THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. Docket No. 08-E-0294
|
|
- Morgan Wiggins
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE GRAFTON, SS. SUPERIOR COURT Docket No. 08-E-0294 B.V. BROOKS, KENNETH F. CLARK, JR., MARISA DEANGELIS KANE, JOHN H. PLUNKETT, DOUGLAS R. RAICHLE, ROBERT G. REED III, AND JOHN STEEL III, Petitioners TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE, v. Respondent MEMORANDUM OF RESPONDENT TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Bruce W. Felmly McLANE, GRAF, RAULERSON & MIDDLETON City Hall Plaza 900 Elm Street P.O. Box 326 Manchester, New Hampshire (603) RichardC. Pepperman, II SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 125 Broad Street New York, New York (212) Attorneys for Respondent Dartmouth College Trustees of January 27,2010
2 Petitioners seek reconsideration of the Court's January 8, 2010 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment (the "Order") on two grounds. First, they argue that the Court erred in finding that res judicata bars their lawsuit, and second, they assert that the Court incorrectly found that they were not intended third-party beneficiaries of the alleged 1891 Agreement. Both arguments are without merit. I. The Court Correctly Applied Res Judicata to Bar Petitioners' Claims. The Court correctly found that all three elements of res judicata are satisfied in this case. In their motion for reconsideration, petitioners challenge only the Court's holding that the stipulated dismissal with prejudice of the Prior Lawsuit was a final judgment on the merits, contending that the Court improperly refused, based on the Bricker doctrine, "to look behind the stipulation." (Motion at 7.) As the Court correctly recognized, under Bricker v. New Hampshire Medical Society, 110 N.H. 469, 470 (1970), "[j]udicial interference in the internal affairs of an association is strictly limited and will not be undertaken in the absence of a showing of injustice or illegal action and resulting damage to the complaining member." Petitioners argue that Bricker "was never meant to extend to actions taken by an association which materially and adversely affect the legal rights of the association's members vis-a-vis outside parties." (Motion at 8 (emphasis in original).) This argument fails under controlling Supreme Court precedent. In Brzica v. Trustees. of Dartmouth College, 147 N.H. 443, 456 (2002), seven Dartmouth alumni sued the College seeking almost the identical relief sought in this case: an order "'enjoin[ing] the Trustees from breaching their obligations under the 1891 Agreement." The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the case under Bricker, holding that "[t]he relief requested... would necessarily interfere with the internal affairs of the association." Jd.
3 The Supreme Court thus has already held that Bricker applies to actions taken by the College that potentially affect the alleged "legal rights" of Dartmouth alumni under the 1891 Agreement.' Petitioners do not seriously challenge the Court's holding under Bricker that the undisputed facts here "do not show injustice or illegality." (Order at 7.) They instead resort to name calling, referring to "the Association's malodorous stipulation for dismissal" (Motion at 10) and arguing that the Association Executive Committee entered into the stipulation "with the connivance of the College" (id. at 9). The undisputed facts do not support petitioners' rhetoric. As the Court correctly found, "[v ]iewed in the light most favorable to the petitioners," the facts and allegations show that the Executive Committee "openly campaign[ ed] against the litigation" and, "[0 ]nce elected,... took measures to terminate the litigation," including "working with counsel, the respondent, and the respondent's counsel to draft the stipulation." (Order at 7.) Such actions are commonplace, not nefarious, and petitioners identify no additional facts in their motion. Petitioners also suggest that the Court should ignore Bricker in view of the Supreme Court's recent decision in In re Zachary G., 159 N.H. 146 (2009). According to petitioners, the Supreme Court declined to apply res judicata in that case "'because of the potential adverse impact... on the... interests of persons not themselves parties in the initial action.'" (Motion at 9 (quoting Zachary, 159 N.H. at 152).) Petitioners' reliance on Zachary is misplaced. In that case, the Supreme Court declined to accord preclusive effect to an earlier factual finding that two 1 Without citing any authority, petitioners assert that the College lacks standing to assert a "defense" under Bricker (Motion at 8), an argument they also raised in opposing the College's motion to dismiss. The Supreme Court rejected this argument in Brzica as well, holding that Bricker applies even if relief is sought only against the College where that relief "would necessarily interfere with the internal affairs of the association." 147 N.H. at 456. The relief requested here-for example, a ruling that the Association's duly elected Executive Committee lacked the authority to dismiss the Prior Lawsuit with prejudice-clearly would interfere in the Association's internal affairs
