Javier Garza,...
Views: 2
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO LIABILITY OF JOHN F. FOLEY, INDIVIDUALLY
Plaintiff filed its complaint August 17, 1992. Defendants filed an answer and counter-complaint August 28, 1992. Also on August 28, 1992, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment as to the liability of defendant John F. Foley in his individual capacity. On September 10, 1992, plainti...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff brings this action against Manhattan Life Insurance Company (“Manhattan Life”) and American International Life Assurance Company of New York (“American International”) seeking unpaid benefits under two life insurance policies. Jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Both defendants move for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rule...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 623 (1992)
Don L. SEWARD, Plaintiff,
v.
B.O.C. DIVISION OF GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 91 C 7599.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.
October 26, 1992.
*624 *625 Don L. Seward, pro se.
Robert A. Wolf, Oak Park, Ill., for plaintiff.
Michael A. Warner, John L. Collins, Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
ORDER
NORGLE,...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1567 (1992)
Trent T. HICKSON, Plaintiff,
v.
HOME FEDERAL OF ATLANTA, Defendant.
No. 1:92-cv-914-RHH.
United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.
September 28, 1992.
*1568 *1569 Trent T. Hickson, Somerset, N.J., for plaintiff.
Hugh Marshall Worsham, Jr., Hishon & Burbage, Michael J. Shavel and Hill Wallack, Princeton, N.J., for defendant.
ORDER
ROBERT H. HALL, D...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1363 (1992)
Yolanda GOMEZ, Manuel Gomez, Maria Valadez-Gonzalez, Gerardo Velasquez, and Isabel Velasquez, Plaintiffs,
v.
The HOUSING AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF EL PASO and Edmund Carrera, in his capacity as Executive Director of the El Paso Housing Authority, et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. EP-91-CA-30.
United States District Court, W.D. Texas, El Paso Division.
October 30, 1992.
*1364 Ju...
Views: 1
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT These cross-motions for summary judgment concern the award of attorney’s fees and costs under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The novel issue presented is whether fees are recoverable after a mediated dispute resolution of a child’s “Individualized Education Program,” without the need of a requested ...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 419 (1992)
Vernon L. SIMMONS, et al.
v.
CITY OF FORTH WORTH, TEXAS.
Civ. A. No. 4:90-CV-688-Y.
United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division.
June 12, 1992.
*420 Bruce Craig Deats, Martha Powell Owen, Van Os Deats Rubinett & Owen, Austin, Tex., for plaintiff.
Ralph Wade Adkins, City Atty., City of Fort Worth, Amy L. Nickell, Bettye S. Springer, Fort Worth, Tex., f...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER For a more complete recitation of events that have led to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Supplemental Relief, see opinions in Cattin v. General Motors Corp., 955 F.2d 416 (6th Cir.1992), Cattin v. General Motors Corp., 641 F.Supp. 591 (E.D.Mich.1986), and Cattin v. General Motors Corp., 612 F.Supp. 948 (E.D.Mich.1985). Now, before me, is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Supplemental Relief *161in ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Chrysler Capital Corporation (“Chrysler”) seeks a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 construing a loan participation agreement that it entered into with defendant Bankers Trust Company (“Bankers Trust”). Chrysler now moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, F.R.Civ.P. Bankers Trust opposes Chrysler’s motion and cross-moves for summary judgment.
I.
Plaintiff...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 409 (1992)
TROPICAL CRUISE LINES, S.A., Plaintiff,
and
Southtrust Bank of Alabama, N.A., Plaintiff-Intervenor,
v.
VESTA INSURANCE COMPANY a/k/a Skadedeforsikringsselskapet Vesta a/s or Vesta Hygea and Stolt-Nielsen, Inc., Defendants.
SOUTHTRUST BANK OF ALABAMA, N.A., Plaintiff,
v.
VESTA INSURANCE COMPANY a/k/a Skadedeforsikringsselskapet Vesta a/s or Vesta Hygea and Stolt-Nielsen, In...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 482 (1992)
LETICA CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
SWEETHEART CUP COMPANY, Defendant.
No. 91-74639.
United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D.
November 9, 1992.
*483 Thomas N. Young, Krass & Young, Troy, Mich., for plaintiff.
Michael E. Husmann, John J. McHugh, William E. Snyder, Michael Best & Friedrich, Milwaukee, Wis., Donald S. Young, Michael P. Cooney, Dykema Gossett, D...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the court on Defendants’ Gino and Marie Marinelli’s motion for summary judgment. Defendant Gino Marinelli seeks summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ claims for violation of Sections 12(1) and 12(2) of the Securities, Act of 1933 (“the 1933 Act”), Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“the 1934 Act”) ...
Views: 2
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Plaintiff Smalley & Company is a distributor of adhesives and sealants. Defendant Emerson & Cuming manufactures adhesives and sealants. Defendant distributes its products both directly and through distributors. In November 1987, plaintiff entered into a distributor agreement to sell defendant’s products. In January 1989 and again in September 1989, Thiokol...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion for relief from final judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant has responded and plaintiffs have replied thereto. On May 4, 1992 at the conclusion of a consolidated proceeding to consider plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary and permanent injunction, the Court granted plaintiffs’ request in ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Malcolm S. Brassell, a citizen of the City of Montgomery, Alabama, filed this lawsuit because the city does not have procedures for recall elections and thus could not grant his request for a recall election in a district represented by a city council member who, according to Brassell, voted on an issue contrary to what he had led his constituency to believe that he w...
Views: 0
ORDER
Hoganas has brought this action against A.P. Green alleging that A.P. Green infringed its patent, United States Patent Number 3,982,953 (the “ ’953 patent”). A nonjury trial on this matter was held January 13-17, 1992. The court, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the trial, arguments of counsel, and the record as a whole, hereby makes the following findings of fact an...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before this Court are Plaintiff's and Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment. This is an action for judicial review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health and Human Services denying Plaintiff’s claim for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income under Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Thi...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1453 (1992)
STATE FARM AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
Fred Carl SANDERS, and Jan M. Faber, individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Matt J. Faber, Deceased, Defendant.
No. IP 90-1829 C.
United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division.
October 14, 1992.
*1454 John Beeman, Patricia Polis McCrory, Harrison & Moberly, Indianapolis, for plaintiff.
Dou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is presently before the Court on the Plaintiffs Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the issue of insurance coverage in this action. Having reviewed the parties’ briefs and being otherwise fully advised in this matter, the Court finds that the Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment should be granted.
I.
FINDINGS OF FACT
...
Views: 1
ORDER
Defendants have been charged with violating federal income tax laws. Prior to their indictment, defendants’ lawyer and accountants (collectively, “defendants’ representatives”) met with Internal Revenue
*2
Service (“IRS”) officials pursuant to written powers of attorney from the defendants. During these meetings, defendants’ representatives allegedly made inculpatory st...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The Memorandum Opinion and Order in the above-styled and numbered case signed on October 5, 1992 is vacated. This Memorandum Opinion and Order is substituted therefor. Before the court is the motion of Interve-nor Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), in its capacity as Receiver for Red Bird Bank of Dallas, for a one-hundred and eighty (180) day stay of th...
Views: 0
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Lawrence H. Schlang and Olen Rae Goodwin (“Plaintiffs”) initiated this action against (1) three corporations — Key Airlines, Bain Investments and Presidential Airways; (2) six individuals — Coleman Andrews, James Bridges, William Swaim, Jr., Thomas Kolfenbach, Sean Deaton, Steven Wilson, Donald Kyker. Plaintiffs alleged violations of (1) the Railway Labor Act (“...
Views: 0
ORDER AND REASONS Defendant, Shell Oil Company, filed a motion seeking a protective order preventing the release of a statement made by a non-party witness, Jack Zewe, a transcript of a recorded conversation between Zewe and unknown others, and a computer printout of time records prepared by Zewe and provided by him to Shell at the time of his statement. Zewe and the Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee (P...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before this court is plaintiff/counter-defendant’s, Capitol Indemnity Corporation, motion to strike pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(f).1 Plaintiff wishes *347to strike ¶ 9 of defendant/counter-plaintiff’s, Tranel Developments, Inc., counterclaim and exhibit B attached to the counterclaim.
Exhibit B of defendant’s counterclaim is an unsigned letter, dated June 23...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN PART, AND DENYING IN PART.
On February 7, 1992, Plaintiffs brought a motion for partial summary judgment against defendant Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company (“Lumbermens”), based on the second cause of action of plaintiffs’ complaint. Plaintiffs claimed that Lumber-mens had a duty to defend plaintiffs under Policy No. 3BN/...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On December 16, 1991, plaintiffs Anthony and Deeva Darby filed suit alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1982 and several violations of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (“Fair Housing Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 3601,
et seq,,
by defendants Heather Ridge and Dart Properties, Inc. Plainti...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 234 (1992)
The ABENAKI NATION OF MISSISSQUOI, the Abenaki Tribal Council, Dee Brightstar, Dorcus Churchill, Michael Delaney, Blackhorse Phillips, Hilda Robtoy, April St. Francis, David St. Francis, Homer Francis, and Robert Wells, all on their own behalves and on Behalf of the Abenaki People
v.
James K. HUGHES, Lt. Colonel, District Engineer of the New England Division of the Corps o...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Before this court is defendant’s,1 Charles Washington, M.D., motion to dismiss the amended complaint filed by plaintiff, James West, a minor.2 Plaintiff has alleged that in November 1976 defendant was negligent in caring for and treating plaintiff. Plaintiff has further alleged that as a direct and proximate cause of defendant’s negligence, he has been “continuously disabled bo...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 1422 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
SUMMIT EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES, INC., et al., Defendants,
v.
GENERAL MOTORS, et al., Third-Party Defendants.
No. 5:90CV1704.
United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, E.D.
July 21, 1992.
Memorandum and Order on Denial of Reconsideration September 13, 1992.
*1423 *1424 Michael A. Jeter, Office Of The U.S. Atty., Cleveland, Ohio, Coli...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Abraham & Straus (“A & S”) has moved this Court for a preliminary injunction ordering the defendants and all those in active concert with them to refrain from picketing or engaging in any other job action over the issue of staffing of engineers and mechanics at A & S’ new store in Roosevelt Field, New York, on the ground that the conduct violates the terms of the parties’ col...
