IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )"

Transcription

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE CONNIE CURTS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, WAGGIN TRAIN, LLC and NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY, Defendants. Case No C Division No. 16 PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES FOR CLASS COUNSEL AND A CASE CONTRIBUTION AWARD FOR CONNIE CURTS Plaintiff Connie Curts, pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 52.08(e and in conjunction with her pending Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, hereby moves the Court for approval of attorneys fees and litigation expenses for class counsel and a case contribution award for herself. In support of this motion, Plaintiff states as follows: The combined efforts of Plaintiff and class counsel Shank & Hamilton, P.C. have resulted in a $586,000 settlement that will provide substantial reimbursement to Missouri consumers who allegedly have suffered economic harm from the purchase of misrepresented dog treats sold or distributed by Defendants Waggin Train, LLC and Nestle Purina PetCare Company. As is customary in class action litigation that results in a common fund for the benefit of the class, Plaintiff and class counsel seek the Court s approval of (1 class counsel s requested fee award of 40% of the settlement fund, in the amount of $234,400.00; (2 the reimbursement of litigation expenses to class counsel in the amount of $43,768.96; and (3 a case contribution award of $5,000 to Plaintiff Connie Curts. The justification for each of these awards is discussed in detail in Plaintiff s suggestions in support of this motion.

2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Connie Curts respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion for Approval of Attorneys Fees and Litigation Expenses for Class Counsel and a Case Contribution Award for Connie Curts and enter an order and judgment pursuant to Rule 52.08(e approving each of the requested awards for Plaintiff and class counsel. A proposed order and judgment will be submitted contemporaneously for the Court s consideration. Respectfully submitted, SHANK & HAMILTON, P.C. By: /s/ Christopher S. Shank. Christopher S. Shank, MO #28760 David L. Heinemann, MO #37622 Stephen J. Moore, MO # Grand Boulevard, Suite 1600 Kansas City, Missouri Telephone: Facsimile: chriss@shankhamilton.com davidh@shankhamilton.com sjm@shankhamilton.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Connie Curts 2

3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 26th day of May, 2014, the foregoing document was filed via the Court s efiling system, which shall send notice of such filing to the following counsel of record: Counsel for Defendants Robert M. Thompson Craig A. Hoover James T. Wicks E. Desmond Hogan Christopher C. Grenz Briana L. Black BRYAN CAVE LLP Miranda L. Berge One Kansas City Place HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 1200 Main Street, Suite Thirteenth Street, NW Kansas City, Missouri Washington, DC /s/ Christopher S. Shank Attorney for Plaintiff 3

4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE CONNIE CURTS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, WAGGIN TRAIN, LLC and NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY, Defendants. Case No C Division No. 16 SUGGESTIONS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES FOR CLASS COUNSEL AND A CASE CONTRIBUTION AWARD FOR CONNIE CURTS Plaintiff Connie Curts ( Plaintiff submits the following suggestions in support of her Motion for Approval of Attorneys Fees and Litigation Expenses for Class Counsel and a Case Contribution Award for Connie Curts, filed May 26, Introduction The prosecution of this class action has resulted in a $586,000 settlement benefiting thousands of Missouri consumers who allegedly suffered economic harm from their purchases of misrepresented dog treats (the Dog Treat Products. This lawsuit alleges that Defendants Waggin Train LLC and Nestle Purina PetCare Company made misrepresentations and material omissions in stating that their Dog Treat Products were wholesome, healthy, all natural, and what nature intended when they were in fact (Plaintiff alleged unwholesome, unnatural, and contaminated Chinese-made products. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants conduct violated the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act ( MMPA, Mo. Rev. Stat et seq. This motion seeks the Court s approval of attorneys fees and litigation expenses for class counsel, as well as approval of a case contribution award to Plaintiff for her service as the class representative.

5 Argument and Authorities Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 52.08(e requires Court approval for compromise of a class action. Here, the parties have agreed to a proposed settlement including a $586,000 cash fund that will allow the class members to receive substantial reimbursement for their purchase of the Dog Treat Products. With the exception of notice and claim administration costs that will be paid separately by Defendants, the proposed settlement creates an all-in cash fund from which attorneys fees, litigation expenses and a case contribution award will be paid if approved by the Court. For reasons discussed below, Plaintiff requests that the Court approve: (1 an award of $234,400 in attorneys fees for class counsel s work in this case; (2 an award of $43, in litigation expenses incurred by class counsel to prosecute this case; and (3 a case contribution award of $5,000 for Plaintiff in recognition of her efforts as the class representative. I. Class Counsel Should be Awarded Their Reasonable Attorneys Fees Courts generally recognize that counsel whose efforts create a common settlement fund are entitled to recover a reasonable attorneys fee from the fund. See Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert, 444 U.S. 472, 478 (1980 ( [T]his Court has recognized consistently that a litigant or a lawyer who recovers a common fund for the benefit of persons other than himself or his client is entitled to a reasonable attorney s fee from the fund as a whole. ; Gerken v. Sherman, 351 S.W.3d 1, 13 (Mo. Ct. App (quoting Lett v. City of St. Louis, 24 S.W.3d 157, 162 (Mo. Ct. App ( the common benefit doctrine permits recovery of attorney s fees when a successful litigant benefits a group of other individuals similarly situated ; 2 Joseph M. McLaughlin, McLaughlin on Class Actions 6:24 (11th ed ( public policy considerations of encouraging lawyers to represent classes favor the award of a reasonable attorney s fee in class actions that yield a benefit to class members. 2

