North American Dismantling Corporation
|
|
- Irene Price
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT North American Dismantling Corporation v. Cate Street Capital, Inc., CSC Group Holdings, LLC, NewCo Energy, LLC, Berlin Station, LLC and Burgess Biopower, LLC No CV ORDER The Plaintiff, North American Dismantling Corporation ( North American ), has brought a declaratory judgment action against the Defendants, Cate Street Capital, Inc. ( Cate Street ), CSC Group Holdings, LLC ( CSC ), NewCo Energy, LLC ( NewCo ), Berlin Station, LLC ( Berlin Station ) and Burgess Biopower, LLC ( Burgess ) in order to obtain an order that North American is entitled to review certain documents identified in Exhibit B to its Complaint, and that it is entitled to access such further documents as may be reasonably necessary to comply with the provisions of an existing Asset Purchase Agreement ( APA ) entered into by North American. North American alleges that the APA entitles North American to obtain five percent (5%) of the cash flow of a Biomass Project, 1 from companies that Cate Street manages. The Defendants have moved to dismiss. For the reasons stated in this Order, the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. The Defendants shall provide an answer to the Complaint within 30 days from the date of the 1 As defined in the APA. (See Compl., Ex. A at 3.)
2 Clerk s Notice transmitting this Order. I North American alleges that it is entitled to review the documents it seeks by the explicit terms of the APA entered into between it and Laidlaw Berlin Biopower, LLC ( Laidlaw ). Under the terms of the APA, [f]or a period of ten (10) years from the commencement of commercial operations of the Biomass Project that the Purchaser [2] intends to develop (the Earn-Out Period ), the Seller shall be entitled to five percent (5%) of the net cash flow earned by the Purchaser from the operation of the Business ( the Earn- Out ). (Compl., Ex. A at 5.) According to the Complaint, the APA requires that: The Purchaser shall maintain full and correct books and records showing in detail the earnings and expenses of the Premises and will permit the Seller, or its representatives, during regular business hours, to examine said books and records and all supporting vouchers and data from time to time upon request upon the Seller. Any such access shall occur at the expense of the Seller. (Compl. 24.) North American seeks to review the documents described in Exhibit B to its Complaint (the Documents ). (Id. 12.) It alleges that [t]his case is necessary because the Defendants refused to provide the Documents to [North American] for its review. (Id. 13.) North American alleges that after the APA was executed in 2008: 16. Thereafter, Laidlaw transferred its rights and obligations under the APA to the companies that Cate Street manages with respect to the ownership and operation of a 75 megawatt biomass power plant that Cate Street developed at the location of the former Fraser Pulp Mill ( Berlin Power Plant ). 17. The companies that Cate Street manages with respect to the Berlin Power Plant, and which actually hold, own, operate and/or comprise the corporate structure of the Berlin Power Plant, include [CSC], NewCo, Berlin Station 2 Laidlaw is defined as the Purchaser in the APA. (See Compl., Ex. A at 2.) - 2 -
3 and Burgess. 18. In turn: (Id ) A. [CSC] holds a number of companies, including NewCo, each of which constitutes the parent entity of a separate investment project including the Berlin Power Plant; B. NewCo holds a number of companies, all of which together comprise the entities that hold, own, operate and/or comprise the corporate structure of the Berlin Power Plant; C. Berlin Station is the owner of the Berlin Power Plant; and D. Burgess is the operator of the Berlin Power Plant. Apart from alleging a transfer of rights, North American alleges that: 43. With respect to the Documents requested, as described in Exhibit B hereto, each of the companies identified therein is managed by Cate Street within the corporate structure of the Berlin Power Plant, and thus each falls within the meaning of the Biomass Project, Business and/or the Premises as defined and used within the Earn-Out provisions of the APA. 44. By virtue of its management of the companies within the corporate structure of the Berlin Power Plant, Cate Street has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. 45. By virtue of its existence as the holding company for Cate Street s investment projects, including the Berlin Power Plant, [CSC] has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. 46. By virtue of its existence as the holding company for the Berlin Power Plant investment project, NewCo has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. 47. By virtue of its existence as the owner of the Berlin Power Plant, Berlin Station has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. 48. By virtue of its existence as the operator of the Berlin Power Plant, - 3 -