4 children from an abusive home could be safely returned to the home when, by the time a later proceeding took place, there had been "new incidents of abuse and neglect." Zachary, 159 N.H. at 152. "Given the overriding need to ensure that the children's best interests are properly protected" and the statutory standards applicable to proceedings for the termination of parental rights, the Supreme Court held that "collateral estoppel is no bar to reconsidering evidence from an earlier action if there exist subsequent and recent incidents of abuse and neglect substantially similar to those in the earlier, closed action." Id. The facts here are clearly distinguishable. In sum, the Court correctly found that res judicata applies in this case. That doctrine bars all of petitioners' causes of action, which are the "same" causes of action previously asserted by the Association. As the Court correctly recognized, "[i]n New Hampshire, cause of action is construed broadly." (Order at 6.) The Supreme Court has held that New Hampshire defines "cause of action collectively to refer to all theories on which relief could be claimed on the basis of the factual transaction in question." Eastern Marine Const. Corp. v. First Southern Leasing, Ltd., 129 N.H. 270, 275 (1987). Here, as the Court correctly held, "all of the legal issues now raised either were raised or could have been raised in the prior suit." (Order at 6.) Thus, all of petitioners' claims related to Dartmouth alumni's supposed right to parity and the alleged breach of the 1891 Agreement-petitioners' entire complaint-are barred by res judicata. The Supreme Court's remarks in Brzica are directly on point: The factual transaction in question is the modification to the alumni trustee election procedure that occurred in As such, the parties are now barred from bringing an action that attempts to make the same challenge, dressed up in whatever new cloth the [plaintiffs] choose to weave. The change in label is simply not sufficient to reopen the question for adjudication today. 147 N.H. at 455 (citation omitted, alteration in original). Petitioners here cannot escape res judicata simply by asserting new legal theories or arguing that they are suing both as members of - 3 -
5 the Association and as intended third-party beneficiaries. In either capacity, their suit is based on the same "factual transaction" at issue in the Prior Lawsuit and thus is barred by res judicata. II. The Court Correctly Found That Petitioners Are Not Intended Third-Party Beneficiaries. Although it was not necessary for the Court to reach the issue of standing given its ruling on res judicata, the Court also correctly held that petitioners are not intended third-party beneficiaries of the alleged 1891 Agreement for multiple, independent reasons. (Order at 8-11.) As an initial matter, the Court noted that "petitioners' claim that they are intended third-party beneficiaries is belied by their admission that the members of the Association could vote to empower the executive committee to end the alleged parity agreement." (Id. at 9.) Wholly apart from that admission, however, the Court held that "the undisputed facts do not support the petitioners' claim that they are intended third-party beneficiaries." (Id. at 11.) As the Court explained, "[t]he 1891 Agreement conferred a benefit on alumni, not each alumnus. In order to effectuate the purpose of the 1891 Agreement-giving alumni a greater role in management of Dartmouth College-it is not necessary or appropriate to recognize a right of performance in each individual alumnus." (Order at 10.) Indeed, the Court concluded, "[t]he 1891 Agreement would be entirely unworkable if it were interpreted to confer such a benefit and if such a right of performance were recognized." (Id.) In so ruling, the Court rejected petitioners' contention that all Dartmouth alumni are intended third-party beneficiaries simply because the alleged 1891 Agreement "benefits them." (Id.) Finally, the Court determined that if it were "to recognize the petitioners as intended third-party beneficiaries, it would embroil the judiciary in the internal governance of the Association," contrary to the Bricker doctrine. (Id. at 11.) Petitioners spend much of their motion for reconsideration arguing that the Court erred in relying upon their "admission," strenuously denying that they made such an admission in their opposition to the College's motion to dismiss. (Motion at 2-5.) In so doing, however, petitioners - 4 -
