This case concerns the licensing rights for several early musical recordings by reggae legends Bob Marley and the Wailers. When the music was initially recorded in Jamaica in the 1960s, record keeping was not a primary concern. The absence of legal documentation has led to confusion in the marketplace as to which entities own licensing rights for these recordings.

Defendants Universal Mus

After settlers displaced the Osage Nation from its native lands, the federal government shunted the tribe onto the open prairie in Indian Territory, part of what later became the State of Oklahoma. At the time, the government had no idea those grasslands were to prove a great deal more fertile than they appeared. Only years later did the Osages’ mammoth reserves of oil and gas make themselves kn

Although the heroism and sacrifice of forebears are never far from the minds of her citizenry, Texas has nonetheless accorded special emphasis to certain of these persons and their deeds through the placement of thousands of state government-approved historical markers, known today as “Official Texas Historical Markers.� While these markers can vary somewhat in appearance, they uniformly conve

In this appeal, we consider whether section 101.106(f) of the Texas Tort Claims Act1 violates the “open courts� provision of the Texas Constitution.2 We

_________________________

1 That section provides:

2

also consider whether the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in Franka v. Velasquez, 332 S.W.3d 367 (Tex. 2011) violates the “takings�3 and “due process�4 pr

Plaintiff-Appellant Delbert Ingram appeals from a district court’s dismissal of his claims against Defendants-Appellees (“Defendants�). Mr. Ingram sued Defendants- Appellees—Dr. Hashib D. Faruque, Dr. Yan Feng, Donna Delise, Kyle Inhofe, Lt. Michael Stevenson, and Captain Tim Collins1— claiming that Defendants had violated his rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Cons

David Demers is a tenured associate professor at Washington State University. He brought suit alleging that university administrators retaliated against him in violation of the First Amendment for distributing a short pamphlet and drafts from an in-progress book. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants, finding that the pamphlet and draft were distributed pursuant to Demersâ

The Federal Depository Insurance Corporation (FDIC), while acting as receiver1 of the New Frontier Bank (the Bank), used proceeds from the sale of cattle belonging to a limited liability company (LLC) to pay down a loan of one of the two LLC members. According to the complaint, the FDIC had no authority to do so because the payment was contrary to the members’ agreement. Ignoring the separate en

Appellant, John Harrison, challenges the trial court’s order granting the plea to the jurisdiction of appellee, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (“UTHSCH�), in his suit against UTHSCH and others for medical

2

malpractice. In his sole issue, Harrison contends that the trial court erred in granting UTHSCH’s plea and denying him the opportunity to replead

We originally issued our opinion and judgment in this appeal on June 27, 2013. Appellant Edward Baldridge has moved for en banc reconsideration. We

2

withdraw our previous opinion and judgment, and issue this opinion and a new judgment in its place. We dismiss the motion for en banc reconsideration as moot.1

After Edward Baldridge’s employment was terminated by Spring Branch

Plaintiffs Linda and David Kubert were grievously injured by an eighteen-year-old driver who was texting while driving and crossed the center-line of the road. Their claims for compensation from the young driver have been settled and are no longer part of this lawsuit. Plaintiffs appeal the trial court's dismissal of their claims against the driver's seventeen-year-old friend who was texting the d

¶ 1 Summary judgment in defendant’s favor was affirmed where there was insufficient evidence of either actual or constructive notice to the city of the height difference in the sidewalk prior to the plaintiff’s fall.

¶ 2 The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. On appeal, plaintiff contends that summary judgment should be vacated because there was sufficient

The Appellant, Leslie Harris, challenges the final summary judgment entered by the trial court on her action for declaratory relief. The court’s ruling was based on the statute of limitations. Because the court erred in finding the statute of limitations barred the suit, we reverse.

History of the Dispute

In 2006, Harris took title to property in Bristol Lakes, a residential co

Kass Shuler, P.A., seeks certiorari review of an order by the circuit court, sitting in its appellate capacity, reversing a county court's award of attorney's fees to Kass Shuler. We grant the petition in part and deny it in part.