4 Burgess has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. (Id ) Finally, North American alleges that [i]n 2015, Cate Street, Berlin Station and Burgess, on behalf of themselves and their subsidiaries and affiliates, admitted that they are obligated to provide documents for review as required by the Earn-Out provisions of the APA. (Id. 37.) (Id. 55.) North American requests that the Court: A. Declare that [North American] is entitled to review the Documents; B. Declare that [North American] is entitled to review such further documents as may be reasonably necessary to comply with the provisions of the APA; C. Award [North American] reasonable attorney s fees, costs and disbursements associated with bringing this action to enforce its rights under the Earn-Out provisions of the APA; and D. Grant such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. II When considering a Motion to Dismiss, the court must determine whether the facts as pled are sufficient under the law to set forth a cause of action. Brzica v. Trustees of Dartmouth College, 147 N.H. 443, 450 (2002). In reviewing the allegations, a court must rigorously scrutinize the complaint to determine whether, on its face, it asserts a cause of action. Id. The court must accept the truth of all well pleaded facts, with all reasonable inferences therefrom. Mt. Springs Water Co. v. Mt. Lakes Vill. Dist., 126 N.H. 199, 200 (1985). A reviewing court need not accept as true statements in the complaint that are merely conclusions of law. Chase v. Vill. Dist. of Eastman, 128 N.H. 807, 814 (1986)
5 All of the Defendants claim that the Complaint must be dismissed because it does not state a cause of action for damages. For example, Cate Street and CSC argue: [D]efendants Cate Street and [CSC] respectfully request dismissal of this action against them, both (1) because the Complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to support any claim against defendant Cate Street and (2) because, with respect to defendant [CSC], the Complaint merely asserts the legal conclusion that an obligation was transferred to [CSC] without alleging any predicate facts supporting that legal conclusion.... (Defs. Cate Street and CSC s Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss, at 1 2 (emphasis added).) A similar argument is made by NewCo, Berlin Station and Burgess: In this case, [North American] has brought a declaratory judgment action based upon a single, broad, and unsupported legal conclusion that the defendants generally and apparently each and every defendant separately are successors in liability as it relates to the APA. In other words, [North American] has simply stated that there is successor liability, without providing even a modicum of the most basic information as to how the alleged successor liability has been established generally, let alone with respect to each individual defendant. Instead, [North American] points very generally to a subsequent Laidlaw transaction and a muddled description of defendants perceived corporate structure as somehow reflecting successor liability.... Indeed, beyond indicating that this subsequent transaction occurred, [North American] failed to provide any information or assert any factual allegations supporting the claim of liability. (Defs. NewCo, Berlin Station and Burgess Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss, at 3 4 (emphasis added).) But North American does not seek damages; it seeks an equitable remedy of discovery pursuant to RSA 491:22, the declaratory judgment statute. North American requests only that it be permitted to review the Documents and that it is entitled to access such further documents as may be reasonably necessary to comply with the provisions of the APA. The Defendants do not assert that the use of a Declaratory Judgment is improper in this case. The New Hampshire Supreme Court has stated that [t]he remedy of declaratory - 5 -