6 say very little, if anything, about the other independent reasons why the Court rejected their allegation that each Dartmouth alumnus is an intended third-party beneficiary of the 1891 Agreement, and thus provide no basis for the Court to reconsider its ruling. Moreover, by focusing exclusively on the statements in their brief in opposition to the College's motion, petitioners ignore their counsel's clear statement at oral argument that the College should ask Dartmouth alumni to vote whether they want to end parity, thus conceding that a majority of alumni could vote to end parity without infringing on the rights of any individual alumnus. As this Court recognized, however, neither a majority of Dartmouth alumni nor the Association Executive Committee could vote to modify or repeal the alleged 1891 Agreement if petitioners are correct that each individual alumnus is an intended third-party beneficiary and has taken any action in reliance upon the 1891 Agreement. See Restatement (Second) of Contracts 311. Lastly, petitioners assert that "the Court's ruling arises out of a misunderstanding of the Plaintiffs' claims." (Motion at 5.) According to petitioners, "[t]he right of performance at issue in this case is not the right of the Plaintiffs to individually choose Board members; it is the right of the Plaintiffs to insist that the College perform the 1891 Agreement-which, in turn, means the right to insist that the College afford them and other alumni an opportunity to participate in a process by which they may all choose half of the Board." (ld. at 6 (emphasis in original).) There was no "misunderstanding" by the Court. As the Court's Order makes clear, the Court correctly understood that petitioners argued that each individual Dartmouth alumnus has the right to enforce the 1891 Agreement. The Court concluded that the undisputed facts do not support this argument and that "[t]he 1891 Agreement would be entirely unworkable... if such a right of performance were recognized." (Id. at 10.) In fact, the Court found that "[b]y recognizing a right of performance in the petitioners, the Court would interfere with the Association's internal - 5 -
7 affairs." (Id. at 11.) Petitioners point to no new facts or law that would provide a basis for the Court to reconsider that ruling. Dated: January 27,2010 Respectfully submitted, Richard C. Pepperman, II SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 125 Broad Street New York, New York (212) ~~ Bruce w. cl111iy,barno: 787 McLANE, GRAF, RAULERSON & MIDDLETON City Hall Plaza, 900 Elm Street Manchester, New Hampshire (603) Attorneys for Respondent Dartmouth College Trustees of - 6-
8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing and any attachments were served by hand and electronic mail on Eugene M. Van Loan III, Wadleigh, Starr & Peters, PLLC, 95 Market Street, Manchester, NH 03101, on January 27,2010. Brucew~C=~
B.V. BROOKS & a. TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE. Argued: February 10, 2011 Opinion Issued: April 12, 2011
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE HARRY A. SLEEPER. THE HOBAN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP & a. Argued: June 26, 2008 Opinion Issued: July 25, 2008
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION
[Cite as Price v. Carter Lumber Co., 2010-Ohio-4328.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) GERALD PRICE C.A. No. 24991 Appellant v. CARTER LUMBER CO.,
More informationPUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE D/B/A EVERSOURCE ENERGY
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE before the PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE D/B/A EVERSOURCE ENERGY Petition for Approval of Lease Agreement Between Public Service Company
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT. In Case No , Appeal of Town of Goshen, the court on August 19, 2015, issued the following order:
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2014-0656, Appeal of Town of Goshen, the court on August 19, 2015, issued the following order: Having considered the parties briefs and oral arguments
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) SCHEDULING ORDER. Pharmaceuticals Stockholders Litigation, Consol. C.A. No.
EFiled: Oct 20 2015 11:35AM EDT Transaction ID 58039964 Case No. 10553-VCN IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE NPS PHARMACEUTICALS STOCKHOLDERS LITIGATION ) ) CONSOLIDATED C.A. No.
