Mark Menard and Carol Menard appeal from a district court order dismissing their complaint for failure to state a claim and denying their motion to amend the complaint. Mark Menard, whom we refer to as "Menard," was permanently injured while crossing through a railroad freight yard; the district court ruled that his complaint against CSX Transportation, Inc. ("CSX") failed to assert sufficient fa

This case arises from various disputes between a landlord and tenant. The landlord is Ms. Heller, the counterclaimant-appellant herein, and the tenant is Sola Salon Studios, Inc. (“Sola�), the appellee herein. Only one of the parties’ many claims and counterclaims is before this court. All that is left for our resolution is a determination *This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e

Appellee, Lexington Insurance Company (“Lexington�), moved for rehearing of our April 19, 2012 opinion. We grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw our April 19, 2012 opinion and judgment, and issue this opinion and judgment in their stead. Our disposition remains the same. We dismiss Lexington’s May 21, 2012 motion for en banc reconsideration as moot.1

Appellant, Javier Alvarado, s

Appellants Michael and Lydia Ruiz filed a complaint against Safeway, Inc., (Safeway) under Business and Professions Code section 25602.1,1 seeking damages for their son‟s death in a car accident. Safeway filed a motion for summary judgment arguing it was entitled to prevail, as a matter of law, because it did not furnish or cause to be furnished alcohol to the minor who caused the accident withi

¶1 Doug Torian brought suit against his former employer (EnvironMax) and its directors to recover the value of shares he received to offset wages owed to him by the company—shares he claimed were diluted by corporate misdeeds. The district court dismissed Torian‘s suit on summary judgment, concluding that the claim was derivative in nature and that ing to assert it directly. In so ruling, th

Defendants, Rysher Entertainment, LLC, 2929 Entertainment, LP, and Qualia Capital, LLC, appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff, Don Johnson Productions, Inc. On December 7, 1994, plaintiff and Rysher Entertainment, LLC entered into a contract for the services of an actor, Don Johnson. Entitled the ―Term Agreement‖ (the contract), it provided for production of the ―Nash Bridgesâ

This case concerns alleged violations of local occupancy-tax laws by various online travel companies. Plaintiffs—cities, townships, and a county in the state of Ohio—sued various online travel companies, asserting that the online travel companies violated local tax laws by failing to pay a transient-occupancy tax on the difference between a contractually agreed-upon “wholesale� room rate,

This case presents an as-applied and a purported facial attack on the Massachusetts statutory and administrative scheme for revoking licenses for the carrying of firearms. The district court entered summary judgment dismissing the claims. Hightower v. City of Boston, 822 F. Supp. 2d 38, 65-66 (D. Mass. 2011).

Stacey Hightower is a former Boston Police officer who, during many of he

Plaintiff, Brenda Linam sued Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. on a premises liability theory. The accident in which Plaintiff, Brenda Linam, slipped and fell on a puddle of water on September 11, 2009, at the Wal-Mart in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma.

Plaintiff filed the present action alleging negligence. No evidence exists to support Plaintiffs claim that WalMart’s actions were negligent, as the exis

In this case, plaintiffs-appellees -- producers and owners of copyrighted television programming -- sued defendants-appellants ivi, Inc. ("ivi") and its Chief Executive Officer, Todd Weaver, for streaming plaintiffs' copyrighted television programming over the Internet live and without their consent. The district court granted a preliminary injunction for plaintiffs, holding that: (1) plaintiffs w

In this interlocutory appeal,[1] appellant City of Haltom City (the City) appeals the trial court’s order denying its motion for summary judgment concerning the claims brought by appellees, whom we have listed above. In five issues, the City argues that the trial court does not have jurisdiction over appellees’ claims because the City’s immunity has not been waived. We reverse the trial c

This appeal reads like a telenovela, a Spanish soap opera. It pits music celebrities, who make money by promoting themselves, against a gossip magazine, that makes money by publishing celebrity photographs, with a paparazzo, who apparently stole the disputed pictures, stuck in the middle.