6 judgment affords relief from uncertainty and insecurity created by a doubt as to rights, status or legal relations existing between the parties. Benson v. New Hampshire Ins. Guar. Ass n, 151 N.H. 590, (2004). Declaratory judgment actions are said to be sui generis as they partake of some of the characteristics of both law actions and equity proceedings. Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. v. Transformer Serv. Inc., 112 N.H. 360, (1972). However, the Court has been unable to find a case which supports use of a declaratory judgment action brought pursuant to RSA 491:22 in order to obtain prelitigation discovery. It is doubtful that a declaratory judgment action is the proper vehicle by which North American s claim should proceed. The substance of the pleading, and not the form of the pleading before the Court is essential to the determination of a remedy. In re Proposed N.H. Rules of Civil Procedure, 139 N.H. 512, (1995). North American seeks discovery so that it can make a claim. The Court has authority to treat a properly served Complaint captioned as a declaratory judgment action, but seeking a remedy more properly characterized as a petition for presuit discovery as such a petition, and the Court will do so in this case. See Owen v. Weston, 63 N.H. 599, 603 (1885) ( To cure a defect of form, an amendment may be ordered; but without an amendment, such a defect may be disregarded. ); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 1(d). The superior court has specific authority to afford discovery under RSA 498:1 and the courts have had such equity powers with respect to discovery since RS 171:6 (1842) (stating, in pertinent part, that the court shall have power to hear and determine, as a court of equity... in suits for discovery in cases where a discovery may be lawfully required ); see Reynolds v. Burgess Sulfite Fiber Co., 71 N.H. 332, 333 (1902). Equitable discovery arose in response to the common law maxim nemo tenetur armare - 6 -
7 adversarium suum contra se one is not bound to arm one s adversary against oneself. See Reynolds, 71 N.H. at 333. At common law, this principle generally allowed parties to conceal from each other, up until the time of trial, the evidence upon which they intended to rely. Id. at The New Hampshire Supreme Court has noted that [u]nder this maxim, many claims existed for which there could be no redress, simply because the plaintiff s evidence was, in whole or in part, in the defendant s possession. Gutbier v. Hannaford Bros. Co., 150 N.H. 540, 543 (2004) (citation omitted). This perceived injustice at common law led to the development of the equitable remedy of bills for discovery. Id. This is the precise position in which North American finds itself. In the 1920s and 1930s, the former bills of discovery were transmuted in practice into discovery motions and the use of a separate equity proceeding for discovery in aid of a pending action at law fell into disuse. 4 G. MacDonald, New Hampshire Practice: Civil Practice and Procedure, 22.06, at 22-9 n.32 (4th ed. 2014). However, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has continued to hold that a party may bring a petition for discovery in aid of an action that has not yet been brought. Robbins v. Kalwall Corp., 120 N.H. 451, (1980). 3 Such actions are, to be sure, not common, and such an action may not be maintained where a party has a remedy at law. See Gutbier, 150 N.H. at 544. But the whole point of the Defendants arguments is that North American has no remedy at law, as it is apparent when the arguments made by each Defendant are examined. III Cate Street argues that [t]he failure to allege that any obligations were transferred to Cate Street, or assumed by Cate Street, is fatal to the Complaint against Cate Street. 3 Pre-suit discovery is permitted in many American jurisdictions, and by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure - 7 -
8 (Defs. Cate Street and CSC s Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss, at 3.) Cate Street correctly notes that the allegation that Cate Street manages other Defendants does nothing to change the analysis because managers have no liability for the contract obligations of the limited liability companies they manage, citing Mbahaba v. Morgan, 163 N.H. 561, 565 (2012). (Id. at 3 4.) But this argument proves too much. North American does not seek to hold Cate Street liable as a result of its interest or operation of other Defendants; rather, it seeks access to the Documents. It alleges plainly and clearly that [b]y virtue of its management of the companies within the corporate structure of the Berlin Power Plant, Cate Street has in its possession, custody and/or control the Documents that [North American] seeks through this action and has failed to produce them. (Compl. 44.) North American has plainly alleged that Cate Street has documents in its possession, that it has an equitable basis to examine the documents, and Cate Street will not produce them. Similarly, CSC argues that this case should be dismissed because the Complaint does not state a cause of action at law against it: the Complaint against [CSC] is based upon a bare assertion of liability without any supporting predicate facts. (Defs. Cate Street and CSC s Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss, at 4.) NewCo, Berlin Station and Burgess make similar arguments in their papers: there simply are no allegations as to how this transaction, in and of itself, gave rise to successor liability. (Defs. NewCo, Berlin Station and Burgess Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss, at 4.) Pre-suit discovery is appropriate in this instance for precisely the reasons the Defendants seek dismissal that there is no allegation that any of them are liable under 27(a)(1). See generally 23 Am. Jur. 2d Depositions Discovery