6 The trial court is deemed an expert at fashioning an award of attorneys fees and may do so at its discretion. Berry v. Volkswagen Group of Am., Inc., 397 S.W.3d 425, 430 (Mo. banc 2013; see also Bachman v. A.G. Edwards, Inc., 344 S.W.3d 260, 267 (Mo. Ct. App As an expert on the subject of attorneys fees, and because a trial court has knowledge of the pertinent issues in a case, the trial court may set a fee award without the aid of evidence. Baker v. Dep t of Mental Health, 408 S.W.3d 228, 245 (Mo. Ct. App A trial court s award of attorney s fees is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, which requires an objecting party to show that the trial court s decision was against the logic of the circumstances and so arbitrary and unreasonable as to shock one s sense of justice. Berry, 397 S.W.3d at 431. To demonstrate an abuse of discretion, the complaining party must show the trial court s decision was against the logic of the circumstances and so arbitrary and unreasonable as to shock one s sense of justice. Bachman, 344 S.W.3d at 267 (quoting Russell v. Russell, 210 S.W.3d 191, 199 (Mo. banc In Bachman, the court held that the following factors were appropriately considered by the trial court in determining an attorneys fee award following a class action settlement: (1 the benefit conferred on the Class, (2 the complexity of the issues, (3 the duration of the case, (4 the risks to which Plaintiffs Counsel were exposed, (5 the experience, reputation, and skill of the attorneys involved, (6 awards in similar cases, (7 time and labor required, (8 lodestar cross-check, and (9 reaction of Class Members. Id. In this case, Plaintiff and Plaintiff s counsel request an attorneys fee award of 40% of the settlement fund, which amounts to $234, The requested fee award is supported by the Affidavit of Christopher S. Shank, attached hereto as EXHIBIT A. As discussed in the following sections, a fee award in this amount is reasonable under the circumstances and should be granted because each of the factors set forth in Bachman support the fee request. 3

7 A. The Settlement Confers a Substantial Benefit on the Class Class counsel s work in this case has secured a $586,000 cash settlement for the benefit of the class of Missouri consumers who allegedly suffered economic harm from their purchase of Defendants Dog Treat Products. As discussed in Plaintiff s settlement approval papers, this settlement fund provides a source of recovery for Missouri consumers that is in addition to other sources of recovery including Defendants ongoing voluntary refund program and a separate nationwide settlement negotiated through concurrent proceedings in federal court. Missouri courts have discretion to determine the methodology for approving the amount of attorneys fees in contingency cases, and may use a so-called percentage of fund method that awards counsel a percentage of the common settlement fund. Bachman, 344 S.W.3d at 267 (awarding a percentage of the common fund. In the past two decades the dominant method of awarding attorney s fees in Common Fund cases has shifted from the lodestar approach to the percentage-of-the-fund approach. Been v. O.K. Indus., Inc., No. CIV RAW, 2011 WL , at *4 (E.D. Okla. Aug. 16, Using the percentage of the fund method in this case has the advantage of making the award of attorneys fees to class counsel commensurate with the benefit conferred on the class. See Trombley v. Nat l City Bank, 826 F. Supp. 2d 179, 205 (D.D.C (percentage of fund method directly aligns the interests of the Class and its counsel for the efficient prosecution and early resolution of litigation, which clearly benefits both litigants and the judicial system. This factor favors the requested fee award because the settlement has produced a substantial class benefit and the fee award can reasonably be calculated as a percentage of the settlement fund. 4

8 B. This Case Involves Complex Legal and Factual Issues The factual, legal, and scientific issues in this case are extremely complex, ranging from highly disputed questions concerning the presence of contaminants, if any, in the Dog Treat Products, to the propriety of conducting the case as a class action, to the cause of reported injuries in Plaintiff s and absent class members pets, to Plaintiff s theory of damages. This complexity is borne out in the competing opinions of the parties experts, and also in the volume of motion papers filed in the case. Class counsel s successful navigation of these complex issues favors the requested fee award. C. This Case Has Been Litigated for More Than Two Years This lawsuit was filed in February 2013, and even before initiation of the litigation Class Counsel spent many months investigating the matter by combing through the extensive record of governmental and scientific publications regarding the Dog Treat Products. As discussed below, the litigation has been extensive and intense. The extended duration of the litigation supports the requested fee award. D. Class Counsel Were Exposed to Significant Risk in Prosecuting This Case on a Contingent Fee Basis Class counsel have represented Plaintiff and the class in this case on a purely contingent fee basis, which created significant risk that class counsel might not be compensated for the time and expense dedicated to the case. See In re The Mills Corp. Sec. Litig., 265 F.R.D. 246, 263 (E.D. Va It is widely recognized that this risk justifies a higher fee award. See Temp. Servs., Inc. v. Am. Int l Grp., Inc., No. 3:08-cv JFA, 2012 WL , at *9-10 (D.S.C. June 22, 2012 ( Courts across the country recognize that the risk of receiving no recovery is a major factor in awarding attorneys fees, and it is the primary aspect of a contingency fee case that supports a percentage fee recovery. ; Reyes v. Altamarea Grp., LLC, No. 10-CV

9 (RLE, 2011 WL , at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 16, 2011 ( [C]ontingency fees provide access to counsel for individuals who would otherwise have difficulty obtaining representation and transfer a significant portion of the risk of loss to the attorneys taking a case. Access to the courts would be difficult to achieve without compensating attorneys for that risk. (internal quotations and ellipses omitted. Class counsel have not been compensated for any time or expenses in connection with this litigation since their investigation and work on this case began more than two years ago. Given the numerous legal defenses and the skill with which the case was defended, the risk of non-payment was very real. Class counsel nonetheless assumed the risks associated with pursuing the case, zealously represented the class, and secured a substantial recovery for all class members. Under these circumstances, this factor weighs heavily in favor of the requested fee award. See Shaw v. Interthinx, Inc., No. 13-cv REB-NYW, 2015 WL , at *5 (D. Colo. Apr. 21, 2015 (finding that contingent fee arrangement weighed in favor of the requested fees because Class Counsel assumed significant risk of nonpayment when they agreed to represent Named Plaintiffs on a contingency fee basis. E. This Case Involved Highly Experienced, Reputable and Skilled Attorneys Class counsel have substantial experience in litigating class action lawsuits, including consumer protection claims. Here, class counsel provided skilled legal services to the class by successfully litigating the action in the face of highly competent and vigorous opposition from multiple national law firms representing a determined corporate client. The ability to obtain recovery for the class in the face of sophisticated and formidable legal opposition reflects the quality of class counsel s legal work and strongly favors the requested fee award. 6