Views: 0
Page 17162
805 F. Supp. 726 (1992)
Jerry Wayne KLEISS, Plaintiff,
v.
Michael SHORT, David Ireland, H.D. Jones, K.R. Beaird, Gary Ramaker, R.L. Dobson, Gerald D. Gander, Shelby County Missouri, Shelby County Missouri Prosecuting Attorney, and Gary Davis, Defendants.
No. 4-91-CV-80715.
United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, C.D.
November 4, 1992.
Jeffrey M. Lipman of Lipman Law Firm, P.C., Urbandale, Iowa, ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff, Barbara Peek (“Peek”), has brought this action based on diversity of citizenship against both GNLV Corporation doing business as Golden Nugget Hotel and Casino (“GNLV”) and the Golden Nugget Risk Management Corporation (“GNRM”). Plaintiff, a citizen of Pennsylvania, seeks damages for injuries that she allegedly sustained as the result of a “slip and fall” on the defe...
Views: 0
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
By this action filed on September 11, 1991, Plaintiff Marilyn S. Denham seeks a refund of $31,325.31, which she asserts was a levied tax payment. The facts are not in dispute. Trial was held on August 24, 1992, at which time the parties offered exhibits in evidence and presented arguments to the Court. The Court took the case under submission. The Court has reviewe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Clara James and Edward Gaines, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, bring this class action under the Federal Food Stamp Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2011, et seq., claiming that defendants, 1 administrators of the Alabama food stamp program, wrongfully recouped over-issued food stamp benefits. Defendants have moved to dismiss the action un...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM
Presently before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. For the following reasons, the motion will be denied.
I. BACKGROUND
This is an action brought by plaintiffs Dover Steel Company, Inc. (“Dover”) and A.M.B. Construction Company, Inc. (“A.M.B.”) against two insurance companies, defendants The Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (“Hartford...
Views: 1
ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
Redcliffe Americas Limited (hereinafter “Redcliffe”) leased approximately 245 refrigerated containers to Topgallant Group Inc. (hereinafter “Topgallant Group”) under a three-year “Equipment Rental Agreement”
1
dated April 22, 1988 (as amended). Topgallant Group was a...
Views: 0
805 F.Supp. 874 (1992)
A. Rex GARDNER, David Lundskog, General John S. Samules, Joan Thalman, Judy Mora, A. Jay De La Mare, Dale Baker, David Komatz, Komatz Joint Account, a Colorado general partnership, and Univex International, a Colorado corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
INVESTORS DIVERSIFIED CAPITAL, INC., Samuel Sisk, Edward Duggan and Don Urben, et al., and Cordovano & Company, P.C., and Sam ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Defendant has moved for reargument of this Court’s February 11, 1992 Opinion and Order (the “February opinion”), 784 F.Supp. 89 (S.D.N.Y.1992) declining to refer defendant’s unreasonable rate defense to the Interstate Commerce Commission and to stay this action pending the outcome of that reference. The basis for the motion, filed more than five months after the decision in quest...
Views: 0
ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, the Village of Fox River Grove, in McHenry and Lake Counties, Illinois (the Village), filed a three-count complaint against defendant, Grayhill, Inc. (Grayhill). Count I of the complaint is brought pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. § 9601
et seq.
Count II is based on this c...
Views: 2
OPINION ON DENIAL OF HABEAS CORPUS
1.
Introduction.
The state of Texas plans to execute Harris for the murder of Tim Merka in 1978. After convicting him of capital murder, the jury sentenced him to die. On appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial. At his second trial, a jury again found Harris guilty and sentenced him to...
Views: 0
Page 17192
805 F. Supp. 1401 (1992)
Jan RAYBURN, Plaintiff,
v.
The EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. H-91-2155.
United States District Court, S.D. Texas.
November 9, 1992.
*1402 *1403 G.P. Hardy, III, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
Richard L. Josephson, Houston, Tex., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CRONE, United States Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Cou...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This opinion emanates from the voluntary settlement in the action commenced by the plaintiffs United States of America (the “Government”) against the defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters (the “IBT”) and the IBT’s General Executive Board (the “GEB”) embodied in the volun*277tary consent order entered March 14, 1989 (the “Consent Decree”). The remedial provisions i...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff Banff, Ltd. (“Banff”) brought this action alleging trademark infringement and false designation of origin under sections 35 and 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1117, 1125(a), and pendent state claims. The defendants, having prevailed after a jury trial, presently seek an award of attorney fees and costs in accordance with Lanham Act § 35(a).
Banff is a New Yor...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This action has been reassigned to this Court’s calendar from that of its former colleague Honorable liana Rovner (now elevated to our Court of Appeals). Before the reassignment Judge Rovner had referred two motions to dismiss to Magistrate Judge Edward Bobrick for decision — one motion filed by defendants Bionetics Corporation (“Bionetics”) and Dr. John Parks...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Trevis Walker has moved pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(b) to suppress guns and ammunition seized from his luggage and statements he made on April 8, 1992 after he got off an Amtrak train at New York’s Pennsylvania Station. He argues that the facts available to the Amtrak officers who made the seizure were insufficient to justify detaining him pursuant to
Te...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants Florida Power Corporation (“FPC”) and the Florida Power Corporation Employee Benefit Plan’s (“the Plan”) Motion to Transfer Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e)(2) and to Dismiss Counts I through V with prejudice, reasserted in their Rule 10(c) Motion, filed September 17,1992. Also before the Court is D...
Views: 0
ORDER This matter is before the court on submission by the parties for adjudication based on stipulated and agreed facts. The case presents two issues: 1) Did the individual mortgage from Kearney and Tice securing the Quality Chevrolet dealership property cross-collateralize the dealership debts secured by the personal guarantees of Kearney and Tice that were incurred the same day? and 2) Is GM...
Views: 0
ORDER ON APPEAL REVERSING AND REMANDING THE ORDER OF BANKRUPTCY COURT GRANTING DEBTOR’S MOTION TO SELL ALL ITS ASSETS AND DENYING UNITED STATES’ MOTION TO CONVERT
This case is before the court on the appeal of the United States of America
*1002
from the Bankruptcy Court’s order granting the debtor’s motion to sell all its assets and denying the United States of America’s moti...
Views: 1
■ MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the court is the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction filed by Defendants, Joe Appolito, Ella Appolito, James P. Hanson, Alton R. McKim, and Jo Anna Ivan (Docket Entry # 10). Plaintiffs, K & W Enterprises, Inc., K & W Enterprises 90-11, L.P., Marshall L. Worsham and D. Glen Kennedy did not r...
Views: 0
Page 17226
805 F. Supp. 854 (1992)
P.W. STEPHENS CONTRACTORS, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
MID AMERICAN INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, a Cayman Islands corporation, United Capitol Insurance Company, an Arizona corporation, Lui Tuua, Jr., an individual residing in the State of Hawaii, Oregon Electric Construction, Inc., an Oregon corporation, and United States of America, Defendants.
Civ. No. ...
Views: 1
OPINION AND ORDER Geraldo Hernandez has petitioned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for a writ of habeas corpus and to vacate the judgment of conviction that followed his guilty plea. He argues that the 90-month sentence he received violated a plea bargain insofar as it represented an upward departure from the 10-16 month range generated by the adjusted offense level and criminal history category refl...
Views: 0
OPINION
Plaintiff IMAF, S.p.A. (“IMAF”) brought this case in 1986 alleging breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, trademark infringement, and unfair competition by defendant J.C. Penney Company, Inc. (“Penney”). IMAF initially brought suit in state court, and the case was removed to federal court because of trademark claims based on the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051
...
Views: 1
OPINION
Plaintiffs Marvin Felix, Omar Cornielle and Martin Chaddy
1
seek leave to file a consolidated amended complaint and to join as additional parties New York Drug Enforcement Task Force (“NYDETF”) officers
2
William O’Flaherty and Miguel Monge. Defendants Richard Chamberlain, Joseph Cruz, Francisco Garrido, Dennis Johnston, William O’Flaherty, and James Wood and...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff International Paving Systems, Inc. (“IPS”) commenced this action against Van-Tulco, Inc. (“Van-Tulco”) and the additional defendants, Van-Tulco’s sureties on the payment bond which is the subject of this action. IPS is seeking $125,816.07 from Van-Tulco or its sureties for latex modified concrete (“LMC”) that IPS supplied to AVA Construction, Inc. (“AVA”), Van-Tul...
Views: 3
MEMORANDUM
BACKGROUND
The court has before it a motion filed October 8, 1992 by defendants United
*60
States Gypsum Company (“U.S. Gypsum”), GAF Corporation (“GAF”), and National Gypsum Company (“National Gypsum”), hereafter collectively the “CCR defendants.”
1
The CCR defendants seek a stay of execution of the judgment entered by this court on July 9, 1992 (R...
Views: 0
Page 17238
805 F. Supp. 905 (1992)
OKLAHOMA PUBLISHING COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
KANSAS CITY FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Employers Reinsurance Corporation, Houston General Insurance Company, Old Republic Insurance Company, Puritan Insurance Company and Reliance Insurance Company, Defendants.
No. CIV-90-1251-A.
United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma.
October 21, 1992.
*906 James M. Chaney, James E. ...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 371 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
James J. LEDWITH, Jr., Defendant.
No. 3:92-CV-390.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division.
November 5, 1992.
*372 Nicholas Stephan Altimari, U.S. Attorney's Office, Richmond, Va., for plaintiff.
Wayne Lee Emery, Warsaw, Va., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM
MERHIGE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 252 (1992)
SOLAREX CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
ARCO SOLAR, INC. and Siemens Solar Industries, L.P., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 87-237-JJF.
United States District Court, D. Delaware.
November 6, 1992.
*253 *254 *255 *256 Steven J. Balick, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, Del., Kenneth E. Payne, Thomas W. Winland, and J. Michael Jakes, Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner, Washin...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 355 (1992)
Richard B. NELLIS, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, et al., Defendants.