9 the APA. The reasons for discovery apply with equal force and some greater reason to a nonparty. Robbins, 120 N.H. at 453 (quotation omitted). A nonparty often has no interest in participating in the plaintiff s suit against another litigant, and, absent equitable discovery, a plaintiff may have had no means at law to obtain necessary information. Gutbier, 150 N.H. at 544. In this case, while North American may know the form the action should take, breach of contract, it does not know the identity of the proper defendant. In such circumstances, a petition for pre-suit discovery is entirely appropriate. A New Hampshire court cannot countenance a situation in which a claim may exist but there [can] be no redress, simply because the plaintiff s evidence was, in whole or in part, in the defendant s possession. Id. Accordingly, the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. The Defendants shall provide an answer to the Complaint within 30 days from the date of the Clerk s Notice transmitting this Order. SO ORDERED 10/13/17 s/richard B. McNamara DATE Richard B. McNamara, Presiding Justice RBM/ - 9 -
John Reardon. Mark Plantier. No. 12-CV and. Joseph Bohi and Mark Plantier. John Reardon. No. 12-CV ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT John Reardon v. Mark Plantier No. 12-CV-00317 and Joseph Bohi and Mark Plantier v. John Reardon No. 12-CV-00330 ORDER In Docket Number 12-CV-00330, the Plaintiffs, Joseph Bohi
More informationORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO DISSOLVE ATTACHMENT
STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, ss. BUSINESS AND CONSUMER COURT Location: Portland CONTI ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff, v. Docket No. BCD-CV-15-49 / THERMOGEN I, LLC CA TE STREET CAPITAL, INC. and GNP WEST,
More informationHooksett Sewer Commission. Penta Corporation, I. Kruger, Inc. d/b/a Kruger, Inc., and Graves Engineering, Inc. No CV ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Hooksett Sewer Commission v. Penta Corporation, I. Kruger, Inc. d/b/a Kruger, Inc., and Graves Engineering, Inc. No. 2013-CV-00540 ORDER The Plaintiff, Hooksett Sewer Commission
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS. (Filed: April 18, 2012)
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. (Filed: April 18, 2012) SUPERIOR COURT THE BANK OF NEW YORK : MELLON F/K/A THE BANK OF : NEW YORK, AS SUCCESSOR IN : TO JP MORGAN CHASE
More informationXTL-NH, Inc. New Hampshire State Liquor Commission NO CV-119 ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT XTL-NH, Inc. v. New Hampshire State Liquor Commission NO. 2013-CV-119 ORDER The Petitioner, XTL-NH ( XTL ), has brought an action against the Respondents, the New Hampshire
More informationCase 2:15-cv CDJ Document 31 Filed 03/16/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:15-cv-00773-CDJ Document 31 Filed 03/16/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN D. ORANGE, on behalf of himself : and all others similarly
More informationU.S. Bank Nat l Ass n v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Index No /2011 Page 2 of 12
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: IAS PART THREE --------------------------------------------------------------------X U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, for HarborView
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : : : ORDER
Case 213-cv-00155-RWS Document 9 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION OVIDIU CONSTANTIN, v. Plaintiff, WELLS FARGO BANK,
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 informationGvest Real Estate, LLC v. JS Real Estate Invs. LLC, 2017 NCBC 31.
Gvest Real Estate, LLC v. JS Real Estate Invs. LLC, 2017 NCBC 31. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA MECKLENBURG COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 16 CVS 21135 GVEST REAL ESTATE, LLC,
More informationDartmouth College. North Branch Construction, Inc. & Lavalle/Brensinger, P.A. AND. North Branch Construction, Inc.
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Dartmouth College v. North Branch Construction, Inc. & Lavalle/Brensinger, P.A. AND North Branch Construction, Inc. v. Building Envelope Solutions, Inc. d/b/a Foam Tech NO.