10 F. Awards in Similar Cases and the Fee Agreement With Plaintiff Supports the Requested Fee Award Class counsel request a fee award of 40% of the settlement fund, which is reasonable when compared to other fee awards approved by the courts. Generally, it is recognized that fee awards as high as 50% of a gross common settlement fund are reasonable. See 4 William B. Rubenstein, Newberg on Class Actions 17:25 (4th ed ( [A]n upper limit of 50 percent of the fund may be stated as a general rule, although even larger percentages have been awarded. ; Shaw, 2015 WL , at *6 ( courts have... recognized that [t]he percentages awarded in common fund cases typically range from 20 to 50 percent of the common fund created ; Velez v. Novartis Pharm. Corp., No. 04 Civ (CM, 2010 WL , at *21 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 30, 2010 (noting approval of fee awards ranging from 20 to 50 percent of the gross settlement benefit ; Wells v. Allstate Ins. Co., 557 F. Supp. 2d 1, 6-7 (D.D.C (noting that [f]ee awards in common-fund cases may range from fifteen to forty-five percent and approving fee request of 45% of total gross recovery. It should also be noted that the request for 40% of the settlement fund is consistent with class counsel s contingent fee agreement with the named plaintiff in this lawsuit. This creates a presumption of reasonableness for the overall fee request because the retainer agreement is indicative of what the market would pay for the subject legal services. See In re Nortel Networks Corp. Sec. Litig., 539 F.3d 129, (2d Cir ( In many cases, the agreedupon fee will offer the best indication of a market rate, thus providing a good starting position for a district court s fee analysis. ; In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 282 (3d Cir ( [C]ourts should accord a presumption of reasonableness to any fee request submitted pursuant to a retainer agreement that was entered into between a properly-selected lead plaintiff and a properly-selected lead counsel. ; see also 4 Rubenstein, supra, 14:6 ( The percentage award 7

11 should mimic the market. The percentage method is consistent with and is intended to mirror practice in the private marketplace where contingent fee attorneys typically negotiate percentage fee arrangements with their clients.. Here, the record demonstrates that the requested fee award is consistent with general practice and the market for legal services. Under these circumstances, the Court should find that this factor supports the requested fee award. G. Significant Amounts of Time and Labor Have Been Required to Prosecute This Case To date, class counsel have invested over 3,000 hours in the prosecution of this lawsuit, including work performed in investigation and analysis of complex legal and factual issues, review of thousands of pages of documents produced in discovery, and preparation of pleadings and motion papers. In addition to the proceedings in this case involving dispositive motions, class certification and product retention, this litigation also has involved extensive collateral proceedings in numerous other state and federal courts, including class certification challenges in the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District and the Missouri Supreme Court, removal proceedings in the United States District for the Western District of Missouri, and challenges to a proposed nationwide settlement and attendant rulings affecting this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the United States Supreme Court. Simply put, class counsel s work in this case has been substantial and this factor strongly supports the requested fee award. H. The Lodestar Cross-Check Is a Strong Indicator of the Reasonableness of the Requested Fee Award The lodestar cross-check is a well-established method of testing the reasonableness of a fee request. In re NuvaRing Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 4:08 MDL 1964 RWS, 2014 WL , 8

12 at *2 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 18, The lodestar is determined by multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended by a reasonable hourly rate in the community. Berry, 397 S.W.3d at 429 n.3. When used as a cross-check to award a percentage of the settlement fund, a lodestar calculation does not require mathematical precision and may be based on summaries submitted by counsel. In re NuvaRing Prods., 2014 WL , at *4. Here, as summarized in the Affidavit of Christopher Shank, the two attorneys primarily responsible for prosecuting this action have expended 1, hours of work through April 30, 2015, for a lodestar of $737, The hourly rates used to calculate this lodestar senior partners at $525 per hour and senior associates at $350 per hour are those customarily used by class counsel in contingent class litigation and are reasonable in comparison to the hourly rates commonly awarded in Missouri class actions to counsel of similar skill and experience. In Berry, for example, the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the trial court s award of attorney s fees based on a lodestar calculation with rates ranging from $200 per hour for professional staff to $650 hour for senior partners. Berry, 397 S.W.3d at 428 n.2; id. at 432 (affirming the trial court s finding that these rates were reasonable. Similarly, in Plubell v. Merck & Co., this Court awarded reasonable attorneys fees to class counsel and found that rates as high as $675 per hour for partner time and as high as $450 for associate time are well within the rates normally charged for similar work by similarly qualified counsel in Missouri. Final Judgment and Order of Final Settlement Approval and Dismissal with Prejudice, Plubell v. Merck & Co. Inc., No. 04CV , at 8-9 (Mo. Cir. Ct. Jackson Cnty. Mar. 15, 2013 (Roldan, J.. 1 Other attorneys and paralegals in the firm have contributed more than 1,400 hours in the case. Given this additional work, the lodestar calculation is highly conservative and will readily support the requested fee award. 9

13 The work done by class counsel has been necessarily expended in the course of litigation activity in this court and many other courts around the country. In fact, because counsel knew it was possible that they would never be paid for their work if there was no recovery, they had every economic incentive not to engage in unnecessary work. Moreno v. City of Sacramento, 534 F.3d 1106, 1112 (9th Cir ( It must also be kept in mind that lawyers are not likely to spend unnecessary time on contingency fee cases in the hope of inflating their fees.. And because the calculated lodestar ($737, is substantially greater than the dollar amount of the requested fee award ($234,400.00, the fee request should enjoy a strong presumption of reasonableness. See, e.g., Stagi v. Nat l R.R. Passenger Corp., 880 F. Supp. 2d 564, 572 (E.D. Pa (finding a requested fee of approximately 89% of the lodestar to be well under the generally acceptable range and that the lodestar cross-check provides strong additional support for approving the attorneys fee request ; Plymouth Cnty. Contributory Ret. Sys. v. Hassan, No (DMC (JAD, 2012 WL , at *5 (D.N.J. Feb. 28, 2012 ( Plaintiff s Counsel has actually requested an award of fees in an amount less than their actual lodestar and expenses. This is presumptively reasonable, and weighs in favor of an award of attorneys fees.. Under these circumstances, the lodestar cross-check clearly supports the requested fee award. I. The Class Members Have Voiced No Objection to the Requested Fee Award Class members were advised in the settlement notice that class counsel would request a fee award of 40%, and no objections have been made to that request or any other aspect of the proposed settlement. A complete lack of objection to the proposed fee award renders the award presumptively reasonable. See Davis v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., 827 F. Supp. 2d 172, 183 (W.D.N.Y (noting that the absence of objections to an agreed-upon attorneys fee award is a factor that weighs in favor of approval of the award.. 10