Civ. No. 92-771-A.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Div.
November 3, 1992.
Joan Marie Canny, Caplin & Drysdale, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs.
Harvey B. Cohen, Brian Patrick Gettings, Cohen, Gettings & Dunham, Arlington, Va., for defendants.
MEMORAN...
Views: 0
809 F. Supp. 1501 (1992)
Tony PICKERING, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
USX CORPORATION, Defendant.
Lynn A. BARNEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
USX CORPORATION, Defendant.
Reldon C. KENNEY, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
USX CORPORATION, Defendant.
Civ. Nos. 87-C-838J, 88-C-763J and 91-C-636J.
United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D.
November 3, 1992.
*1502 *1503 *1504 *1505 *1506 *1507 Lynn C. Harris, Provo, UT, ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the motion of Plaintiffs
1
, by their attorneys, brought pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e), for Court approval of the settlement of this action by the terms set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement (the “Stipulation”) signed by the parties to the action on June 26, 1992. On August 17, 1992, this Court’s Preliminary Order was filed setting th...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION This action is before the court on the plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment filed July 30, 1992, and the defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, which was incorporated in his response to the Motion for Summary Judgment. I. BACKGROUND The defendant, W. Eugene Rutledge, purchased the Lattimer-Stevens Company in 1984. At that time, company employees were covered by two pension p...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS On August 18, 1992, petitioner moved to amend his petition and add six new claims pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 15(a) states that once a responsive pleading has been served, “a party may amend the party’s pleadings only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; a...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1484 (1992)
SAFEWAY, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA, Defendant.
NO. C-88-3440 DLJ.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
October 22, 1992.
*1485 John J. Dacey, of McKenna & Fitting, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff.
David B. Paynter, of Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard of San Francisco, Cal., and Jonathan Thier, of Ca...
Views: 0
Page 17278
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [14-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below,
*953
concludes that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED.
A. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Southern Business Communications, Inc. (“SBC”) is a N...
Views: 0
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The statement of Sue Weston establishes that between 1971-1975, the defendant borrowed the sum of $5,232.00 and executed promissory notes in that amount.
2. The loans were guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education under Title IV-B of the Higher Educational Act of 1965.
Id.
On or before March 1,...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 361 (1992)
Natalia PEREIRA, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Bruce KOZLOWSKI, Director of the Department of Medical Assistance Services of the State of Virginia, Defendant.
No. 3:92-CV-255.
United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division.
November 3, 1992.
William Kimble, Fort Worth, Tex., for plaintiffs.
Ternon Tucker Galloway Burton, Supreme Court of Va., Pamela Malone Reed, V...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 333 (1992)
Roger LYON, Plaintiff,
v.
CENTIMARK CORPORATION, Barry L. Budkey, and John P. Liekar, Jr., Defendants.
No. 92-337-CIV-5-BO.
United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Raleigh Division.
October 25, 1992.
*334 Jeffrey L. Jenkins, Jackson & Jenkins, Henderson, N.C., for plaintiff.
Lynn Fontana, Durham, N.C., for defendants.
ORDER
TERRENCE WILLIAM BOYLE, District ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 911 (1992)
Sherwin J. WATKINS, Plaintiff,
v.
GENERAL REFRACTORIES COMPANY, a corporation; John Does 1-5, Defendants.
No. 92-C-122A.
United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D.
October 29, 1992.
*912 *913 Thomas S. Taylor, Suitter, Axland, Armstrong & Hanson, Provo, Utah, for plaintiff.
Stanley J. Preston, Snow, Christensen & Martineau, Salt Lake City, Utah, for defendants.
AL...
Views: 0
Page 17318
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This bankruptcy appeal presents the narrow issue whether the bankruptcy court erred in holding that the seller’s assigned security interest in a modular home was not perfected by a notation on the modular home’s certificate of title. Issues of law receive de novo review on appeal.
In re Branding Iron Motel,
798 F.2d 396, 400 (10th Cir.1986). The relevant fa...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff in this action, Archibald Hill, alleges employment discrimination and other violations of his federal civil rights. The defendants are the New York City Board of Education and a private bus company. Both defendants have moved for summary judgment on all causes of action, and plaintiff has cross-moved for partial summary judgment. For the reasons set forth be...
Views: 3
OPINION
Defendant USX Corporation (“USX”) moves for summary judgment, and plaintiffs cross-move for partial summary judgment. I referred both motions to Magistrate Judge Leonard Bernikow who, in a Report and Recommendation (“Report”), recommended denying defendant USX Corp.’s motion for summary judgment and granting plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment. Also before the court is...
Views: 2
*571REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TO THE HONORABLE MARVIN E. ASPEN, one of the Judges of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
This matter is before the court on the motion for class certification of plaintiff Zenovia Elliott. In the face of defendants’ attack on her ability to adequately represent the class, plaintiff has also moved to amend the complaint to add ano...
Views: 2
*559 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Daniel Miller, proceeding pro se, sues Defendants Towne Oaks East Apartments, Fuller Management Company and Alan Arnold for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 3604 of the Fair Housing Act. More specifically, the Plaintiff alleges racial considerations played a role in the decisions and actions of the Defendants, which included the eviction of the Plaintiff...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiffs, Carlos Crump, Sharon Jeffrey, and Wintress Finch, instituted this civil action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the Gilmer Independent School District, alleging that they are being unconstitutionally denied a high school diploma and the
*553
right to participate in their high school graduation ceremony. Plaintiffs seek a temporary restraining order man...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER
Agencies of the Government — just like ordinary citizens — must comply with the law regardless of whether it is inconvenient or burdensome to do so. Because I believe that the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Defense acted contrary to a statute recently passed by Congress governing the closure or realignment of military installations, I hereby issue an injunct...
Views: 0
Page 17352
The defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which was submitted on briefs without oral argument. After considering the briefs of counsel, the record and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, for the reasons which follow: This-is a lawsuit for malicious prosecution and abuse of process, which grew out of a dispute between Robert Graham [“Graham”] of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Midwest Suspension- and Brake’s (“Midwest") motion for reconsideration of the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order dated August 17, 1992 in which the Court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff United States of America (“the government”) as to the issue of Midwest’s liability in the case at bar 796 F.Supp. ...
Views: 1
ORDER For the reasons stated and as more fully outlined on the record on May 26, 1992, the Bankruptcy Court’s Order Determining Postpetition Rents to be Cash Collateral of Connecticut General Life Insurance Company dated February 14, 1992 and the Bankruptcy Court’s Order Conditioning Debtors’ Use of Rents and Providing Adequate Protection of Connecticut General Life Insurance Company’s Interest in...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM — DECISION AND ORDER
I. OVERVIEW
This environmental litigation arises from the defendants’ alleged contamination of land and water in Schodack, New York. The plaintiff, the State of New York, filed its complaint on October 8, 1987, against defendants N. Storonske Cooperage Co. (“Storonske”) and its president, Michael Greenberg, pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Comp...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
This litigation arises from the discovery in 1981 of environmental contamination on a site in South Cairo, New York. During all of the relevant time periods, the site on which the alleged damage occurred was owned by defendant/third-party plaintiff Amro Realty Corporation (“Amro”) and was leased to American Thermostat Corporation (“AT”). Defendants/third-part...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER I This case involves a dispute between a purchaser of assets relating to a condominium project (“HMB”) and homeowners who are alleged to have interfered with HMB’s contract and other rights. HMB initiated a pre-complaint discovery proceeding in the courts of New York State by ex parte order to show cause under CPLR 3102, citing the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Ac...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Gillett Communications of Atlanta, Inc., d/b/a WAGA-TV5’s (“WAGA-TV”) Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Petition for Declaratory Judgment, filed on October 28, 1992. A hearing was held on October 29, 1992. The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Application and Petition.
BACKGROUND
WAGA-TV is engaged in the business of...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
When enacting the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Congress left open the question of the Act’s retroactive application, assuring that the nation’s federal courts would have literally thousands of opportunities to decide and disagree. The motion to strike now pending in this ease rests on the proposition that the Act does not apply to cases which, though filed after the Act’...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER American Standard Insurance Company of Wisconsin and American Family Mutual Insurance Company appeal the bankruptcy court’s orders of May 27, 1992 (setting the day for filing a complaint of nondischarge-ability or objections to discharge) and June 23, 1992 (denying appellants’ motion to allow filing of complaint and objection to discharge). This court has jurisdiction pursu...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER The defendant is charged with interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, *826 altering a vehicle identification number (“YIN”) and making false statements, in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2312, 2313, 511(a), and 1623. Defendant moves pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, (1) to suppress as evidence .information obtained from number...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
For an extensive discussion of the factual background in this case,
see Chicago Pro. Sports v. National Basketball Ass’n,
754 F.Supp. 1336, 1338-49 (N.D.Ill.1991),
aff'd,
961 F.2d 667 (7th Cir.1992),
cert. denied,
— U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 409, 121 L.Ed.2d 334 (1992).
II. NBA MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner, William George Bonin, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his 1982 convictions in Los An-geles of ten counts of first degree murder and his subsequent death sentence. 1 After his Los Angeles trial, petitioner stood trial in Orange County where he was convicted of four additional coun...
Views: 101
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Presently before the court is defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for (1) lack of subject matter jurisdiction, (2) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and (3) qualified immunity. Oral argument was heard on December 20,1991 in Syracuse, New York. For the following reasons, the court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant t...
Views: 2
Page 17384
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This is an action brought under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552 to enjoin the United States Department of Commerce from withholding certain census data and for declaratory relief. The matter is before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Federal Jurisdiction is predicated on 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). The s...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on two motions by CMF Virginia Land, L.P. (“CMF”): (1) to substitute itself as plaintiff in this action, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 25(c); and (2) for Summary Judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 56(a).
I. FACTUAL SUMMARY
This is a suit on a guaranty. CMF seeks judgment against Defendants Edward L. Brinson, Douglas C. Mullins,...