More informationIN THE 13TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF BOONE COUNTY, MISSOURI
IN THE 13TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF BOONE COUNTY, MISSOURI THE CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 09-BA-CV02314 GALEN J. SUPPES, WILLIAM R. SUTTERLIN, RENEWABLE ALTERNATIVES,
More informationCase 1:14-cv LTS Document 41 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:14-cv-08597-LTS Document 41 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------x WALLACE WOOD PROPERTIES,
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2014-0596, New Hampshire Municipal Association & a. v. New Hampshire Department of State & a., the court on June 22, 2015, issued the following order:
More informationDG Whitefield, LLC, et al. Cate Street Capital, Inc., et al. No CV-1406 ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT DG Whitefield, LLC, et al. v. Cate Street Capital, Inc., et al. No. 218-2015-CV-1406 ORDER The Plaintiffs, DG Whitefield, LLC ( Whitefield ) and Indeck Energy-Alexandria, LLC
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 informationHome Equity Asset Trust (Heat ) v DLJ Mtge. Capital, Inc NY Slip Op 50001(U) Decided on January 3, 2014
[*1] Home Equity Asset Trust 2006-5 (Heat 2006-5) v DLJ Mtge. Capital, Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 50001(U) Decided on January 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Bransten, J. Published by New York State Law
More informationCase 1:12-cv JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168
Case 1:12-cv-00396-JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division CYBERLOCK CONSULTING, INC., )
More informationJUN 1 6 ~16. ANDRosco~GIN ) ) ) ) ) Before the court is Defendant William Maselli's motion for summary judgment
STATE OF MAINE ANDROSCOGGIN, SS. ADAM BAROUDI, v. Plaintiff, WILLIAM MASELLI, CAROL WATSON, et al., Defendants. RECEIVED & FILED JUN 1 6 ~16 ANDRosco~GIN SUPE RIOR CC?!U SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET
More informationArthur O. Phaneuf, A.O. Phaneuf & Son Funeral Home and Cremation Inc., and Crematorium Society of New Hampshire, Inc.
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Arthur O. Phaneuf, A.O. Phaneuf & Son Funeral Home and Cremation Inc., and Crematorium Society of New Hampshire, Inc. v. N.H. Board of Registration of Funeral Directors and
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY WESTFIELD INSURANCE ) COMPANY, INC., ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) C.A. No. N14C-06-214 ALR ) MIRANDA & HARDT ) CONTRACTING AND BUILDING
More informationCase 2:16-cv ES-SCM Document 78 Filed 01/25/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 681 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 216-cv-00753-ES-SCM Document 78 Filed 01/25/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID 681 Not for Publication UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY NORMAN WALSH, on behalf of himself and others similarly
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO 201B jul q P 12 5^
104500613 RODGER SAFFOLD, II Plaintiff 104500613. f' c IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO 201B jul q P 12 5^ Case No: CV-17-878065 CLERK OF COURTS CUYAHOGA COUNTY Judge: JOHN P O'DONNELL
More informationCase: CJP Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/21/16 Desc: Main Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Case: 16-01052-CJP Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/21/16 Desc: Main Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE In re: GT ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES INC., et al., Reorganized Debtors.
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE JUDICIAL BRANCH SUPERIOR COURT Merrimack Superior Court Thtephone (603) 225 550 163 North Main St/PO Box 2880 TTY/TDD Relay: (800) 735-2964 Concord NH 03302-2880 http://wwwcourtsstatenhus
More informationOorah, Inc. v Covista Communications, Inc NY Slip Op 32484(U) September 25, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011
Oorah, Inc. v Covista Communications, Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 32484(U) September 25, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652316/2011 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationCase 2:18-cv JHS Document 26 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:18-cv-01333-JHS Document 26 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ERIC SCALLA, v. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-1333 KWS, INC.,
More informationCase 3:11-cv DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10
Case 3:11-cv-00332-DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION AUGUSTUS P. SORIANO PLAINTIFF V. CIVIL
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS. (Filed: May 17, 2012)
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. (Filed: May 17, 2012) SUPERIOR COURT KENNETH N. INGRAM : OLIVIA INGRAM : : v. : C.A. No. PC 2010-1940 : MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC : REGISTRATION
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84
Case: 1:16-cv-04522 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION LISA SKINNER, Plaintiff, v. Case No.