14 In summary, all of the factors identified by the court in Bachman support the requested fee award. Plaintiff and class counsel therefore submit that the Court should approve the fee request and award class counsel 40% of the settlement fund, which amounts to $234, II. Class Counsel Should be Reimbursed for Their Out-of-Pocket Litigation Expenses It is appropriate and customary in class litigation for class counsel to be reimbursed their out-of-pocket litigation expenses from a common settlement fund. See In re Giant Interactive Grp., Inc. Sec. Litig., 279 F.R.D. 151, 165 (S.D.N.Y ( It is well established that counsel who create a common fund are entitled to the reimbursement of expenses that they advance to a class. ; see also 2 McLaughlin, supra, 6:24 (noting that class counsel also is entitled to reimbursement from the class recovery (without interest for the costs and reasonable out-ofpocket expenses incurred in prosecuting the litigation. Reimbursable expenses include costs incurred for legal research, photocopying, document production, deposition transcripts, travel, meals, lodging, postage and expert witness services. See In re Toys R Us-Delaware, Inc. Fair & Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA Litig., 295 F.R.D. 438, 469 (C.D. Cal (quotation omitted; Boyd v. Coventry Health Care Inc., 299 F.R.D. 451, 468 (D. Md. 2014; Hale v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case Nos. 01CV218710, 02CV227674, 2009 WL , 6 (Mo. Cir. Ct. Jackson Cnty. May 15, 2009 (Midkiff, J.. Here, as described in the attached affidavit of Christopher S. Shank, class counsel request reimbursement of $43, in litigation expenses incurred in prosecution of this lawsuit. This includes costs necessarily expended for expert witness fees, Westlaw legal research, copying and document production, deposition transcripts/videos, and travel. These expenses are reasonable, were directly related to the prosecution of this lawsuit and were necessary in achieving the proposed settlement. The class members have been advised of the expense request and no 11

15 objections have been made. Accordingly, Plaintiff and class counsel respectfully submit that the Court should approve the requested reimbursement of litigation expenses in full. III. Class Representative Connie Curts Should be Awarded a $5,000 Case Contribution Award for Her Service to the Class It is standard practice in class litigation for the class representatives to receive a separate monetary payment (a so-called case contribution or incentive award. 2 McLaughlin, supra, 6:28 ( [T]here is near-universal recognition that it is appropriate for the court to approve an incentive award [to the class representatives] payable from the class recovery, usually within the range of $1,000 $20,000, for the efforts they make in obtaining a recovery on behalf of the class.. Another judge in this court has stated that [t]he purpose of incentive awards, or supplemental compensation, for class representatives is to encourage people with significant claims to pursue actions on behalf of others similarly situated. Hale, 2009 WL , 43. Here, it is requested that the Court approve an incentive award of $5,000 for Plaintiff Connie Curts, who has actively and effectively contributed to the successful resolution of this lawsuit by providing invaluable assistance to class counsel in the investigation, formulation and prosecution of the claims in this case. This award recognizes Plaintiff s substantial assistance throughout the proceedings, including gathering and producing documents, consulting with counsel on the development and execution of litigation strategies, being deposed and appearing subject to subpoena at the class certification hearing, and otherwise participating in the litigation for over two years. The requested award is consistent with the amount preliminarily approved by the federal court in Illinois for the named plaintiffs in the nationwide class action, and is well within the range of incentive awards that Missouri courts have granted in class actions. See Bachman v. A.G. Edwards, Inc., No , 2010 WL , 4 (Mo. Cir. Ct. St. Louis City 12

16 May 21, 2010 (awarding $10,000 each to the two representative plaintiffs, aff d, 344 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011; Hale, 2009 WL , 43 (awarding $20,000 to each of the class representatives; see also Risch v. Natoli Eng g Co., LLC, No. 4:11CV1621 AGF, 2012 WL , at *3 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 24, 2012 (approving incentive award of $5,000 to named plaintiff; Simmons v. Enter. Holdings, Inc., No. 4:10CV00625AGF, 2012 WL , at *2 (E.D. Mo. July 13, 2012 (awarding $6,000 to each of the named plaintiffs. Class members were advised in the settlement notice that Plaintiff would be requesting a case contribution award in this amount, and no objection has been made to this request (or any other aspect of the proposed settlement. Accordingly, Plaintiff and class counsel respectfully submit that the Court should approve the requested case contribution award in the amount of $5,000 to Plaintiff Connie Curts. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff and class counsel respectfully request that the Court enter an order (1 approving class counsel s requested fee award of 40% of the settlement fund, in the amount of $234,400.00; (2 approving the reimbursement of litigation expenses to class counsel in the amount of $43,768.96; and (3 approving the requested case contribution award of $5,000 to Plaintiff Connie Curts. 13

17 Respectfully submitted, SHANK & HAMILTON, P.C. By: /s/ Christopher S. Shank Christopher S. Shank, MO #28760 David L. Heinemann, MO #37622 Stephen J. Moore, MO # Grand Boulevard, Suite 1600 Kansas City, Missouri Telephone: Facsimile: Attorneys for Plaintiff Connie Curts CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 26th day of May, 2014, the foregoing document was filed via the Court s efiling system, which shall send notice of such filing to the following counsel of record: Counsel for Defendants Robert M. Thompson Craig A. Hoover James T. Wicks E. Desmond Hogan Christopher C. Grenz Briana L. Black BRYAN CAVE LLP Miranda L. Berge One Kansas City Place HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 1200 Main Street, Suite Thirteenth Street, NW Kansas City, Missouri Washington, DC /s/ Christopher S. Shank Attorney for Plaintiff 14

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, AT INDEPENDENCE

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, AT INDEPENDENCE IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI, AT INDEPENDENCE CONNIE CURTS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, WAGGIN TRAIN, LLC and NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:06-cv-02163-JLL-MF Document 183 Filed 05/01/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 3678 Case 2:06-cv-02163-JLL-MF Document 158-5 Fed 01123/15 Page 1 of 13 Page(D: 3357 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENWOOD DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENWOOD DIVISION 8:13-cv-03424-JMC Date Filed 04/23/15 Entry Number 52 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENWOOD DIVISION In re: Building Materials Corporation of America

More information

Case 3:07-cv JST Document 5169 Filed 06/08/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:07-cv JST Document 5169 Filed 06/08/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :0-cv-0-JST Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Order Relates To: ALL DIRECT PURCHASER

More information

Case 2:07-cv PD Document 296 Filed 09/19/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA O R D E R

Case 2:07-cv PD Document 296 Filed 09/19/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA O R D E R Case 2:07-cv-04296-PD Document 296 Filed 09/19/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MOORE, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : v. : Civ. No. 07-4296 : GMAC