- 2 -

Kass Shuler filed a mortgage foreclosure suit on behalf of a client. Carol Barchard, who was not the mortgagor, was named as a defendant for the purp

The question presented is whether to issue a writ of mandamus to resolve in favor of the defendants this long-lived litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS�)—a statute, passed in 1789, that was rediscovered and revitalized by the courts in recent decades to permit aliens to sue for alleged serious violations of human rights occurring abroad. The statute was first deployed in 1980 again

The City of Dallas filed these interlocutory appeals from orders denying its pleas to the jurisdiction in four lawsuits filed against the City by current and former police officers, firefighters, and rescue officers (the Officers) alleging that the City breached its contract with them regarding their pay. We consolidated the appeals for the purpose of briefing and argument. For the following reaso

Former prosecutors Andrew Thomas and Lisa Aubuchon, and their spouses, (“Defendants�) appeal the district court’s partial denial of their motions to dismiss. Former Maricopa County Board of Supervisors member Donald T. Stapley, Jr. and his spouse (“Plaintiffs�) allege that Defendants initiated a frivolous federal civil racketeering (“RICO�) suit against Stapley to harass him. The sui

Although this case presents significant questions regarding the interaction of federal banking and state foreclosure laws, our focus is upon a more fundamental question: whether the district court even had jurisdiction to consider the issues raised. Plaintiffs1 filed a class-action lawsuit in state court, alleging that the defendants2—including ReconTrust, a Texas-based national bank—had

Billy Edward Damuth, II, appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing his breach of contract suit against Trinity Valley Community College (TVCC). In his sole issue, Damuth contends TVCC’s governmental immunity has been waived. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Damuth entered into a written employment agreement with TVCC to coach and teach. Five months into the one year contract, he was d

After filing a worker’s compensation claim, Appellant Kim Burt filed suit against her former employer, Andrews County Hospital District doing business as Permian Regional Medical Center (the Hospital), Appellee, alleging retaliatory discharge under Chapter 451 of the Texas Labor Code and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Burt now appeals the trial court’s summary judgment in favor

Webb County appeals the trial court’s order denying its plea to the jurisdiction in Khaledi Properties, Ltd.’s suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate. We hold that Webb County did not waive its immunity from suit, either by contract or by its conduct. We therefore reverse the trial court’s order denying Webb County’s plea to the jurisdiction and render judg

In November 2009, a vehicle that Randall Keith Hampton was driving collided with another vehicle at an intersection in Valley Center. Hampton and his wife sued the driver of the other vehicle as well as the County of San Diego (County).1 The Hamptons brought claims against the County for dangerous condition of public property (Gov. Code, § 835 et seq.)2 (fourth cause of action) and loss of consor

Appellants Paul Curtis and his wife, Desiree Munoz, sued respondent County of Los Angeles for injuries sustained in a vehicle collision precipitated by another motorist, Andres Salazar Meza, while driving on Sierra Highway. The trial court granted respondents‟ motion for summary judgment, and appellants appealed. In affirming, we conclude that respondent showed that with the exception of the lac

Manolo Figueroa (“Figueroa�) appeals the trial court’s entry of final summary judgment in favor of his statutory employer, Master Construction of South Florida, Inc. (“Master Construction�), finding that Master Construction was covered by workers’ compensation immunity for the personal injuries sustained by Figueroa. We affirm.

Figueroa’s action was brought under the intention

In this case, we decide whether a civil contempt petition that seeks indemnification damages under MCL 600.1721 imposes “tort liability� within the meaning of MCL 691.1407(1) of the governmental tort liability act (GTLA), MCL 691.1401 et seq. Given the Legislature’s use of the common-law term “tort,� we hold that “tort liability� as used in MCL 691.1407(1) of the GTLA encompasses all

Sheriff‟s deputies seized and destroyed approximately 1,500 pounds of marijuana under cultivation in a remote area of Humboldt County (the County). Plaintiffs Roscoe, Sylvia, Richard, Timothy and Jeffery Littlefield, each of whom has a written physician‟s recommendation for up to two ounces of marijuana per day, sued the County for conversion and violation of their constitutional and statutory