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE MAHINDRA & MAHINDRA, LTD. HOLLOWAY MOTOR CARS OF MANCHESTER, LLC & a.
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationCase 1:12-cv VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x
Case 112-cv-01203-VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11 CITY OF AUSTIN POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT. No Michael R. Smith
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT No. 2009-0530 Michael R. Smith v. Frisbie Memorial Hospital, Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Carol A. Themelis, Brenda Niland, Dawna Enman, and Dale
More informationJEFFREY M. GRAY. TERI E. KELLY & a. Submitted: September 8, 2010 Opinion Issued: November 24, 2010
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationNOTICE OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff, Martha J. Toy, by her attorney, William B.
Case 1:05-cv-00760-JJF 2:05-cv-01814-BMS Document 31-4 3-1 Filed 04/28/2005 11/01/2005 Page 1 of 10 LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM B. HILDEBRAND L.L.C. By: William B. Hildebrand 1040 North Kings Highway Suite
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2017-0412, Louis F. Clarizio v. R. David DePuy, Esq. & a., the court on October 12, 2018, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs and
More informationMENDEZ v. USA Doc. 12 RI AL. No C. (Filed: September 20, 2016) (NOT TO BE PUBLISHED) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
MENDEZ v. USA Doc. 12 RI AL 3Jn tbe Wniteb セエ エ ウ @ (!Court of jf eberal (!Claims No. 16-441C (Filed: September 20, 2016 (NOT TO BE PUBLISHED ********************************** LAWRENCE MENDEZ, JR., Plaintiff,
More informationWater Rights: Is the Quechan Tribe Barred from Seeking a Determination of Reservation Boundaries in Indian Country
University of Tulsa College of Law TU Law Digital Commons Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works 1996 Water Rights: Is the Quechan Tribe Barred from Seeking a Determination
More information2013 PA Super 240. Appeal from the Order entered August 13, 2012, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Civil Division, at No(s): 03691
2013 PA Super 240 BUYFIGURE.COM, INC., Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. AUTOTRADER.COM, INC., R.M. HOLLENSHEAD AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC., AND ROBERT M. HOLLENSHEAD, Appellees No. 2813
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON July 19, 2011 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON July 19, 2011 Session JOHN D. GLASS v. SUNTRUST BANK, Trustee of the Ann Haskins Whitson Glass Trust; SUNTRUST BANK, Executor of the Estate of Ann Haskins
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D, this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More informationCase KRH Doc 628 Filed 10/08/15 Entered 10/08/15 13:37:03 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10
Document Page 1 of 10 JONES DAY North Point 901 Lakeside Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Telephone: (216) 586-3939 Facsimile: (216) 579-0212 David G. Heiman (admitted pro hac vice) Carl E. Black (admitted
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2015
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/2015 09:00 PM INDEX NO. 651992/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY -----------------------------------------------------------------------X
More informationPresent: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, Mims, and Powell, JJ., and Koontz, S.J.
Present: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, Mims, and Powell, JJ., and Koontz, S.J. SYNCHRONIZED CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC. OPINION BY JUSTICE LEROY F. MILLETTE, JR. v. Record No. 131569 October
More informationCase 1:06-cv JR Document 19 Filed 10/01/2007 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:06-cv-02249-JR Document 19 Filed 10/01/2007 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THE OSAGE TRIBE OF INDIANS ) OF OKLAHOMA v. ) Civil Action No. 04-0283 (JR) KEMPTHORNE,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv WS-M.