More information

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 3231 Filed 05/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:15-md CRB Document 3231 Filed 05/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-md-0-crb Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 IN RE: VOLKSWAGEN CLEAN DIESEL MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

More information

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 1140 Filed 11/08/18 Page 1 of 11 : :

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 1140 Filed 11/08/18 Page 1 of 11 : : Case 1:13-cv-07789-LGS Document 1140 Filed 11/08/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------X : IN RE FOREIGN

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 EDGAR VICERAL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MISTRAS GROUP, INC., Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-emc ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTIONS FOR FINAL APPROVAL

More information

Case 5:08-cv PD Document 185 Filed 02/07/13 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 5:08-cv PD Document 185 Filed 02/07/13 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 5:08-cv-00479-PD Document 185 Filed 02/07/13 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA KYLE J. LIGUORI and : TAMMY L. HOFFMAN, individually : and on

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv MOC-DSC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv MOC-DSC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv-00540-MOC-DSC LUANNA SCOTT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Vs. ) ORDER ) FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC., )

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-00-jls-jpr Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Page ID #: 0 0 KENNETH J. LEE, MARK G. THOMPSON, and DAVID C. ACREE, individually, on behalf of others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-000-jls-rnb Document 0 Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #:0 0 0 TIMOTHY R. PEEL, ET AL., vs. Plaintiffs, BROOKSAMERICA MORTGAGE CORP., ET AL., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT

More information

Case Document 3609 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/15 Page 1 of 17

Case Document 3609 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/15 Page 1 of 17 Case 12-36187 Document 3609 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: ATP OIL & GAS CORPORATION CASE NO. 12-36187

More information

Case3:13-cv JST Document51 Filed10/22/14 Page1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case3:13-cv JST Document51 Filed10/22/14 Page1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case:-cv-0-JST Document Filed// Page of 0 BOBBIE PACHECO DYER, et al., v. Plaintiffs, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. -cv-0-jst

More information

Baker & Hostetler, L.L.P. ("B&H" or "Applicant"), files its First and Final Application

Baker & Hostetler, L.L.P. (B&H or Applicant), files its First and Final Application UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) In re: ) Case No. 01-16034 (AJG) ) ENRON CORP., et al., ) Jointly Administered ) TRUSTEES ) Chapter 11 ) FIRST AND FINAL APPLICATION FOR ALLOWANCE

More information

Case 1:13-cv JEI-JS Document 96-2 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 660 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 1:13-cv JEI-JS Document 96-2 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 660 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 1:13-cv-06836-JEI-JS Document 96-2 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 21 PageID: 660 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY LARA PEARSALL-DINEEN, individually and on behalf of all other similarly

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE MICHAEL E. TAYLOR, et al., v. Plaintiffs, DYNAMIC PET PRODUCTS, LLC, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1616-CV11531 Division

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES GENERAL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES GENERAL Case 2:15-cv-06457-MWF-JEM Document 254 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 13 Page ID #:10244 Present: The Honorable MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD, U.S. District Judge Deputy Clerk: Rita Sanchez Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: May 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008) Docket No.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: May 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008) Docket No. 07-0757-cv In re: Nortel Networks Corp. Securities Litigation UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2007 (Argued: May 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008) Docket No. 07-0757-cv

More information

OBJECTION TO CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND APPROVAL OF ATTORNEYS FEES. COMES NOW, Bert Chapa, Objector, by and through counsel of record, files

OBJECTION TO CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND APPROVAL OF ATTORNEYS FEES. COMES NOW, Bert Chapa, Objector, by and through counsel of record, files IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION ) ) IN RE: PRE-FILLED PROPANE ) MDL Docket No. 2086 TANK MARKETING AND SALES ) Master Case No. 09-00465 PRACTICES

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Case 1:16-cv-00486-NCT-JEP Document 36 Filed 04/17/18 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA DAVID LINNINS, KIM WOLFINGTON, and CAROL BLACKSTOCK, on behalf of

More information

Case 3:16-cv WHO Document Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:16-cv WHO Document Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 7 Case :-cv-00-who Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 0 JAMES KNAPP, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

More information

2:16-cv RMG Date Filed 09/05/18 Entry Number 152 Page 1 of 16

2:16-cv RMG Date Filed 09/05/18 Entry Number 152 Page 1 of 16 2:16-cv-00616-RMG Date Filed 09/05/18 Entry Number 152 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Dana Spires, et al., Plaintiffs, v. David R. Schools,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Klaus v. Jonestown Bank and Trust Company, of Jonestown, Pennsylvania Doc. 33 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THOMAS KLAUS, CIVIL ACTION NO. 112-CV-2488 individually

More information

Case 3:15-cv RBL Document 23 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:15-cv RBL Document 23 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 17 Case :-cv-00-rbl Document Filed 0// Page of THE HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA ANNIE McCULLUMN, NANCY RAMEY and TAMI ROMERO, on behalf

More information

Case 1:15-cv MGC Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2017 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:15-cv MGC Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2017 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 1:15-cv-22782-MGC Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/18/2017 Page 1 of 9 BENJAMIN FERNANDEZ, et. al., vs. Plaintiffs, MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, UNITED STATES DISTRICT

More information

Case 9:15-cv JIC Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2016 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 9:15-cv JIC Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2016 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 9:15-cv-81783-JIC Document 75 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2016 Page 1 of 8 DAVID M. LEVINE, not individually, but solely in his capacity as Receiver for ECAREER HOLDINGS, INC. and ECAREER, INC.,

More information

Motion to Compel ( Defendant s Motion ) and Plaintiff Joseph Lee Gay s ( Plaintiff ) Motion

Motion to Compel ( Defendant s Motion ) and Plaintiff Joseph Lee Gay s ( Plaintiff ) Motion STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA LINCOLN COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 13 CVS 383 JOSEPH LEE GAY, Individually and On Behalf of All Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. PEOPLES

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-0-pa-as Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JACQUELINE F. IBARRA, an individual on behalf of herself and all other similarly

More information

Case3:13-cv JST Document73 Filed05/01/15 Page1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case3:13-cv JST Document73 Filed05/01/15 Page1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case:-cv-0-JST Document Filed0/0/ Page of 0 0 ALETA LILLY, et al., v. Plaintiffs, JAMBA JUICE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. -cv-0-jst

More information

: x. Presently before the Court is the Motion of Class Counsel for Attorneys' Fees and