Views: 1
*550 MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs bring this consolidated class action against American Travelers Corporation (ATC) and several of ATC’s senior executives. Plaintiffs allege violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 §§ 10(b) and 20(a), as amended by 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b) and 78t(a), and of Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Plaintiffs also allege commo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a dispute between two sophisticated corporations involved in the business of selling high-tech communications equipment. Behind the attempt to characterize it as a business tort, the case fundamentally sounds in contract. Pursuant to a Master Distributorship Agreement (“MDA”) dated July 1, 1991, the Plaintiff, Dowty Communications Incorporated (“Dowty”), a desig...
Views: 4
795 F. Supp. 159 (1992)
James J. PRESTON, Jr.
v.
MOUNTAINSIDE TRANSPORT, INC.
Civ. A. No. WN-91-1845.
United States District Court, D. Maryland.
March 30, 1992.
David J. Preller, Jr., and Preller & Preller, Towson, Md., for plaintiff.
Jeffrey E. Rockman, and Frank, Bernstein, Conaway & Goldman of Baltimore, Md., and William W. Allport, and Allport & Miller, Cleveland, Ohio, for defend...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff was tried on criminal charges in state court and convicted by a jury on July 18, 1988. He is currently incarcerated at Lehigh County Prison. On May 18, 1992, plaintiff filed a
pro se
42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint against Glennis Clark, former District Attorney of Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, the Lehigh County District Attorney...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Federal Kemper Insurance Company (“Kemper”) filed a complaint for declaratory judgment with this court on June 25, 1992. Jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship.
In June, 1991, defendant Erica Reager (“Reager”) was injured while a passenger in a car driven by Kerry Darkes (“Darkes”). Reager has asserted that the accident occurred ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Congoleum Corporation has moved this court for leave to amend its answer to assert counterclaims for trade secret theft and antitrust violations (Document No. 60). For the reasons stated be*290low, I will permit defendant to amend its answer to add an antitrust count and will deny defendant’s request to add a count based upon alleged trade secret theft.
II. DI...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER Major League Baseball Players Association (“MLBPA”) moves for a preliminary injunction against Dad’s Kid Corp. and for partial summary judgment. MLBPA alleges that Dad’s Kid has infringed its trademark rights under federal and state trademark law, and has misappropriated publicity rights belonging to major league baseball players, for whom MLBPA is the ex- *459 elusive licen...
Views: 0
ORDER Ronnie Lee Anderson, a disabled individual who receives Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits, challenges the method used by the Social Security Administration (SSA) to calculate the amount of SSI benefits for the first three months of his eligibility for SSL The defendant, the Secretary of Health and Human' Services (the Secretary), moves to dismiss this action for lack of subject ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR
FORUM NON CONVENIENS
FACTS
On March 30, 1986, a Mexicana Airlines Boeing 727 flew non-stop from Chicago’s O’Hare Airport to Guadalahara, Mexico, and then to Mexico City. The following day, March 31, 1986, it crashed after takeoff killing its crew and passengers. The airplane, operating as Mexicana Airlines Flight 940, was en ro...
Views: 1
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND INTERVENOR’S MOTION TO DISMISS
Before the Court are the following motions: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed December 9, 1988, to which Defendants Harold Birch and John Cockrell responded April 25, 1989, and the Plaintiff replied March 21, 1990; and (2) the Intervenor’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss, filed April 17, 1...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs, the three international unions, seek a temporary restraining order requiring Quantum Chemical Corp./USI Division to cease its recently implemented “on call duty” policy. They desire to preserve the status quo pending arbitration concerning the mandatory overtime provision of their collective bargaining contracts.
The agreements have been in effect among th...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM DECISION The Court has before it defendants’ motion for summary judgment and motion to strike affidavit of expert. The Court heard oral argument on these motions and they are now at issue. On the motion for summary judgment the Court must determine whether there exist any genuine issues of material fact. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). This litigation began when Ronald Walker drowned in a dred...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1434 (1992)
D & G STOUT, INC., f/k/a General Liquors, Inc., David R. Stout, and Georgia R. Stout, Plaintiffs,
v.
BACARDI IMPORTS, INC., Defendant.
No. S87-605(RLM).
United States District Court, N.D. of Indiana, South Bend Division.
October 21, 1992.
*1435 *1436 *1437 Franklin A. Morse II, South Bend, Ind., for plaintiffs.
Timothy W. Woods, South Bend, Ind., for defendant.
MEMOR...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING CITY'S MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants City and County of Honolulu and the Department of Public Works of the City and County of Honolulu’s (“City”) motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, summary judgment and plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment came on for he...
Views: 2
ORDER Brian L. Denton, formerly an employee at the Franklin County Juvenile Detention Center, filed this action asserting that his termination from that employment violated his constitutional rights. The question of whether he had a constitutionally-protected property interest in continued employment hinges on whether he was a member of the classified or unclassified service under Ohio law. In an ...
Views: 0
ORDER Now before the court are various pretrial motions filed by defendant Jeffrey Erickson (“Erickson” or “defendant”). The government filed a consolidated response. Erickson did not file a reply. In addition, the government filed pretrial motions. For ease of discussion, the court first addresses each of Erickson’s motions separately. Thereafter, the court addresses the government’s motions. ...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is the motion of defendant, Mario Rainone (“Rainone”), to withdraw his plea of guilty to the superseding indictment pursuant to Rule 32(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court has carefully considered the parties’ pleadings and the pertinent law. We deny Rainone's motion without a hearing. *355I. FACTS The facts are straightforward. On or about December 18, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER City of Chicago (“City”) has filed a Notice of Removal (the “Notice”) of this action from the Circuit Court of Cook County, basing the removal on the presence in the Complaint (its Count III) of a claim that City and unidentified defendants described there as “Unknown Parties” violated the federal constitutional rights of decedent Derrick Hall (“Hall”).1 Based on its i...
Views: 0
*439
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This case is before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(c), Fed.R.Civ.P.
For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
On June 14, 1985, Trans World Airlines Flight 847B departing Athens for Boston was hijacked in Athens. Plaintiff Francis C. Wals...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand filed January 23, 1992, Defendants’ Response to Motion to Remand filed February 10, 1992, and Plaintiff’s Supplemental Motion to Remand and Reply filed February 24, 1992.
FACTS
On December 3, 1991, Plaintiff State of Texas (“Plaintiff”) filed a quo warranto proceeding against Defendants Alliance Em...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM The Court has before it the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (entered December 17, 1991; Docket Entry No. 30), defendant’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (filed January 3, 1992; Docket Entry No. 31), and other pleadings and memoranda concerning the Report and Recommendation.1 In his Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the plai...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant, The Hearst Corporation, moves to disqualify its former attorney, Jeffrey M. Bernbach, from representing three former employees of Hearst in actions accusing Hearst of various forms of illegal employment discrimination, retaliation and illegal discharge. The court finds that Mr. Bernbach’s representation of these three former employees against Hearst violates D...
Views: 3
Page 17433
*146
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Fina Oil Company, the defendant in this citizen suit brought under § 505 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1321, moves for dismissal on the issue of standing. National Resource Defense Council, plaintiff, moves for partial summary judgment. Both parties have stipulated that, for today’s hearing, the issue is whether the court’s jurisdiction over this act...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Sheldon Solow, doing business as Solow Building Co. (“Solow”), moves for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants’ liability for default on a com
*10
mercial lease. Defendants oppose summary judgment and move to dismiss or stay the action because defendant Polly Peck International, pic (“Polly Peck”) is in insolvency proceedings in Engla...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 308 (1992)
Leon GERVEL and Joellen Gervel, h/w, Plaintiffs,
v.
L & J TALENT, Star Five Corp., L & J Press Corp., Press Parts Inc., M.G. Mathias, Rob Mathias, and Margaret G. Mathias, Defendants.
Civ. A. No. 92-5651.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
October 22, 1992.
John E. Salmon, La Brum and Doak, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Robert A. Klein, Rawle &am...
Views: 1
Page 17453
MEMORANDUM The United States Department of Education (“DOE”) appeals from the Bankruptcy Court’s determination that Cheryl Pet-tis’ student loan obligation may not be offset against her tax refund 133 B.R. 711. Among the issues presented by the DOE is “whether the suit against the United States and its agencies is barred by sovereign immunity since the United States did not file any proof of cl...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs are individuals who purchased common stock or call options, or sold put options, of U.S. Bioscienee from April 12, 1991 through January 31, 1992. They bring this action on their own and as representatives of a class against U.S. Bioscience, Inc. (“Bioscience”) and several of its officers and directors, alleging violations of the federal securities laws and negligent misrep...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on appellant First Security Bank of Utah’s (“First Security”) appeal from the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court granting trustee Harriet Styler’s (“Trustee”) motion for summary judgment. A hearing on this appeal was held on October 29, 1992. First Security was represented by Lorrin D. Ron-now, and the Trustee was represented ...
Views: 0
OPINION
Nine in-state public television stations currently serve the citizens of Pennsylvania.
1
Plaintiff Independence Public Media of Philadelphia, Inc. operates the infant of these nine, WYBE in Philadelphia, which began broadcasting in 1990.
2
In addition to being a newcomer, plaintiff considers WYBE to be unique among Pennsylvania public television stations in t...
Views: 1
805 F. Supp. 1544 (1992)
STRATEGIS ASSET VALUATION & MANAGEMENT, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
PACIFIC MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, PMRealty Management Company, a California corporation, Defendants and third-party plaintiffs,
v.
Mark A. DUNN, as Receiver, Third-party defendant.
Civ. A. No. 91-B-876.
United States District Court, D. Colorado.
Novem...
Views: 0
OPINION
In order to aid the court in its task of redistricting the State of New York from 34 to 31 congressional districts, as mandated by the 1990 federal census, this three-judge court appointed the Hon. Frederick B. Lacey as special master on May 12, 1992. Two weeks later, on May 26, 1992, Judge Lacey presented a plan of 31 congressional districts with a report recommending that this c...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION The parties dispute the priority of certain liens attached to a parcel of land in Warren County, Kentucky. The realty had been owned by D.J. Barclay and his wife, Marjorie, as tenants by the entirety. The land has since been sold, and its entire proceeds will pass to the litigant who prevails in this suit. D.J. and Marjorie Barclay became owners of seventy acres of land in ...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs Barbara Hayes, Special Administrator for the Estate of Cyndee Hayes (Hayes), and Carol Sampson (Sampson) bring this action for damages based on theories of product liability, negligence, and wrongful death as a result of illnesses allegedly sustained by plaintiffs as a result of exposure to “radiant energy” emitted from Raytheon video display terminals (VDTs). De...