Case: 14-13314 Date Filed: 02/09/2015 Page: 1 of 15 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 14-13314 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00268-WS-M
More informationThis case comes before the Court on Defendant Nancy Dutton's Motion. for Summary Judgment, Defendant Van Meer and Belanger, PA and Kelly
)'...-,,* %.....!.", > #.-, STATE OF MAINE,..' '
More informationCase: HJB Doc #: 3116 Filed: 02/16/16 Desc: Main Document Page 1 of 4
Case 4-96-HJB Doc # 36 Filed 02/6/6 Desc Main Document Page of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE -----------------------------------------------------------------------x
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 DAVID MILLER Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA ANTHONY PUCCIO AND JOSEPHINE PUCCIO, HIS WIFE, ANGELINE J. PUCCIO, NRT PITTSBURGH,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 Please note: This sample document is redacted from an actual research and writing project we did for a customer some time ago. It reflects the law as of the date we completed it. Because
More informationCase 1:15-cv NBF Document 16 Filed 10/26/15 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
Case 1:15-cv-00342-NBF Document 16 Filed 10/26/15 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS THE INTER-TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant. No. 15-342L
More informationCase: 2:13-cv CMV Doc #: 92 Filed: 11/14/18 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 812 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 2:13-cv-00767-CMV Doc #: 92 Filed: 11/14/18 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 812 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION MICHAEL R. PETERS, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 2:13-cv-767
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD R. LEMIEUX AND JOANNE LEMIEUX. Argued: May 21, 2008 Opinion Issued: June 13, 2008
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) ) SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULING ORDER
EFiled: Mar 16 2015 04:00PM EDT Transaction ID 56925018 Case No. 8145-VCN EXHIBIT C IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE: FREEPORT-MCMORAN COPPER & GOLD INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION )
More informationNo. IN THE DONALD KARR, Petitioner, STATE OF INDIANA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari To the Indiana Supreme Court
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DONALD KARR, Petitioner, v. STATE OF INDIANA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari To the Indiana Supreme Court PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 16-1791 Twin City Pipe Trades Service Association, Inc., lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Wenner Quality Services, Inc., a Minnesota
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
NO. 15-307 In the Supreme Court of the United States MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., v. Petitioner, APOTEX INC., Respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
More informationCARL E. BAYLIS. Order (public reprimand) entered by the Board December 30, BOARD MEMORANDUM 1
Public Reprimand No. 2003-19 CARL E. BAYLIS Order (public reprimand) entered by the Board December 30, 2003. BOARD MEMORANDUM 1 The respondent, Carl E. Baylis, was admitted to the bar in 1968. A year later
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 17 March 2015
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA14-810 Filed: 17 March 2015 MACON BANK, INC., Plaintiff, Macon County v. No. 13 CVS 456 STEPHEN P. GLEANER, MARTHA K. GLEANER, and WILLIAM A. PATTERSON,
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION PATRICK J. LYNCH AND : DIANE R. LYNCH, : Plaintiffs : : v. : No. 11-0143 : U.S. BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE, : Defendant : Civil Law
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H. D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
]' STUART ROSENBERG Plaintiff 93723077 93723077 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO Case No: CV-l$fetffift) I U P 2: 0 I lllll it CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES INC ET
More informationCase 1:15-cv MAK Document 44 Filed 10/10/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 366 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:15-cv-01059-MAK Document 44 Filed 10/10/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 366 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : No. 15-1059
More informationCase 4:13-cv YGR Document 126 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-ygr Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARK NATHANSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Plaintiffs,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Submitted:September 23, 2013 Decided: December 8, 2014)
--cv (L) 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Submitted:September, 0 Decided: December, 0) Docket Nos. --cv, --cv -----------------------------------------------------------X
More informationrdd Doc 381 Filed 09/01/17 Entered 09/01/17 17:18:41 Main Document Pg 1 of 27
Pg 1 of 27 Christopher Marcus, P.C. James H.M. Sprayregen, P.C. John T. Weber William A. Guerrieri (admitted pro hac vice) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Alexandra Schwarzman (admitted pro hac vice) KIRKLAND & ELLIS