More informationCase 3:14-cv VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
Case 3:14-cv-01714-VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 PAUL T. EDWARDS, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT v. CASE NO. 3:14-cv-1714 (VAB) NORTH AMERICAN POWER AND GAS,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:12-CV REDRIDGE FINANCE GROUP, LLC
Leed HR, LLC v. Redridge Finance Group, LLC Doc. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:12-CV-00797 LEED HR, LLC PLAINTIFF v. REDRIDGE FINANCE GROUP,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. June 15, 2016
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., v. Stephen A. Ablitt et al. Doc. 57 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR OPTION ONE MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-FXD1 ASSET-BACKED
More informationCase 6:14-cv CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331
Case 6:14-cv-01400-CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION MARRIOTT OWNERSHIP RESORTS, INC., MARRIOTT VACATIONS
More informationCase 1:15-cv JMF Document 9 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:15-cv-04685-JMF Document 9 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : IN RE:
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :0-cv-0-IEG -JMA Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KAVEH KHAST, Plaintiff, CASE NO: 0-CV--IEG (JMA) vs. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK; JP MORGAN BANK;
More informationPlaintiff, : : : : John Sgaliordich is an individual investor who alleges that various investment
-VVP Sgaliordich v. Lloyd's Asset Management et al Doc. 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------ X JOHN ANTHONY SGALIORDICH,
More informationCase: 1:16-cv CAB Doc #: 26 Filed: 11/14/17 1 of 7. PageID #: 316 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:16-cv-02739-CAB Doc #: 26 Filed: 11/14/17 1 of 7. PageID #: 316 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION TOWNE AUTO SALES, LLC, CASE NO. 1:16-cv-02739 Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trust...Pooling and Servicing Agreement date v. Burke et al Doc. 55 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION DEUTSCHE BANK NAT L
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:10-cv-01936-M Document 24 Filed 07/20/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 177 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC., v. Plaintiff,
More informationCase 1:15-cv KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01927-KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01927-KLM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO GINA M. KILPATRICK, individually
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 information) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THIS CAUSE, designated a complex business case by Order of the Chief Justice
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF WAKE DOUGLAS D. WHITNEY, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHARLES M. WINSTON, EDWIN B. BORDEN, JR., RICHARD L. DAUGHERTY, ROBERT
More informationCase 1:11-cv RGA Document 50 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 568 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:11-cv-00217-RGA Document 50 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 568 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE KENNETH HOCH, : Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : BARBARA
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs,
Case :-cv-0-ajb-bgs Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 ROSE MARIE RENO and LARRY ANDERSON, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
More informationCase 2:06-cv JS-WDW Document 18 Filed 03/26/2007 Page 1 of 13. Plaintiffs,
Case 2:06-cv-01238-JS-WDW Document 18 Filed 03/26/2007 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------X JEFFREY SCHAUB and HOWARD SCHAUB, as
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 0 MATHEW ENTERPRISE, INC., Plaintiff, v. CHRYSLER GROUP LLC, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-blf ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT S PARTIAL
More informationSUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF WAKE 07 CVS 20852
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF WAKE 07 CVS 20852 MOORING CAPITAL FUND, LLC, ) Individually and derivatively as minority ) member of COMSTOCK NORTH
More informationMcNamara v. City of Nashua 08-CV-348-JD 02/09/10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
McNamara v. City of Nashua 08-CV-348-JD 02/09/10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Robert McNamara v. Civil No. 08-cv-348-JD Opinion No. 2010 DNH 020 City of Nashua O R D E
More informationBitumar USA, Inc. New Hampshire Department of Transportation NO CV ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Bitumar USA, Inc. v. New Hampshire Department of Transportation NO. 217-2014-CV-00389 ORDER Plaintiff, Bitumar USA, Inc. ( Bitumar ), seeks a preliminary injunction against
More informationCase 3:10-cv MLC -DEA Document 10 Filed 06/24/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 112
Case 310-cv-00494-MLC -DEA Document 10 Filed 06/24/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID 112 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ROBERT JOHNSON, et al., CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-494 (MLC)
More informationCase: 1:03-cv Document #: 869 Filed: 09/03/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:15984
Case: 1:03-cv-03904 Document #: 869 Filed: 09/03/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:15984 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION. CIVIL ACTION NO. v. 1:12-cv-0686-JEC ORDER & OPINION
Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial LLC v. Teledyne Technologies, Inc. et al Doc. 150 WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS, GUNN & DIAL, LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Yeti Coolers, LLC v. RTIC Coolers, LLC Doc. 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION YETI COOLERS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. 1:16-CV-264-RP RTIC COOLERS, LLC, RTIC
More informationXTL- NH, Inc. New Hampshire State Liquor Commission. No CV-119 ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT XTL- NH, Inc. v. New Hampshire State Liquor Commission No. 2013-CV-119 ORDER The Plaintiff, XTL-NH, Inc. ( XTL ), a disappointed bidder for a warehousing contract, has brought
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXA S SHERMAN DIVISION FILE D U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MAR 21200 7 DAVID J. MALANu, t;lerk BY DEPUTY PLA, LLC, individually and on
More informationCase 1:13-cv NBF Document 21 Filed 05/02/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
Case 1:13-cv-00874-NBF Document 21 Filed 05/02/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ) WINNEMUCCA INDIAN COLONY, and ) WILLIS EVANS, Chairman, ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) No. 13-874 L
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:07-cv-491-RJC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Rowl v. Smith Debnam Narron Wyche Saintsing & Myers, LLP et al Doc. 49 PAULINE ROWL, vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:07-cv-491-RJC
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:14-cv-02540-RGK-RZ Document 40 Filed 08/06/14 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:293 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 14-2540-RGK (RZx) Date August
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 information1. This case arises out of a dispute related to the sale of Plaintiff David Post s
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ROWAN COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 17 CVS 798 DAVID B. POST, Individually and as Sellers Representative, Plaintiff, v. AVITA DRUGS, LLC, a Louisiana
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NORINE SYLVIA CAVE, Plaintiff, v. DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-who ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS Re: Dkt. No.,,
More informationKrawiec v. Manly, 2015 NCBC 82.