Views: 0
OPINION and ORDER This is a civil negligence and strict liability action for monetary relief arising from injuries sustained by James Johnson while working on a United States postal truck manufactured by the Grumman defendants. The case is before the court on defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Resolution of this motion rests on whether defendants are eligible to invoke the "government con...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Defendant, Equifax Services, Inc. (“Equifax”), moves for summary judgment on Counts II, III and IV of the complaint and for partial summary judgment limiting plaintiffs’ potential recovery on Count I. Plaintiffs, General Electric Capital Corporation (“GECC”) and General Electric Capital Comm...
Views: 0
Page 17489
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BACKGROUND 1. Plaintiff Farmer was arrested in Collier County, Florida and brought before the Honorable Hugh D. Hayes, Circuit Court Judge in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit. Plaintiff requested that he be released on furlough to attend his father’s funeral *1517which was to be held on November 30,1985 in Lee County, Florida. 2. On November 26,...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1082 (1992)
CABLEAMERICA CORPORATION and Cable Alabama Corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, et al., Defendants.
No. CV-91-N-2932-NE.
United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Northeastern Division.
April 13, 1992.
*1083 *1084 David Overlock Stewart, Thomas B. Smith, Ropes & Gray, Washington, D.C., Roderic G. Steakley, Joe H. Ritch, Sirote and Permutt P.C., Hunt...
Views: 0
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the motion of Counter-defendants Michael H. McCaskey and Maria M. McCaskey to amend the order dated June 30, 1992, 1992 WL 161059, disqualifying Trenam, Simmons, Kemker, Sharf, Barkin, Frye, & O’Neill (Trenam, Simmons) from further participation in this litigation. The motion requests amendment of the order to certify four questions of law for inter...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants, the members of the Joint Executive Board (“Executive Board”) of Local 32B-32J (the “Union”) move pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the first, third and fourth causes of action of the second amended complaint filed by Carlos Guzman (“Guzman”), a member and former shop steward of the Union. Defendants’ papers state the...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Department of Labor (“DOL”) has moved the Court to stay all state and federal court litigation pending against defendant Consolidated Welfare Fund (the “Fund”). The Court has received no objections to the entry of such a stay. Accordingly, for the reasons stated below, the DOL’s motion is granted, and all cases against the Fund are stayed until further notice.
FACTS
The DOL instit...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF THREE-JUDGE COURT This memorandum and order addresses the following matters: (1) a motion to enjoin, or in the alternative to remove, a state court suit, made by defendants Marino, Skelos, and the New York State Senate (“Senate defendants”); (2) a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to stay these federal proceedings on abstention grounds, made by defendants Gantt, T...
Views: 2
Page 17496
805 F. Supp. 1475 (1992)
Gerald B. ROTH and Logan M. Ammon, Plaintiffs,
v.
SAWYER-CLEATOR LUMBER COMPANY EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN, Charles J. Sawyer and Clifford E. Sawyer, Defendants.
No. 3-91 CIV 347.
United States District Court, D. Minnesota, Third Division.
November 10, 1992.
*1476 Parsinen Bowman & Levy P.A. by George R. Serdar, and Ann M. Sanford, Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff...
Views: 0
RECOMMENDED RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND
In this action, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). seeks foreclosure of a $4,500,000.00 mortgage which allegedly secures a note between defendant Sextant Development Corporation (“Sextant”) and Citytrust. The motion presently before this court is the plaintiff’s motion to strike the defendant’s jury demand dated Octob...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court is the motion of defendants Bull Data Systems, Inc., Zenith Data Systems, S.A., and Zenith Data Systems Europe, S.A. (collectively, “ZDS Defendants”), for an order compelling plaintiffs Allendale Mutual Insurance Company (“Allendale”) and Factory Mutual International (“FMI”) to produce certain documents in discovery.
It being apparent that the instant matter repr...
Views: 0
OPINION
Robert Ferrara (“Ferrara”) brings this habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). Ferrara was convicted in 1982 of murder in the second degree, N.Y. Penal Law § 125.25 (McKinney 1974), by a jury in the New York State Supreme Court, New York County. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment Of twenty-five years to life (Rothwax, J.). Fer-rara’s petition alleges th...
Views: 0
OPINION Two criminal jury trials — two hung juries — coupled with not guilty verdicts on some of the counts. Should this Court put an end to this criminal prosecution? Yes. Defendant moves for judgment of acquittal. The Government opposes, but moves for dismissal without prejudice, which in turn, is opposed by the Defendant. The Court will do neither. The Court dismisses the remai...
Views: 0
OPINION Bench trial. Posit: was the city properly requested to graduate to private financing of a loan to upgrade its sewer system? Yes. Judgment for the United States. I. FACTS In 1980, the City of Girard, Illinois, was mandated by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to make improvements to its sewage treatment facility at a cost of $3,800,000. Construction costs were financ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Herman Kelly (Kelly) filed this pro se action against L.L. Cool J., Def Jam Music Records Publishing, Inc. (Def Jam), and Marley Marl Music, Inc. for copyright infringement and other assorted claims.1 This action is presently before the Court on Def Jam’s motion for a more definite statement of the copyright claim pursuant to Rule 12(e), Fed.R.Civ.P., and Def Jam's mot...
Views: 2
OPINION
Plaintiff Dawson Industries, Inc. (“Dawson”) is a Georgia corporation which operates Almark Mills, an apparel manufacturing plant in Dawson, Georgia, and which is authorized to do business in New York. Dawson was insured by defendant Affiliated FM Insurance Company (“Affiliated”), a Rhode Island corporation, for loss of property under a fidelity insurance policy effective March 1, 1987. T...
Views: 1
OPINION
Defendants move to dismiss the substantially identical complaints in these two actions. Chief Magistrate Judge Nina Ger-shon issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) recommending dismissal of four of plaintiffs’ seven claims; plaintiffs did not object to that recommendation. This Opinion addresses whether the court should also grant defendants’ motions to dismiss the remainin...
Views: 2
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY FINAL JUDGMENT
This cause is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for final summary judgment
*254
regarding two counts; and Plaintiffs memorandum in support thereof, filed April 10, 1992. Plaintiffs deposition of Virgil M. Palmer, III was filed April 10, 1992. Defendant’s response to Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment was filed April 24, 1992...
Views: 0
ORDER This cause is before the Court on Defendant Prison Health Services’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff Gary Raymond Suit’s Civil Rights Complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docket No. 8) This Court must read Plaintiff’s pro se allegations in a liberal fashion. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972). Plaintiff’s complaint should not be dismissed for failure to ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1266 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Orin Nigel CARR, Dexter Fitzgerald Myhand, Kelvin D. Walker, Defendants.
Nos. 92-53-01-CR-5-F, 92-53-05-CR-5-F and 92-53-09-CR-5-F.
United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Raleigh Division.
September 9, 1992.
*1267 Eric Evenson, Asst. U.S. Atty., for U.S.
Richard M. Roberts, West Orange, N.J., John L. Coble, Wilmington, N.C., for def...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
We are considering the parties’ motions for reconsideration of our Memorandum and Order of September 22, 1992, in which we granted summary judgment to defendant.1
We believe additional briefing and the recent enactment of the Weather Service Modernization Act of 1992, Pub.L. No. 102-567 (to be codified at 15 U.S.C. § 313 note), (“1992 Act”) warrant a reexamination of our earlier decisi...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
Presently before me are eleven separate complaints filed by Mr. Joseph Mallon. For the reasons that follow, each of the complaints will be dismissed as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). I also find that Mr. Mallon, unless restrained, will continue to abuse the judicial process by filing additional frivolous actions. I will, accordingly, issue a permanent injunction, un...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment against the individual guarantor defendants pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and on defendants’ motion for leave of court to amend their answer pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The motions have been fully briefed and are now ripe for ruling.
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Defendant, William Cochran, is charged with possession and interstate shipment of material involving the exploitation of minors in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(1) and 2252(a)(4). Before the court is defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence and his statement obtained pursuant to an allegedly invalid search and seizure. On January 22, 1992, employees of Atlas Van Lines (...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1493 (1992)
Roger MARSH and Frans Merkx, Plaintiffs,
v.
Stanley K. BURRELL, a/k/a M.C. Hammer or Hammer; Bustin' Management, Inc.; Bustin' Records, Inc.; Bustin' Productions, Inc.; Bustin' Touring, Inc.; and Bustin' Management/Capitol Records-Thorn EMI Joint Venture, Defendants.
No. C-92-1292 MHP.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
October 26, 1992.
*1494 *1495 Thomas M. ...
Views: 1
*124MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, a New York State prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants who are involved in the state parole system. Plaintiff contends that his parole hearing was constitutionally flawed. He requests immediate release on parole and compensatory damages. Defendants McElwee, White, Goggins, and Umina now move under Rule ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
This case is before this Court on the motion to dismiss filed by the defendant, United States of America.
The complaint in the instant case seeks to quash a summons which was issued to TRW by Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) agent Marcia J. Pennington. The summons asked TRW to produce a credit report regarding “Jo...
Views: 0
ORDER
On this date the Court considered the Motion to Determine Jurisdiction and Venue, filed by Tesoro Petroleum Corporation on November 1, 1991.
Introduction
This suit stems from an arbitration proceeding that took place in the Southern District of New York. The arbitration award was entered on September 6, 1991, also in the Southern District of New York. On September 9, 19...
Views: 1
The Court holds that, despite the normal jurisdictional prerequisite of an administrative demand, the bankruptcy court has an independent ground for jurisdiction over a claimed preferential transfer because the RTC filed its own affirmative claim.