: x. Presently before the Court is the Motion of Class Counsel for Attorneys' Fees and Winters, et al v. Assicurazioni, et al Doc. 227 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IN RE: ASSICURAZIONI

More information

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8 Case3:15-cv-01723-VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MAYER BROWN LLP DALE J. GIALI (SBN 150382) dgiali@mayerbrown.com KERI E. BORDERS (SBN 194015) kborders@mayerbrown.com 350

More information

Case 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 840 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 840 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 1:10-cv-00990-ER-SRF Document 840 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 34928 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN RE WILMINGTON TRUST SECURITIES LITIGATION Master File No. 10-cv-0990-ER

More information

Case: 4:14-cv AGF Doc. #: 266 Filed: 06/24/16 Page: 1 of 16 PageID #: 13015

Case: 4:14-cv AGF Doc. #: 266 Filed: 06/24/16 Page: 1 of 16 PageID #: 13015 Case: 4:14-cv-01833-AGF Doc. #: 266 Filed: 06/24/16 Page: 1 of 16 PageID #: 13015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. LOUIS DIVISION MARK BOSWELL, DAVID LUTTON, VICKIE

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Case 2:12-cv-02060-KDE-JCW Document 29 Filed 08/09/13 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA PAULA LANDRY CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 12-2060 CAINE & WEINER COMPANY, INC. SECTION

More information

Case 3:14-cv HSG Document 61 Filed 08/01/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:14-cv HSG Document 61 Filed 08/01/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA VICTOR GUTTMANN, Plaintiff, v. OLE MEXICAN FOODS, INC., Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-hsg ORDER GRANTING

More information

Case 1:08-cv RDB Document 83 Filed 10/20/2009 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 1:08-cv RDB Document 83 Filed 10/20/2009 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 1:08-cv-01281-RDB Document 83 Filed 10/20/2009 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND * JOHN DOE No. 1, et al., * Plaintiffs * v. Civil Action No.: RDB-08-1281

More information

Case 1:11-cv CM-GWG Document 64 Filed 05/02/14 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:11-cv CM-GWG Document 64 Filed 05/02/14 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case 1:11-cv-07132-CM-GWG Document 64 Filed 05/02/14 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE CITY OF PROVIDENCE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION OWNER-OPERATOR INDEPENDENT ) DRIVERS ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) No. 00-0258-CV-W-FJG

More information

Case 3:16-cv JST Document 65 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:16-cv JST Document 65 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-0-jst Document Filed /0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RICHARD TERRY, Plaintiff, v. HOOVESTOL, INC., Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-jst ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. Case No: 6:15-cv-1824-Orl-41GJK ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. Case No: 6:15-cv-1824-Orl-41GJK ORDER Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Caring First, Inc. et al Doc. 107 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION SECRETARY OF LABOR, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION Ruff v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration Doc. 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION SHERRY L. RUFF, Plaintiff, 4:18-CV-04057-VLD vs. NANCY A. BERRYHILL,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MEMORANDUM ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MEMORANDUM ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE JOAO BOCK TRANSACTION SYSTEMS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES, INC. Defendant. Civ. No. 12-1138-SLR MEMORANDUM ORDER At Wilmington

More information

Case 3:16-cv SI Document 68 Filed 06/18/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Case 3:16-cv SI Document 68 Filed 06/18/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON Case 3:16-cv-01443-SI Document 68 Filed 06/18/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON FATHERS & DAUGHTERS NEVADA, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:16-cv-1443-SI OPINION

More information

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 19 Filed: 06/13/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:901

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 19 Filed: 06/13/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:901 Case: 1:13-cv-01569 Document #: 19 Filed: 06/13/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:901 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PAUL DUFFY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case

More information

Case 1:09-cv TPG Document 59 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

Case 1:09-cv TPG Document 59 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Case 1:09-cv-04471-TPG Document 59 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANDREA BARRON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,

More information

OF NEW JERSEY. Civil Action No. v. V (SRC) AND NOTICE OF OF INTENTION TO APPEAR TO APPEAR OF CLASS MEMBER DAVID DAVID MURRAY MURRAY

OF NEW JERSEY. Civil Action No. v. V (SRC) AND NOTICE OF OF INTENTION TO APPEAR TO APPEAR OF CLASS MEMBER DAVID DAVID MURRAY MURRAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Stein STEIN LAW Law FIRM Firm David M. Nieporent (DN-9400) 25 Philips Parkway Montvale, New Jersey 07645 (201) 391-0770 Fax (201) 391-7776 dnieporent@stein-firm.com

More information

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 100 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 30 PageID #:1793

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 100 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 30 PageID #:1793 Case: 1:16-cv-04232 Document #: 100 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 30 PageID #:1793 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION IN RE WHEATON FRANCISCAN ERISA

More information

Case 2:15-cv MOB-MKM ECF No. 39 filed 08/31/18 PageID.1256 Page 1 of 27

Case 2:15-cv MOB-MKM ECF No. 39 filed 08/31/18 PageID.1256 Page 1 of 27 Case 2:15-cv-00707-MOB-MKM ECF No. 39 filed 08/31/18 PageID.1256 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION IN RE: AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ISLAND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LLC, LIDS CAPITAL LLC, DOUBLE ROCK CORPORATION, and INTRASWEEP LLC, v. Plaintiffs, DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS,

More information

Case 4:13-md YGR Document Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 16 EXHIBIT 25

Case 4:13-md YGR Document Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 16 EXHIBIT 25 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-25 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 16 EXHIBIT 25 Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 1813-25 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 16 1 Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs 2 3 4 5 6

More information

Case: , 04/17/2019, ID: , DktEntry: 37-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case: , 04/17/2019, ID: , DktEntry: 37-1, Page 1 of 7 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case: 18-15054, 04/17/2019, ID: 11266832, DktEntry: 37-1, Page 1 of 7 (1 of 11) NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED APR 17 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: PRE-FILLED PROPANE TANK ) MDL NO. 2086 MARKETING & SALES PRACTICES ) LITIGATION ) Master Case No. 09-02086-MD-W-GAF

More information

Case 2:05-cv SRC-CLW Document 991 Filed 04/29/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 65881

Case 2:05-cv SRC-CLW Document 991 Filed 04/29/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 65881 Case 2:05-cv-02367-SRC-CLW Document 991 Filed 04/29/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 65881 James E. Cecchi Lindsey H. Taylor CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068