Krawiec v. Manly, 2015 NCBC 82. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA MECKLENBURG COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 15 CVS 1927 MICHAEL KRAWIEC, JENNIFER KRAWIEC, and HAPPY DANCE, INC./CMT
More informationPlaintiff Betty, Inc. ( Betty ), brings this action asserting copyright infringement and
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------x BETTY, INC., Plaintiff, v. PEPSICO, INC., Defendant. --------------------------------------------------------------x
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x In re: Chapter 11
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x In re: RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY LLC, Debtor. ---------------------------------------------------------------x
More informationBefore the court is defendants Margaret S. Marean and Erion H. Marean' s motion for
ST ATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, ss SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION J DOCKET NO. RE-16-327 DENIS DANCOES, d/b/a THE DANCOES CO., V. Plaintiff ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MARGARET S. MAREAN
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 informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE HILLSBOROUGH, SS. SUPERIOR COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT 2004 Patrick J. Lorenz, et al. v. The Administrative Office of the Courts and The New Hampshire Supreme Court Docket No. 04-E-0153
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:
Morlock, LLC v. The Bank of New York Mellon Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION MORLOCK, L.L.C., a Texas Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff,
More informationHSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc NY Slip Op 32257(U) November 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc. 2016 NY Slip Op 32257(U) November 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652727/14 Judge: Marcy Friedman Cases posted with a "30000"
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN RE THERESA HOULAHAN TRUST. Argued: January 9, 2014 Opinion Issued: August 22, 2014
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 1:15-cv KBJ Document 16 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:15-cv-00875-KBJ Document 16 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATASHA DALLEY, Plaintiff, v. No. 15 cv-0875 (KBJ MITCHELL RUBENSTEIN & ASSOCIATES,
More informationNOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION AND FAIRNESS HEARING
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA STAMPS BROTHERS OIL & GAS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Case No. CIV-14-0182-HE CONTINENTAL RESOURCES, INC. Defendant. NOTICE OF PROPOSED
More informationHooksett Sewer Commission. Penta Corporation, I. Kruger, Inc. d/b/a/ Kruger, Inc. and Graves Engineering, Inc. No. 13-CV-540 ORDER
MERRIMACK, SS SUPERIOR COURT Hooksett Sewer Commission v. Penta Corporation, I. Kruger, Inc. d/b/a/ Kruger, Inc. and Graves Engineering, Inc. No. 13-CV-540 ORDER The Plaintiff, Hooksett Sewer Commission
More informationBIRCH BROADCASTING, INC. & a. CAPITOL BROADCASTING CORPORATION, INC. & a. Argued: October 14, 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 informationCase 3:12-cv RCJ-WGC Document 49 Filed 03/25/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case :-cv-000-rcj-wgc Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA MARK PHILLIPS; REBECCA PHILLIPS, Plaintiff, V. FIRST HORIZON HOME LOAN CORPORATION; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:13-cv-03012-TWT Document 67 Filed 10/28/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL
More informationhas reviewed the Motion, Response, Reply, Exhibits, Court s file and applicable law to now
DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO 1 st Judicial District Court Jefferson County Court & Administrative Facility 100 Jefferson County Parkway Golden, CO 80401-6002 Plaintiff(s): RUSSELL WEISFIELD,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Before the Court is Twin City Fire Insurance Company s ( Twin City ) Motion for
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRADEN PARTNERS, LP, et al., v. Plaintiffs, TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-jst ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P : : : Appellants : No: 1437 EDA 2016
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE, SUCCESSOR-IN- INTEREST TO WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR PARK PLACE SECURITIES, INC., ASSET-BACKED
More informationCase 1:14-cv FDS Document 24 Filed 06/26/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. ) ) Civil No. v.