I. BACKGROUND
On March 17, 1989, Parker North American (“PNA”) filed its Chapter 11 petition for bankruptcy relief. One of the primary moti...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Bertmond W. Charrette, commenced the present action against his former employer, the defendant, S.M. Flick-inger Company, Inc. (“Flickinger”) on March 17, 1988. Mr. Charrette alleges unlawful termination on the part of Flicking-er, in violation of section 4(a) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C.
§...
Views: 0
ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS TO REMAND, TO AMEND REMOVAL NOTICE, AND DISMISS (12(b)(6))
I. INTRODUCTION
Three motions are before the court. Plaintiff Dean S. Kacludis (“Kacludis”) moves for remand to state court for failure to plead jurisdiction adequately. Defendants GTE Sprint Communications Corp., Sprint/United Management Company, and Mohammed Z. Malik (“Defendants”) in turn seek leave ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Plaintiff Roger Boley brought this action to recover payments he made to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) under an indemnity agreement signed as part of his application for a VA home loan. Boley also seeks to enjoin collection from other VA loan debtors in North Carolina under similar agreements where the VA has not complied with North Carolina antideficiency laws set out in N.C.Gen....
Views: 1
ORDER
Before the Court are two motions to suppress filed by Defendant Bruce Wayne Campbell. On November 9, 1992, this Court held a hearing to consider these motions as well as the other pending motions in this action. The Court ruled on all of the motions at the hearing, except for portions of the motion to suppress statements filed by the Defendant. Having considered and reviewed the motion, the...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On May 29, 1987, a Cook County jury found petitioner Donald Everette guilty of murder for the shooting death of Johnny Island. At trial, Everette admitted shooting Island, but maintained that he had drawn his gun in self-defense and, further, that the gun had discharged accidentally. The trial court instructed the jury that the accidental firing of a gun could not constitute ...
Views: 0
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Pending before the Court is the Memorandum of Recommendation Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Document #24) and the RTC’s Objections to Magistrate Stacy's Memorandum of Recommendation Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Document # 25). Having considered the Memorandum of Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Frances Stacy and the objections of the Resolution Tru...
Views: 0
Page 17566
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This action arises from plaintiff Evergreen Marine Corporation’s (“Evergreen”) delivery of six consignments of frozen scallops to defendant Gloucester Corporation (“Gloucester”) absent receipt of bills of lading. Evergreen’s First Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) avers that defendant Gloucester failed to pay for the scallops. Evergreen brings suit against Gloucester, again...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a civil action wherein the plain
*933
tiffs-taxpayers
1
claim a refund of federal income taxes allegedly overpaid. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(1). This action came before the court on cross-motions for summary judgment. The motions were fully briefed and oral argument was held on October 23, 1992.
I. BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
Page 17579
*902
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiff, Dr. Orville C. Karan (“Dr. Karan”), has been denied a license to practice psychology in Connecticut on the ground that his educational credentials fail to satisfy Connecticut’s licensure standards. Dr. Karan brings this action against Frederick G. Adams, Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Health Services ...
Views: 0
ORDER GRANTING NEW TRIAL
THIS MATTER is before the Court upon the United States of America’s Motion To Set Aside Convictions And To Dismiss Indictment (DE 67) (“Motion”), in which the United States of America seeks to set aside the convictions of Defendants Marion Bray-boy and Wallace Mitchell. In considering this matter, this Court has reviewed the entire court file and is otherwise fully advise...
Views: 0
ORDER Pending are cross-motions for summary judgment. (Docs. 56, 57). I. BACKGROUND The pro se plaintiff, Wilford Simpson, filed this action to quiet title to certain personal property on which the defendant, the United States of America, claims an income tax lien. Simpson does not dispute the merits of the underlying assessment, but' only the procedures used by the government in imposing the lien...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendants Gold Corp., Inc.’s (“Gold Corp.”), Walid Khalife’s, Fadi Khalife’s, and Fred Abdenour’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the United States (of America’s (“the government”) complaint for civil forfeiture and for the return of the property seized pursuant to a seizure warrant dated June 2, 1992. 1 The government f...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment on Count I of plaintiff’s complaint. Defendant has also moved for summary judgment on plaintiff’s second, fifth, sixth and seventh affirmative defenses raised in answer to defendant’s counterclaims. Plaintiff subsequently filed a brief in response to which defendant has replied. Accordi...
Views: 0
ORDER DISQUALIFYING CREDITOR BRADFORD’S COUNSEL
I. Introduction
This case involves a bankruptcy proceeding in which the debtor has sought to disqualify the law firm which represents a large creditor due to a conflict of interest with an individual attorney of the creditor’s law firm. The conflict of interest arose from the individual attorney’s representation of the debtor’s general ...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 310 (1992)
Levent YUKSEL
v.
NORTHERN AMERICAN POWER TECHNOLOGY, INC. and Peter Lo.
Civ. A. No. 92-6002.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.
November 5, 1992.
Arsen Kashkashian, Jr., Bristol, Pa., for plaintiff.
Anthony S. Volpe, Volpe & Koenig, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendants.
*311 MEMORANDUM
KATZ, District Judge.
Defendants North American Power Technology, Inc. ...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In this action, plaintiff has filed suit against defendants alleging defamation, wrongful discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). On April 15, 1992, defendants served a First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of documents on plaintiff. Although the parties stipula...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF EDWARD SIGUEL AS PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY
(DOCKET ENTRY # 7k)
On February 18, 1992, defendant Allstate Life Insurance Company, filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff’s counsel, Edward N. Siguel (“Mr. Siguel”). (Docket Entry #74). Prior thereto, this court brought the matter of Mr. Siguel’s disqualification to the parties’ attention at a status conference hel...
Views: 0
ORDER
Before the court is defendants' motion for supplementation of the administrative record. Defendants’ original motion for supplementation was denied by this court by order of September 24, 1992; however, the court permitted defendants to submit specific documents for the court to consider for supplementation. Defendants have responded to this order by submitting eight actual document...
Views: 0
OPINION ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiff Dr. Joseph V. Scelsa, the Director of the John D. Calandra Italian American Institute (“Institute”) of the City University of New York (“CUNY”), is before this court seeking a preliminary injunction barring defendants from employment discrimination against Italian-Americans and from relocating the Institute and transferring its operat...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
THIS CAUSE is before the court on the non-jury portion of this bifurcated trial, which focused solely on the issue of liability. The background relevant to the court’s findings and conclusions regarding the City's liability can be summarized as follows.
Plaintiffs (“plaintif...
Views: 2
ORDER This action arises from Defendant Freeway Land Investors’ default on a $2,500,-000.00 promissory note secured by a junior trust on a piece of property near McDowell Road and 51st Avenue in Phoenix, Arizona (the subject property). On February 14, 1991, then-Plaintiff Great American Bank (Great American) brought this action in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the Count...
Views: 0
*653 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on defendant Ronald E. Walker’s motion to dismiss plaintiff Kathleen Lindsey’s civil rights complaint against defendant. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and 56. Plaintiff has neither responded to defendant Walker’s motion nor has plaintiff contacted the Court with respect to defendant’s motion. The Court ORDERS that this motion be dispos...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification [8-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that the motion should be denied.
Plaintiff Richard Ronald Datz filed this purported class action of behalf of state prison inmates. The Complaint alleges constitutional violations at ...
Views: 0
ORDER This case is presently before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [19-1], the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation recommending granting in part the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment [31-1], and the Defendants’ Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [32— 1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, f...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment [# 10-2], plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment [# 15-1], plaintiff’s motion for leave to file reply to counterclaim [# 12-1], defendant’s motion for default judgment [# 10-1], and defendant’s motion for oral argument [# 25-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, ...
Views: 2
805 F. Supp. 1513 (1992)
John DOE, Jane Doe, Individually, and as Prochein Ami for Jane Doe 2, a minor, John Doe 2 and John Doe 3, Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES of America and Doe Defendants 1-10, Defendants.
Civ. No. 91-00339 DAE.
United States District Court, D. Hawaii.
November 18, 1992.
*1514 *1515 Paul F. Cronin, Patrick F. McTernan, Cronin Fried Sekiya Kekina & Fairbanks, Honolulu, Hawai...
Views: 0
ORDER
This Cause is before the Court on the motion of Plaintiff Bromenn Healthcare [Bromenn], as sponsor of Bromenn Healthcare Employees’ Group Medical/Dental Plan [Plan], to remand this case to the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, McLean County, Illinois, following removal by Defendants, Northwestern National Life Insurance Company [Northwestern] and Self Assurance Company...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 1522 (1992)
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY and Montana Rail Link, Plaintiffs,
v.
STATE OF MONTANA; and the Montana Department of Public Regulation, Public Service Commission, Defendants.
No. CV 91-38-H-CCL.
United States District Court, D. Montana, Helena Division.
October 16, 1992.
*1523 Robert A. Cannon, Richard A. Knudsen, Knudsen, Berkheimer, Richardson & Endacott, Linc...
Views: 0
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated Medicaid applicants and recipients throughout New York State, *415brought this action to enjoin defendants from considering court ordered support payments, income taxes, and Social Security and state disability insurance contributions, when determining their eligibility for Medicaid benefits under 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a...
Views: 3
805 F. Supp. 1392 (1992)
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., and AMR Corporation, Defendants.
NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC., Plaintiffs,
v.
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., and AMR Corporation, Defendants.
Civ. A. Nos. G-92-259, G-92-266.
United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Galveston Division.
November 4, 1992.
*1393 Stephen D. Susman, Parker C. Folse, Susman Godfrey, L.L....
Views: 5
MODIFIED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In 1990 Wauconda Junior High School promulgated a policy prohibiting student distribution of religious materials on school property. One of its students challenged this policy on the grounds that it violated her First Amendment right to freedom of
*447
speech. We agreed with the student and entered an order preliminarily enjoining the sch...
Views: 1
Page 17663
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a New York corporation, brought this action claiming that defendants, all citizens of states other than New York, improperly procured and used plaintiffs trade secrets and proprietary business information. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 by reason of diversity of citizenship.
Plaintiff has moved for an order directing that Richards & ...
Views: 0
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff, Alexander Butchko, commenced this action against defendant, Tex-tron Lycoming (Textron), claiming his termination was in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Defendant has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, claiming there is no material dispute of fact.