More information

Case: 4:16-cv ERW Doc. #: 105 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 915

Case: 4:16-cv ERW Doc. #: 105 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 915 Case: 4:16-cv-01138-ERW Doc. #: 105 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 10 PageID #: 915 MARILYNN MARTINEZ, et al., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION v. Plaintiffs, Consolidated

More information

Case 1:05-md JG-JO Document 2669 Filed 05/28/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 54790

Case 1:05-md JG-JO Document 2669 Filed 05/28/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 54790 Case 1:05-md-01720-JG-JO Document 2669 Filed 05/28/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 54790 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT

More information

FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT. Court after conducting a fairness hearing, considering all arguments in support of and/or in

FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT. Court after conducting a fairness hearing, considering all arguments in support of and/or in UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE: BAYER CORP. COMBINATION ASPIRIN PRODUCTS MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION THIS PLEADING RELATES TO: 09-md-2023 (BMC)(JMA) COGAN,

More information

Case 3:14-cv ST Document 146 Filed 01/05/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Case 3:14-cv ST Document 146 Filed 01/05/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION Case 3:14-cv-00645-ST Document 146 Filed 01/05/16 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION KELLY OTT and BENJAMIN GESLER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly

More information

Case 4:13-md YGR Document 2322 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 4:13-md YGR Document 2322 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-md-00-ygr Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 IN RE: LITHIUM ION BATTERIES ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates to: ALL DIRECT PURCHASER

More information

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document Filed 03/06/18 Page 1 of 5

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document Filed 03/06/18 Page 1 of 5 Case :0-cv-0-YGR Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 In re SONY PS OTHER OS LITIGATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. :0-CV-0-YGR [PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS

More information

DOJ Stays Are Often Unfair To Private Antitrust Plaintiffs

DOJ Stays Are Often Unfair To Private Antitrust Plaintiffs Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com DOJ Stays Are Often Unfair To Private Antitrust Plaintiffs

More information

Case 4:08-cv RP-CFB Document Filed 12/08/15 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 4:08-cv RP-CFB Document Filed 12/08/15 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION Case 4:08-cv-00507-RP-CFB Document 263-1 Filed 12/08/15 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION GREGORY YOUNG, et al., Case No. 4:08-cv-00507-RP-CFB

More information

Case 1:16-cv SHR Document 49 Filed 09/25/18 Page 1 of 16

Case 1:16-cv SHR Document 49 Filed 09/25/18 Page 1 of 16 Case 116-cv-01221-SHR Document 49 Filed 09/25/18 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JODY FINEFROCK and JULIA FRANCIS, individually and on behalf of

More information

Case 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 0:16-cv-61856-WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 JENNIFER SANDOVAL, vs. Plaintiff, RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, P.L., SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. AHMET MATT OZCAN d/b/a HESSLA, Defendant. Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-1656-JRG

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:10-cv-03604-WJM-MF Document 73 Filed 03/02/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 877 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CONNIE MCLENNAN, VIRGINIA ZONTOK, CARYL FARRELL, on behalf of themselves

More information

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES ON APPEAL

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES ON APPEAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No: 14-3779 Kyle Lawson, et al. v. Appellees Robert T. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Jackson County Department of Recorder of

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number Honorable David M.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number Honorable David M. Grange Insurance Company of Michigan v. Parrish et al Doc. 159 GRANGE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MICHIGAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION v. Plaintiff, Case Number

More information

Case 7:13-cv RDP Document 5 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 10

Case 7:13-cv RDP Document 5 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 10 Case 7:13-cv-01141-RDP Document 5 Filed 07/03/13 Page 1 of 10 FILED 2013 Jul-03 AM 08:54 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA e 2:11-cv-00929-GAF -SS Document 117 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:2380 1 2 3 LINKS: 107, 109 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 IN RE MANNKIND CORP. 12 SECURITIES LITIGATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

More information

How Wal-Mart v. Dukes Affects Securities-Fraud Class Actions

How Wal-Mart v. Dukes Affects Securities-Fraud Class Actions How Wal-Mart v. Dukes Affects Securities-Fraud Class Actions By Robert H. Bell and Thomas G. Haskins Jr. July 18, 2012 District courts and circuit courts continue to grapple with the full import of the

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Case :-cv-0-pcl Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 0 NAOMI TAPIA, individually and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU August 21,2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU August 21,2014 Page 1 of 5 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU August 21,2014 In the Matter of PHH CORPORATION, PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION, PHH HOME

More information

Case: 4:14-cv ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 523. Case No.: 4:14-cv-00159

Case: 4:14-cv ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 523. Case No.: 4:14-cv-00159 Case: 4:14-cv-00159-ERW Doc. #: 74 Filed: 07/13/15 Page: 1 of 9 PageID #: 523 UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JOHN PRATER, on behalf of himself and others similarly

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 1 1 Staton Mike Arias, SBN 1 mike@asstlawyers.com Mikael H. Stahle, SBN mikael@asstlawyers.com ARIAS, SANGUINETTI, STAHLE & TORRIJOS, LLP 01 Center Drive West, Suite 0 Los Angeles, California 00-0 Tel:

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case 8:13-cv-01748-JVS-JPR Document 45 Filed 03/16/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:541 Present: The Honorable James V. Selna Nancy K. Boehme Not Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION Case 3:08-cv-02117-P Document 71 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID 954 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY; BOYD L. RICHIE, in his capacity

More information

Case: 1:07-cv SAS-SKB Doc #: 230 Filed: 06/25/13 Page: 1 of 20 PAGEID #: 8474

Case: 1:07-cv SAS-SKB Doc #: 230 Filed: 06/25/13 Page: 1 of 20 PAGEID #: 8474 Case 107-cv-00828-SAS-SKB Doc # 230 Filed 06/25/13 Page 1 of 20 PAGEID # 8474 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION EBRAHIM SHANECHIAN, ANITA JOHNSON, DONALD SNYDER and

More information

Case5:11-cv EJD Document133 Filed11/20/13 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case5:11-cv EJD Document133 Filed11/20/13 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION Case:-cv-0-EJD Document Filed/0/ Page of 0 Simon Bahne Paris (admitted pro hac vice) Patrick Howard (admitted pro hac vice) SALTZ, MONGELUZZI, BARRETT & BENDESKY, P.C. One Liberty Place, nd Floor 0 Market