Case 1:14-cv-11651-FDS Document 24 Filed 06/26/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS DAVID BIRNBACH, Plaintiff, Civil No. v. 14-11651-FDS ANTENNA SOFTWARE, INC., Defendant.
More informationCase: 4:15-cv RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183
Case: 4:15-cv-00464-RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION GRYPHON INVESTMENTS III, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-0-gmn-njk Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 0 VERN ELMER, an individual, vs. Plaintiff, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a National Association;
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case 4:12-cv-01585 Document 26 Filed in TXSD on 11/30/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION MORLOCK, LLC, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.
More informationNall v Estate of Powell 2012 NY Slip Op 33413(U) March 28, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases
Nall v Estate of Powell 2012 NY Slip Op 33413(U) March 28, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 106958/2011 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op
More informationCase 1:16-cv LTS Document 62 Filed 08/29/18 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:16-cv-03462-LTS Document 62 Filed 08/29/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------x AMERICAN TUGS, INCORPORATED,
More informationRoberts & Stevens, P.A., by Ann-Patton Hornthal, Wyatt S. Stevens, Stephen L. Cash, and John D. Noor, for Defendants Marquis Diagnostic Imaging of
Insight Health Corp. v. Marquis Diagnostic Imaging of NC, LLC, 2015 NCBC 50. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BUNCOMBE COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 14 CVS 1783 INSIGHT HEALTH CORP.
More informationCase 3:03-cv CFD Document 74 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. v. No. 3:03CV277(CFD)(TPS)
Case 3:03-cv-00277-CFD Document 74 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT RONALD P. MORIN, SR., et. al., -Plaintiffs, v. No. 3:03CV277(CFD)(TPS) NATIONWIDE FEDERAL
More informationCase 3:11-cv HZ Document 75 Filed 08/07/13 Page 1 of 14
Case 3:11-cv-01358-HZ Document 75 Filed 08/07/13 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON GOLDEN TEMPLE OF OREGON, LLC an Oregon Limited Liability Company, v. Plaintiff,
More informationBain, Buzzard, & McRae, LLP by Edgar R. Bain for Plaintiff. Shanahan Law Group, PLLC by Brandon S. Neuman and John E. Branch, III for Defendants.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND PATRICIA M. BRADY, v. Plaintiff, BRYANT C. VAN VLAANDEREN; RENEE M. VAN VLAANDEREN; MARC S. TOWNSEND; LINDA M. TOWNSEND; UNITED TOOL & STAMPING COMPANY OF NORTH
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, NOT IN ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE FOR MFRA TRUST 2014-2 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
More informationUNITED 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 informationCase 1:12-cv CM Document 50 Filed 10/26/12 Page 1 of 12
Case 1:12-cv-04873-CM Document 50 Filed 10/26/12 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, SUCCESSOR TO WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., SUCCESSOR
More information2:12-cv DCN Date Filed 04/09/13 Entry Number 32 Page 1 of 9
2:12-cv-02860-DCN Date Filed 04/09/13 Entry Number 32 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION IN RE: MI WINDOWS AND DOORS, ) INC. PRODUCTS
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 informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 3:18-cv-01549-JMM Document 8 Filed 10/11/18 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA NICHOLAS KING, JOAN KING, : No. 3:18cv1549 and KRISTEN KING, : Plaintiffs
More informationFiled 8/ 25/ 16 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
Filed 8/ 25/ 16 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING WADE E. JENSEN and DONALD D. GOFF, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Case No. 06 - CV - 273 J vs.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Pruitt v. Bank of America, N.A. et al Doc. 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SANDRA PRUITT, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., and BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Civil Action No. TDC-15-1310
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2016-0649, The Travelers Indemnity Company v. Construction Services of New Hampshire, LLC, the court on November 29, 2017, issued the following order:
More information