T...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is an action brought by David Frankina (“Frankina”) against his former employer, the First National Bank of Boston (“the Bank”), alleging that the Bank unlawfully discriminated against him because of his age by terminating him in connection with a May, 1989, reduction in force (“RIF”). Frankina’s seven-count amended complaint seeks statutory relief under the Massachusetts ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This suit arose from foundation damage to a track scale, a truck scale, a refractory warehouse, and an oxygen separating plant located at the Georgetown Steel Corporation (GSC) plant in Georgetown, South Carolina. At GSC’s request, Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory, Inc. (PTL) performed tests on steel slag, a by-product of' the steel milling process, to determine if the steel slag had c...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This is a diversity action brought by Telectronics, Inc. (“Telectronics”) against one of its insurers, United National Insurance Company (“United”), alleging breach of contract and bad faith breach of an insurance contract. The plaintiff has moved for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 56. The defendant filed a cross motion for summary judgment and has...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action with pendant state claims in tort is brought by the plaintiff, Ruby McKinney as the mother and best friend of Michael McKinney, against the defendant, West End Voluntary Ambulance Association (“Ambulance Association”).
1
The plaintiffs four-count Complaint is based upon the Ambulance Association’s alleged refus...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [19-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below,
*970
concludes that the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED.
A. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
1. Undisputed facts
Based on the parties’ statements o...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss and to strike (Filing No. 13). For the reasons set out below, this action will be dismissed, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for failure to state a claim.
The plaintiff in this action, Edward Ron-win, doing business as Index Investments, alleges (Filing No. 1) ...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the court on the defendants’ motion for summary judgment [8-1] and Eddie Beal’s motion to intervene [22-1], This Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, GRANTS the motion for summary judgment and DENIES the motion to intervene.
The plaintiff filed her complaint alleging that defendants infr...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Financial Matters, Inc. (“FMI”) and Modern Classic Marketing, d/b/a Stolichnaya Import company, move for a preliminary injunction against PepsiCo and Monsieur Henri Wines. PepsiCo and MHW cross-move for an injunction against plaintiffs. At issue are the trademark rights in “Stolichnaya” vodka.
On this record, the following appears. In 1973 PepsiCo entered into an ag...
Views: 1
OPINION
In this trademark action Plaintiff L. Perrigo Company seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against Warner-Lambert Co. The action is currently before the Court on Defendant Warner-Lambert Co.’s motion to dismiss the complaint, or alternatively for an order staying the action or transferring it to the District Court for the Northern District of Texas. A hearing on the motion was ...
Views: 0
805 F. Supp. 653 (1992)
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Barry J. HODGEKINS, Defendant.
Cause No. S91-530M.
United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division.
August 11, 1992.
*654 *655 Clifford D. Johnson, Asst. U.S. Atty., South Bend, Ind., Peter Sklarew, Douglas W. Snoeyenbos, Trial Atty., Tax Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff.
Stephen A. Seall, ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
John Pancake (“Pancake” or “plaintiff”) instituted this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and named the Honorable John G. McCarthy, retired justice of the New York state Supreme Court as a defendant. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment that a settlement he entered into in open court before Judge McCarthy was forced upon him by the defendant in violation of the Fo...
Views: 0
OPINION
Defendant Randall Terry served and filed nine separate motions in connection with his forthcoming criminal contempt trial before this Court. At oral argument on September 24, 1992 and in a subsequent opinion,
United States v. Randall Terry,
802 F.Supp. 1094 (S.D.N.Y.1992) (“the October 6 Opinion”), this Court disposed of eight of these motions and deferred decision on o...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction [7-1], and the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint [17-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that Plaintiffs’ motion to amend should be granted and Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction should ...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM
This is a contract claim by a government employee, Carolyn Arrington, who has been denied insurance benefits for a particular cancer treatment that she claims is covered under the Blue Cross/Blue Shield 1992 Government-wide Service Benefit Plan of the Federal Employee Health Benefits (“FEHB”) programs.
See
5 U.S.C. § 8903. The action comes before the Court on cross-m...
Views: 1
Page 17694
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [6] and the Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel [7]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that Plaintiff’s motion should be
*995
denied and Defendants’ motion to dismiss should be granted.
BACKGROUND
...
Views: 0
ORDER
This case is presently before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Motion to File Excess Pages [44-1],
1
the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [45-1], and the Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [46-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment sho...
Views: 1
Page 17696
ORDER
Magistrate Judge Jelderks filed his Findings and Recommendation on October 8, 1992. The matter is now before me.
See
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R.Civ.P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. This relieves me of my obligation to give the factual findings
de novo
review.
Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd.,
700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir.1983);...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OUT-OF-TIME APPEAL This matter is presently before the Court on the Motion of Robert Libby for leave to file a late Notice of Appeal to appeal the sentence imposed upon him by this Court following entry of his plea of guilty to receipt of stolen firearms. Libby was sentenced on February 26, 1992 to 27 months incarceration to be followe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff Rolland Richard Mousseaux, a/k/a Rolland Richard Driver (Mousseaux) filed a complaint on February 6, 1991, against the named defendants. His complaint indicates numerous statutory and civil rights violations stemming from two criminal prosecutions, one by the federal government and one by the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, both of which were based on an a...
Views: 2
ORDER Plaintiff seeks judicial review of the Health and Human Services Secretary’s decision which denied her benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3) this court may review a final decision by the Secretary. I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Claimant applied for Supplemental Security Income benefits April 10, 1986. This applicatio...
Views: 0
Page 17703
ORDER This case is presently before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for a Court Order [22-1], the Defendants’ Motion for a Protective Order [23-1], the Plaintiffs Motion for a Free Transcript [24-1], the Plaintiffs Motion for a Court Order [26-1], the Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [29-1], the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [32-1], the Defendants’ Alternative Motion for Summary J...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant in the above-captioned action moves for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. For the reasons that follow, that motion is granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Gerard G. Betz, was employed by defendant, The Legal Aid Society (the “Society”), since on or about-June 1953, see Pre-Trial Order ¶ 2, and was terminated from his employment on December 16, 1988. Id....
Views: 0
ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the Motions of the Petitioners Fox Painting Co. and Fox Painting and Decorating, Inc. (“Fox”), to Stay Proceedings and Set Aside Registration. The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has responded. The case is an unfair labor practice case involving a “pre-hire” agreement between a construction industry employer and a painters union. The action began...
Views: 0
ORDER RE:
RENEWED MOTION OF RAYMOND B. CURRIE AND MARY J. CURRIE TO MODIFY ORDER OF ATTACHMENT AND RELEASE ESCROW FUNDS (DOCKET ENTRY #203) and MOTION OF RAYMOND B. CURRIE AND' MARY J. CURRIE TO STRIKE THE SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVITS OF DIANE L. AZARIAN AND TIMOTHY E. MCCARTHY (DOCKET ENTRY # 209)
On February 12,1992,142 F.R.D. 16, this court issued an Order denying defendant Raymond B. Currie (“defe...
Views: 0
*938
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Cornelius Singleton’s petition for a writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Alabama Supreme Court has set November 20, 1992 (less than two days from today) as the execution date for Petitioner, who seeks collateral relief for the sixth time overall, and for the second time in this Court,
1
...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendant Michael Sessa was convicted, pursuant to an eight-count indictment, of racketeering, racketeering conspiracy, murder, murder conspiracies and loansharking conspiracies. The testimony of Joseph Am-brosino, a coconspirator who pled guilty, comprised a major portion of the government’s proof. Defendant sought to call as a witness the psychologist who examined A...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In the above-referenced action, the United States (“appellant”) appeals, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a), from a final order of the Honorable Cecelia H. Goetz, United States Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of New York, 132 B.R. 239, which denied priority status to two claims of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) as being untimely filed. For the reasons that follow...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of third-party defendant United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (USF & G) to dismiss, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the complaint of defendant/third-party plaintiff Newton County, Mississippi. Newton County has responded to the motion and the court has considered the memoranda of auth...
Views: 0
OPINION
Presently before the court are motions brought by defendants Bank Hapoalim and David Barr to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and to grant partial summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the court holds that an assertion of jurisdiction over these two defendants would be inconsistent with constitutional due process. Because of this holding, the co...
Views: 2
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiffs M. Mark Mendel, Esquire (“Mendel”), Daniel E. Murray, Esquire (“Murray”), and M. Mark Mendel, Ltd. (“Mendel Ltd.”) (collectively “the insureds”), have instituted this diversity action against their professional liability insurance carrier, The Home Insurance Company (“Home”). The insureds seek to compel Home to pay on their behalf a judgment of $1,690,670 which was j...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Angela R. Lucher (“Lucher”) seeks compensatory and punitive damages for injuries she suffered in an accident on March 19, 1989 when she was a passenger in an automobile driven by the defendant (“Hil-denbrandt”). Lucher instituted an action against Hildenbrandt in the Circuit Court of Virginia Beach on September 29, 1989, but shortly before the trial date of August 20, 1991, sh...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Joseph Mallon, who purports to be God and the President of the United States (“Mallon”), has filed fourteen lawsuits in this Court, eleven of which are still pending. In all cases, Mallon has sought to proceed in forma pauperis. The cases were transferred to my docket by Order of Chief Judge Louis C. Bechtle dated October 23, 1992. Among the individuals and entities n...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Presently before the Court are defendants Powermatic Division of DeVlieg-Bullard, Inc. (correctly styled) (“Powermatic”), Houdaille Industries, Inc. (“Houdaille”), John Crane, Inc. (“John Crane”) and T.I. United States Limited’s (“T.I.”) Motion for Reconsideration of this Court’s Order dated September 19, 1992, or for Immediate Certification for Appeal under 28 U.S.C. *440...
Views: 0
807 F.Supp. 85 (1992)
MARK TWAIN KANSAS CITY BANK, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 4:92CV00122 GFG.
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
November 18, 1992.
Charles A. Seigel, III, Partner, Gallop and Johnson, Jay L. Levitch, Partner, Charles A. Seigel, Sr., Managing Partner, Stolar Partnership, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Theodore H. Hel...