More information

Case 1:15-cv MGC Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2016 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:15-cv MGC Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2016 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 1:15-cv-20702-MGC Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/01/2016 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 15-20702-Civ-COOKE/TORRES KELSEY O BRIEN and KATHLEEN

More information

Case 1:07-cv KBF Document 423 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:07-cv KBF Document 423 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 5 Case 1:07-cv-01358-KBF Document 423 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 5 Case 1:07-cv-01358-KBF Document 422-2 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1of5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------)(

More information

Case 3:14-cv MMH-MCR Document 33 Filed 02/16/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID 171

Case 3:14-cv MMH-MCR Document 33 Filed 02/16/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID 171 Case 3:14-cv-00873-MMH-MCR Document 33 Filed 02/16/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID 171 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION DANIEL RUDDELL, on his own behalf and on behalf

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge John L. Kane. Master Docket No. 09-md JLK-KMT (MDL Docket No, 2063)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge John L. Kane. Master Docket No. 09-md JLK-KMT (MDL Docket No, 2063) Case 1:09-md-02063-JLK-KMT Document 527 Filed 07/31/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge John L. Kane Master Docket No. 09-md-02063-JLK-KMT

More information

Case 2:15-cv JAK-AJW Document 26 Filed 07/07/15 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:233

Case 2:15-cv JAK-AJW Document 26 Filed 07/07/15 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:233 Case 2:15-cv-01654-JAK-AJW Document 26 Filed 07/07/15 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:233 Present: The Honorable Andrea Keifer Deputy Clerk JOHN A. KRONSTADT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Not Reported Court Reporter

More information

Case 0:10-cv MGC Document 913 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2012 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:10-cv MGC Document 913 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2012 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 0:10-cv-60786-MGC Document 913 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/23/2012 Page 1 of 5 COQUINA INVESTMENTS, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 10-60786-Civ-Cooke/Bandstra

More information

Case 4:13-md YGR Document Filed 02/08/18 Page 1 of 38 EXHIBIT EE

Case 4:13-md YGR Document Filed 02/08/18 Page 1 of 38 EXHIBIT EE Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 2175-5 Filed 02/08/18 Page 1 of 38 EXHIBIT EE Case 4:13-md-02420-YGR Document 2175-5 Filed 02/08/18 Page 2 of 38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 R. Alexander Saveri

More information

Case 1:14-cv PAC Document 95 Filed 08/29/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:14-cv PAC Document 95 Filed 08/29/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case 1:14-cv-04281-PAC Document 95 Filed 08/29/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK HARRY GAO and ROBERTA SOCALL, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION N2 SELECT, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 4:18-CV-00001-DGK N2 GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants. ORDER

More information

Case 1:12-cv DJC Document 308 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:12-cv DJC Document 308 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Case 1:12-cv-11280-DJC Document 308 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS KAREN L. BACCHI, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 12-11280-DJC MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL

More information

Case 2:11-cv FMO-SS Document 256 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:11349

Case 2:11-cv FMO-SS Document 256 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:11349 Case :-cv-00-fmo-ss Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 JEFFREY H. WOOD Acting Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division MARK SABATH E-mail: mark.sabath@usdoj.gov Massachusetts

More information

: : : : : : : : : : : : 16cv2268. Defendant and Counterclaim/Cross-Claim Plaintiff U.S. Bank National

: : : : : : : : : : : : 16cv2268. Defendant and Counterclaim/Cross-Claim Plaintiff U.S. Bank National Synergy Aerospace Corp v. U.S. Bank National Association et al Doc. 65 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SYNERGY AEROSPACE CORP., -against- Plaintiff, LLFC CORPORATION and U.S.

More information

Case3:13-cv JCS Document34 Filed09/26/14 Page1 of 14

Case3:13-cv JCS Document34 Filed09/26/14 Page1 of 14 Case:-cv-0-JCS Document Filed0// Page of 0 0 Alexander I. Dychter (SBN ) alex@dychterlaw.com Dychter Law Offices, APC 00 Second Ave., Suite San Diego, California 0 Telephone:..0 Facsimile:.0. Norman B.

More information

Case 3:05-cv DGW Document 28 Filed 08/08/05 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #126 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 3:05-cv DGW Document 28 Filed 08/08/05 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #126 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Case 3:05-cv-00015-DGW Document 28 Filed 08/08/05 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #126 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ADAM P. MEYENBURG Individually and on behalf of all others Similarly

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION JACK HOLZER and MARY BRUESH- ) HOLZER, ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) No. 17-cv-0755-NKL ) ATHENE ANNUITY & LIFE ) ASSURANCE

More information

A (800) (800)

A (800) (800) No. 14-1136 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY AND WAGGIN TRAIN, LLC, v. CONNIE CURTS, et al., Petitioners, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE

More information

Case 4:11-cv RC-ALM Document 333 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 6904

Case 4:11-cv RC-ALM Document 333 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 6904 Case 4:11-cv-00655-RC-ALM Document 333 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 6904 IN THE UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

More information

mg Doc 28 Filed 06/20/14 Entered 06/20/14 17:18:03 Main Document Pg 1 of 10

mg Doc 28 Filed 06/20/14 Entered 06/20/14 17:18:03 Main Document Pg 1 of 10 Pg 1 of 10 Hearing Date and Time: July 23, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. (Prevailing Eastern Time) Response Date and Time: July 4, 2014 at 4:00 p.m. (Prevailing Eastern Time) UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN

More information

Case 9:97-cv RC Document 680 Filed 11/13/2009 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION

Case 9:97-cv RC Document 680 Filed 11/13/2009 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION Case 9:97-cv-00063-RC Document 680 Filed 11/13/2009 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION Sylvester McClain, et al. Plaintiffs, v. Lufkin Industries,

More information

DELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OPINION August 14, 2003

DELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OPINION August 14, 2003 DELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OPINION 2003-3 August 14, 2003 THIS OPINION IS MERELY ADVISORY AND IS NOT BINDING ON THE INQUIRING ATTORNEY OR THE COURTS OR ANY OTHER TRIBUNAL

More information

Case 1:07-cv PAB-KLM Document 223 Filed 09/18/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 14

Case 1:07-cv PAB-KLM Document 223 Filed 09/18/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 14 Case 1:07-cv-02351-PAB-KLM Document 223 Filed 09/18/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Philip A. Brimmer Civil Action No. 07-cv-02351-PAB-KLM

More information