More informationCase 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :-cv-000-jcc Document Filed // Page of THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 KIM BAROVIC, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN A. BALLMER, Defendant.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2005-1, by Trustee DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, UNPUBLISHED October 16, 2014 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 316181
More informationCase 1:09-cv RB-RHS Document 139 Filed 11/01/13 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:09-cv-01146-RB-RHS Document 139 Filed 11/01/13 Page 1 of 14 RICHARD STANFORTH, JR., and HELEN LUCERO, for themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
More informationJOEL M. HARRINGTON. METROPOLIS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC. & a. Submitted: June 9, 2011 Opinion Issued: September 22, 2011
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. BEDFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT & a. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE & a. Argued: April 17, 2018 Opinion Issued: August 17, 2018
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR REHEARING
E-Filed Document Feb 12 2018 10:06:26 2016-CA-00928-COA Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2016-TS-00928 CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. APPELLANT VS. ARTHUR E. WOOD, III, AND PAULA WOOD APPELLEES
More informationALR OGLETHORPE, LLC v. Henderson, Ga: Court of Appeals Google Scholar
Page 1 of 5 ALR OGLETHORPE, LLC, et al., v. HENDERSON, et al. A15A2336. Court of Appeals of Georgia, Fourth Division. March 23, 2016. BARNES, P. J., RAY and MCMILLIAN, JJ. BARNES, Presiding Judge. This
More informationAgreement to UOB Banker s Guarantee Terms and Conditions
Agreement to UOB Banker s Guarantee Terms and Conditions In consideration of United Overseas Bank Limited (the Bank ) agreeing at the Applicant s request to issue the Banker s Guarantee, the Applicant
More informationCase 1:12-cv JD Document 202 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPHIRE
Case 1:12-cv-00130-JD Document 202 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPHIRE Town of Wolfeboro, Plaintiff, Case No. 12-cv-130-JD v. Wright-Pierce Defendant.
More informationSETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT. THIS SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT ( Agreement ) is
SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT THIS SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT ( Agreement ) is made as of August 20, 2007 by and between MOST V AMERIKU (hereinafter MVA ) on the one hand and OLEG KAPANETS (hereinafter
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2016-0278, Robert McNamara v. New Hampshire Retirement System, the court on January 27, 2017, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 August Mecklenburg County. and
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CA-00742
E-Filed Document Jun 14 2017 15:21:03 2016-CA-00742-SCT Pages: 13 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2016-CA-00742 CYNDY HOWARTH, Individually, wife, wrongful death beneficiary, and as Executrix
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ROBERT GUNDERSON COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
[Cite as Green Tree Servicing L.L.C. v. Hoover, 2016-Ohio-1169.] COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC : JUDGES: : Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee
More informationCase 3:13-cv RCJ-VPC Document 38 Filed 07/23/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-00-rcj-vpc Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 0 FERRING B.V., vs. Plaintiff, ACTAVIS, INC. et al., Defendants. :-cv-00-rcj-wgc ORDER This patent infringement
More informationv. CASE NO.: CVA Lower Court Case No.: 2005-SC O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA STAR CAMCAM, Appellant, v. CASE NO.: CVA1 08-23 Lower Court Case No.: 2005-SC-11413-O ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR CERTIORARI
E-Filed Document Jun 1 2018 09:30:47 2016-CT-00928-SCT Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2016-TS-00928 CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. APPELLANT VS. ARTHUR E. WOOD, III, AND PAULA WOOD APPELLEES
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 14-1331 Michelle K. Ideker lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. PPG Industries, Inc.; PPG Industries Ohio, Inc.; Rohm & Haas lllllllllllllllllllll
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE PATRICK CANTWELL J & R PROPERTIES UNLIMITED, INC. Argued: April 3, 2007 Opinion Issued: May 30, 2007
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationRespondents. Petitioner the People of the State of New York, by Andrew. M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York (petitioner)
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: PART 17 -----------------------------------------X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by ANDREW M. CUOMO, Attorney General of the State of New
More informationUSCA No UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, SANTANA DRAPEAU, Appellant.