Views: 0
Page 17734
ORDER
Plaintiffs, G & H Soybean Oil, Inc. (“G & H”), and Marc Heiden, brought this action for damages against Defendant seeking to recover for breach of contract. Defendant has moved for partial summary judgment, and Plaintiffs have resisted the motion. Oral argument was heard by the court August 6, 1992.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff G & H Soybean Oil, Inc., (“G & H”) was formed Apri...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1511 (1992)
Jackie HAYMONS, Karen Holcroft, Frank King, Peter Morden, Rand Robinette, and Yolanda Alston, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
Robert WILLIAMS, as Secretary of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, State of Florida, Defendant.
No. 91-503-Civ-J-10.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division.
...
Views: 1
ORDER Facts Appellant was convicted for embezzling union funds. She appealed claiming the magistrate committed error in making the findings he used to compute her sentence. On October 15, 1992, this court affirmed Appellant’s sentence. She now moves to be released from prison on bail pending her appeal to the Fifth Circuit. *627Discussion Both parties agree that this motion hinges on whether Ms. R...
Views: 0
ORDER Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss, which the court converted to a motion for summary judgment by order of July 29, 1992. After careful consideration of the arguments of counsel, the relevant case law, and the record as a whole, the court issues the following order. FACTS Plaintiff is a dependant of a member of the United States Air Force and is entitled to medical trea...
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on defendant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company’s (“DuPont”) motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Marilyn Hegna’s (“Heg-na”) negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty and misrepresentation claims. Based on a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, DuPont’s motion for summary judgment will be granted in part and denied in part.
...
Views: 2
795 F. Supp. 991 (1992)
ANIMAL LOVERS VOLUNTEER ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Richard CHENEY, et al., Defendants.
No. CV 86-4992-RJK.
United States District Court, C.D. California.
February 10, 1992.
Wm. Marshall Morgan, Anthony F. Latiolait, M. Jill Morris, Morgan, Wenzel & *992 McNicholas, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiffs.
Lourdes G. Baird, U.S. Atty., Leon W. Weidman, Asst. U....
Views: 0
ORDER
This matter is before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on their copyright infringement claim. Based on the file, record and proceedings herein, the court grants the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.
BACKGROUND
The plaintiffs are copyright owners of various musical compositions. Defendant Roger Christenson owns, operates and manages Edwardo’s ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Time Warner Inc., Time Inc. Magazine Co., and Richard Behar (collectively “Time”) move this Court for an Order pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dismissing this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the following reasons, the motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Church of Scientolo...
Views: 7
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Gene A. Breaux, plaintiff, filed suit in Jefferson County, Texas District Court, against defendants Pipefitters Local Union 195 (Local 195) and Plumbers and Pipefit-ters National Pension Fund (National Pension Fund) to recover pension benefits and for breach of fiduciary duty. The defendants removed the case to federal district court under Section 502(e)(1) of the Employe...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of third-party defendant Roadway Express, Inc. (Roadway) for summary judgment as to the third-party complaint of defendant/third-party plaintiff Ludlow Corporation (Ludlow). Ludlow has responded to the motion and the court has considered the memoranda of authorities submitted by the parties in ruling on the motion. Having f...
Views: 0
ORDER
On October 21,1992, plaintiff moved pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65 and 15 U.S.C.
*499
§ 1116 for a preliminary injunction barring defendants’ use of plaintiffs registered service mark, “Dine Around,” in any print or electronic promotion or advertising. Plaintiff also requests that defendants be enjoined from entering into any further joint ventures to use the mark. On Octo...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs are nonunion employees of the City of Columbus, Ohio. Defendants are the City of Columbus, the Mayor of Columbus, sued in his official capacity, and Locals 1632 and 2191 of Ohio Council 8, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). The City has recognized Locals 1632 and 2191 as the sole and exclusive representatives of p...
Views: 1
Page 17782
MEMORANDUM OPINION The United States, plaintiff, brings suit against Hardin County, Texas, defendant, to recover overpayments made to Contemporary Health Management of Hardin County, Inc., (d/b/a Hardin Memorial Hospital and Hardin Medical Center), defendant, under the Social Security Act (Medicare), 42 U.S.C. § 1395 et seq. The United States and Hardin County move for summary judgment. Har...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM Defendant was convicted by a jury of bank robbery and armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d). Prior to trial, which commenced on November 17, 1992, defendant moved to suppress the lineup identification testimony of Jeffrey Scott, a teller at the 1229 Connecticut Avenue branch of the Independence Federal Savings Bank, which defendant robbed on May 6 and May 26, ...
Views: 0
ORDER
Sitting by Designation.
This matter is before the court on this court’s order of July 5, 1991, directing defendant to appear before the court to show cause why it should not be held in contempt. The court held a hearing in this matter on September 17, 1991, and a supplemental hearing on November 1, 1991. Appearing for plaintiff were James C. Nemmers, Esq. (at the September 17, ...
Views: 0
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Louisiana confirmed a modified version of the Chapter 13 plan proposed by Marcille and Luther Davis (the debtors). The plan bifurcated a mortgage lien claim on the debtors’ principal residence into secured and unsecured
*17
claims, and the bankruptcy court found that the secured portion of the bifurcated claim held by t...
Views: 0
795 F. Supp. 1001 (1992)
The GF COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
PAN OCEAN SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD., Defendant.
No. CV 90-6952 RG(JRx).
United States District Court, C.D. California.
June 4, 1992.
Reconsideration Denied September 17, 1992.
Dennis J. Seider, Seider & Cohan, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff.
David E.R. Woolley of William, Woolley, Cogswell, Nakazawa & Russell, Los Angeles, Cal., for de...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff corporation, Cook’s Ambulance Service, Inc. (“Cook”), is suing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a constitutional deprivation of due process.1 Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), defendants Lowndes County Board of Supervisors (“Board”), et alia move this court to dismiss the § 1983 complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Included with defendant Board’s motion...
Views: 0
ORDER In a Report and Recommendation filed September 23, 1992, Magistrate Judge Gru-*32bin recommended that I dismiss this petition. In conformity with Small v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir.1989), the Magistrate Judge’s Report explicitly cautioned that failure to file timely objections could constitute a waiver of those objections. No objections have been receive...
Views: 0
ORDER
Defendants in this cause of action seek dismissal pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) of plaintiffs’ cause of action for punitive damages. The issue here is one of pure law: Are punitive damages available in an action for maintenance and cure? As will be explained below, this Court concludes that they are.
A Rule 12(b)(6) motion requires the Court to read the complaint in the lig...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT PIPER’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING DEFENDANT PIPER’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Plaintiff American Steamship Company filed its complaint for declaratory judgment April 26, 1991. Defendant Seafarers Welfare Plan answered June 4, 1991; and defendant Piper answered July 15, 1991. Defendant Piper filed a motion for summary judgm...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the motion of plaintiffs to dissolve the three-judge court previously convened in this
*409
Voting Rights Act case at the request of plaintiffs, and to remand case to managing district judge for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses. Plaintiffs have also moved for an award of attorneys' fees and litigation expen...
Views: 1
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Kenneth Desmond’s motion to dismiss for lack of diversity pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The suit arises from an incident in a Newport bar in which plaintiff, Mark C. Murphy, claims he was wrongfully assaulted by the bar’s doorman, Kenneth Desmond. Murphy brought suit against both the bar...
Views: 0
Page 17808
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
I.BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs San Diego National Bank, SDNB Financial Corp., and Director Charles I. Feurzeig (collectively “SDNB”) are named defendants in a case in this court,
1
and a parallel state action.
2
In those actions, SDNB allegedly aided and abetted Pioneer Mortgage Company in a securities fraud-related scheme (...
Views: 0
ORDER RE: MOTION OF RAYMOND B. CURRIE AND MARY J. CURRIE TO RECONSIDER AND/OR MODIFY ORDER APPROVING REAL ESTATE ATTACHMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 103); and DEFENDANT RAYMOND B. CURRIE AND MARY J. CURRIE’S SECOND MOTION TO MODIFY ORDER OF ATTACHMENT AND TO RELEASE ESCROW FUNDS AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED ORAL ARGUMENT AND AN EXPEDITED HEARING (DOCKET ENTRY # 158)
Pending before this court are defendant Ra...
Views: 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Court, having reviewed all materials submitted in support of and in opposition to Plaintiff Volker K. Meinhold’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: *1454 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In April of 1980, at age seventeen, Meinhold enlisted in the Navy and began an exemplary naval career. Du...
Views: 0
806 F.Supp. 845 (1992)
M.L., et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
CIVIL AIR PATROL, et al., Defendants.
No. 91-2524-C (5).
United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D.
November 20, 1992.
Mary E. Coffey, John J. Frank Partnership, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.
Brian R. Plegge, Partner, Moser and Marsalek, Russell F. Watters, Brown and James, St. Louis, Mo., Robert W. Cockerham, Ballwin, Mo., for defendan...
Views: 0
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendant Roney & Co.’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiffs’, Anthony and Sharon Brunetti’s, complaint. Plaintiffs have neither responded to Roney & Co.’s motion nor have plaintiffs contacted the Court with regard to this motion. Pursuant to E.D.Mich. LR 7.1(e)(2), the Court ORDERS that Roney & Co.’s 12(b)(6) m...
Views: 0
ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT CITY OF DETROIT’S FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ORDER OF DISCOVERY On October 19, 1992, plaintiff filed this motion for sanctions against defendant City of Detroit for defendant’s failure to comply with this court’s order granting discovery. On October 26, 1992, defendant City of Detroit filed a response to ...
Views: 0
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING SALLIE AGEE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING GENEVA SPENCER’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant Sallie Agee filed her motion for summary judgment June 26, 1992. Geneva Spencer1 filed a “reply” to Sallie Agee’s motion June 29, 1992. Additionally, Spencer filed a motion for summary judgment June 26, 1992. Sallie Agee filed an untimely “reply” to Spencer's moti...
Views: 0
Page 17825
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
The history of this action reflects the evolving status of the law of statutes of limitations in securities cases. Hopefully this is the last time that I will have to address it at le