==================================================================== IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT USCA No. 14-3890 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. SANTANA DRAPEAU,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION THE PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE FUNDS, On Behalf of Itself and Others Similarly Situated, vs. Plaintiff, CFC INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES. Argued: October 15, 2014 Opinion Issued: April 30, 2015
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationCase 1:11-cv NLH -AMD Document 61 Filed 01/24/13 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 211 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:11-cv-00861-NLH -AMD Document 61 Filed 01/24/13 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 211 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff,
More informationCase 2:11-cv JTM-JCW Document 551 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:11-cv-00926-JTM-JCW Document 551 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LUTHER SCOTT, JR., and LOUISIANA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, Plaintiffs,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS BAYVIEW FINANCIAL TRADING GROUP LP, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 25, 2005 v No. 262158 Wayne Circuit Court JACK MAVIGLIA and ABN AMRO LC No. 04-416062-CH
More informationIN THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR SALT LAKE COUNTY STATE OF UTAH. Plaintiffs, Case No
Jared C. Fields (10115) Douglas P. Farr (13208) SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. 15 West South Temple, Suite 1200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Telephone: 801.257.1900 Facsimile: 801.257.1800 Email: jfields@swlaw.com
More informationCase 3:14-cv SI Document 240 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON
Case 3:14-cv-00367-SI Document 240 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON IN RE GALENA BIOPHARMA, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No. 3:14-cv-00367-SI FINAL ORDER
More informationMerchants Automotive Group, Inc. Alpine Limousine Service, Inc., et al. BMW of N. Am., LLC and BMW of Manhattan, Inc. No.
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Merchants Automotive Group, Inc. v. Alpine Limousine Service, Inc., et al. v. BMW of N. Am., LLC and BMW of Manhattan, Inc. No. 2015-CV-677 ORDER This case arises out of a
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage,
More informationIED LLC UNIFIED RECOVERY GROUP LLC AND J S LAWRENCE GREEN
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA 1416111 014Ii019F 11 VA FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2010 CA 1610 BLD SERVICES LLC AND McINNIS SERVICES LLC VERSUS IED LLC UNIFIED RECOVERY GROUP LLC AND J S LAWRENCE
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Glenmoore Builders, Inc. v. Smith Family Trust, 2008-Ohio-1379.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) GLENMOORE BUILDERS, INC. C. A. No. 23879
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN, EMERGENCY FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE LOAN BOARD and ATTORNEY GENERAL, FOR PUBLICATION March 14, 2013 9:00 a.m. Plaintiffs-Appellees, v No. 306975 Wayne Circuit
More informationCase 2:09-cv DPH-MJH Document 28 Filed 01/20/2010 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:09-cv-13505-DPH-MJH Document 28 Filed 01/20/2010 Page 1 of 14 IN RE: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION The Bankruptcy Court s Use of a Standardized Form
More informationMarch 22, Supreme Court. No Appeal. (PC ) John Broccoli : v. : Walter Manning. :
March 22, 2019 Supreme Court No. 2018-11-Appeal. (PC 16-3059) John Broccoli : v. : Walter Manning. : NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Rhode Island Reporter.
More informationCase cec Doc 326 Filed 10/30/14 Entered 10/31/14 10:01:10
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: SUFFOLK REGIONAL OFF-TRACK BETTING CORPORATION, Chapter 9 Case No. 12-43503-CEC Debtor. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Main Document Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE CHAPTER ELEVEN ADAMS COUNTY ASPHALT, CO., BANKRUPTCY NO. 1-03-bk-00722 DEBTOR ADAMS COUNTY
More informationNo IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NOTICE The text of this order may be changed or corrected prior t~ the time for filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. FIFTH DIVISION July 24, 2009 No. IN THE APPELLATE COURT
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37 RONALD LUTZ AND SUSAN LUTZ, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellants : : v. : : EDWARD G. WEAN, JR., KRISANN M. : WEAN AND SILVER VALLEY
More informationDOCI: DATE FILED: /%1Ot
Case 2:02-cv-01263-RMB-HBP Document 181 Fil 09/11/12 Page 1 of 11 DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERNDISTRICTOFNEWYORK = x DOCI: DATE FILED: /%1Ot INREACTRADEFINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES,LTD.SECURITIES
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. SHULAMIS ADELMAN, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of NORMAN G.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE March 23, 2017 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE March 23, 2017 Session 08/01/2017 JOHN O. THREADGILL V. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Knox County No. 189713-1 John F. Weaver,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. APPEAL OF THOMAS PHILLIPS (New Hampshire Compensation Appeals Board)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationCase 5:13-cv ATB Document 67 Filed 12/09/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 5:13-cv-00521-ATB Document 67 Filed 12/09/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JEFFREY SCHUYLER, individually and ) on behalf of all others similarly situated,
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE GRAFTON, SS. SUPERIOR COURT No. 07-E-289 Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College vs. Trustees of Dartmouth College ORDER ON THE MOTION TO DISMISS Before the Court is a Motion
More informationGreenberg v DeRosa 2019 NY Slip Op 30046(U) January 2, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases
Greenberg v DeRosa 2019 NY Slip Op 30046(U) January 2, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652424/2018 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PETITIONER S INITIAL BRIEF ON THE MERITS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ROBERT T. MOSHER, CASE NO.: SC00-1263 Lower Tribunal No.: 4D99-1067 Petitioner, v. STEPHEN J. ANDERSON, Respondent. / PETITIONER S INITIAL BRIEF ON THE MERITS John T. Mulhall
More information{*148} OPINION. FRANCHINI, Justice.
TEAM BANK V. MERIDIAN OIL INC., 1994-NMSC-083, 118 N.M. 147, 879 P.2d 779 (S. Ct. 1994) TEAM BANK, a corporation, as Trustee for the San Juan Basin Royalty Trust, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MERIDIAN OIL INC.,
More informationCourt of Appeals, State of Michigan ORDER
Court of Appeals, State of Michigan ORDER Roger Groman v Nolan's Auction Service LLC Docket No. 334895 Stephen L. Borrello Presiding Judge David H. Sawyer LC No. 15-048562-A V Kathleen Jansen Judges The
More informationDefendant moves the court for reconsideration of the court's Order on Defendant's Motion
IN I E R E D JUL 2 8 20~ STATE OF MAINE YORK, SS. CATHERINE F HAYWARD, TRUSTEE OF THE CATHERINE F. HAYWARD REVOCABLE TRUST OF 2012, Plaintiff, V. OCEAN HOUSE, INC., Defendants. SUPERIOR COURT CIVJL ACTION
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT No. 2012-0754 In re Estate of Jack M. Bergquist RULE 7 MANDATORY APPEAL OF 1 ST CIRCUIT PROBATE DIVISION LANCASTER FINAL DECISION BRIEF OF THE ESTATE/APPELLEE ESTATE
More information2012 PA Super 158. Appeal from the Order September 20, 2011 In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Orphans' Court at No(s):
2012 PA Super 158 ESTATE OF D. MASON WHITLEY, JR., DECEASED IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA APPEAL OF: BARBARA HULME, D. MASON WHITLEY III AND EUGENE J. WHITLEY No. 2798 EDA 2011 Appeal from the
More informationCase , Document 69, 08/04/2015, , Page1 of 23
Case 15-705, Document 69, 08/04/2015, 1568149, Page1 of 23 Case 15-705, Document 69, 08/04/2015, 1568149, Page2 of 23 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES......i JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT... 1 STATEMENT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION GREGORY HOOKER and wife ANN MARIE HOOKER, Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. 3-03-CV-2222-R COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOAN, INC., WASHINGTON
More informationNOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
Page 1 of 8 SEAN & SHENASSA 26, LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. No. D063003. Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division One. Filed October
More informationMotion to Correct Errors
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE XXXXXXXX DISTRICT OF XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX DIVISION Cause No.: 9:99-CV-123-ABC Firstname X. LASTNAME, In a petition for removal from the Circuit Petitioner (Xxxxxxx
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PENNSYLVANIA CHIROPRACTIC ) ASSOCIATION, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) No. 09 C 5619 ) BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS OAKLAND UNIVERSITY CHAPTER, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS, UNPUBLISHED February 9, 2012 Charging Party-Appellee, v No. 300680 MERC OAKLAND UNIVERSITY,
More information