Noelia Lorenzo Monge and Jorge Reynoso (“the couple�), Latin American celebrities, claim that Maya

In this premises-liability case, Natasha Williams argues that the trial court erred in granting a no-evidence summary judgment for Unilev Management Corp. Unilev managed the office building where Williams worked and was injured. Because Williams failed to present more than a scintilla of evidence that Unilev knew or should have known of the dangerous condition that injured her, we affirm the trial

Plaintiffs, the Estate of Frieda M. Wilmes through its appointed fiduciary, Claudette Schenck, Robert K. Espel, and James C. Matacia (collectively “Plaintiffs�), on behalf of themselves and all other similarly-situated employees and retirees, appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants Anthem, Inc., Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc., Community Insurance Company,

Plaintiffs, the Estate of Frieda M. Wilmes through its appointed fiduciary, Claudette Schenck, Robert K. Espel, and James C. Matacia (collectively “Plaintiffs�), on behalf of themselves and all other similarly-situated employees and retirees, appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants Anthem, Inc., Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc., Community Insurance Company,

In 2010, the Georgia legislature, apparently concerned that the carrying of weapons and long g 1 uns2 would likely present an unreasonable risk of harm to people who assemble in eight specific locations, enacted a statute barring the unrestricted carrying of weapons or long guns in those locations. O.C.G.A. § 16- 11-127(b) (this provision is hereinafter referred to as the “Carry Law�).3 This

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Jeffery Ensign and for his causes of action against the Defendants PA. Hayes and G.C. Hayes and states as follows:

1. The Plaintiffs a resident of Cleveland County, Oklahoma.

2. The Defendants P.A. Hayes and G.C. Hayes’ home is located at 15339 Goldbeck Oklahoma City, 73165 Oklahoma in Cleveland County.

3. On or about July 16, 2009, Jeffery Ens

Borchardt Rifle Corporation (Borchardt) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment affirming the revocation of its federal firearms license. After an initial compliance inspection, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) granted Borchardt a license in 2002. The ATF conducted a second inspection in 2007 and detected numerous violations of the Gun Control Act, 18

In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable CareAct in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision isthe individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain“minimum essential� health insurance coverage. 26 U. S. C. §5000A.For individuals who are not exempt, and who do not receive he

¶1 This is an appeal from a judgment granting plaintiffs a mandatory injunction based upon written findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the trial court in response to request therefor.

¶2 The asserted issues upon which the case was tried eventually were formed by plaintiffs filing their second amended reply to the amended answer and second amended answer to defendants' cross-pe

Vehicle Code1 section 11710 requires a licensed motor vehicle retail dealer to procure and file a bond in the amount of $50,000. Any person who suffers a loss by reason of the dealer‟s fraud has a right of action against the dealer and the surety on the bond in an amount not to exceed the value of the vehicle purchased. (§ 11711, subd. (a).) Here, respondent Trenton Pierce made a section 11711

¶1 The three issues presented on certiorari are1 whether the trial court: 1) properly allowed the State to prove two of the three factually alleged inappropriate acts in the grand jury's accusation for removal of an elected state official from office for wilful neglect of duty; 2) improperly modified the jury instructions regarding wilful neglect of duty; and 3) erred in denying the motion for a

Adela Otte and Donnie Scott (Appellants) appeal from the trial court’s judgment granting Dean A. Edwards, Sr., Dinnell Edwards and Dean Edwards, Jr.’s (collectively Respondents) Motion to Dismiss Count I of Appellants’ Petition for Wrongful Death. We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

Dinnell E. and Dean A. Edwards, Sr. are the parents of Dean A. Edwards, Jr. (Dean). In

California Pines Property Owners Association (the Association) appeals after the trial court resolved a dispute over water diversion rights in favor of defendant Robert Pedotti.

The Association owns land in the community of California Pines in Modoc County, California, including the land where Donovan Reservoir (Reservoir) and its dam are located. Pedotti owns the nearby 1,761-acre Diamond

Appellant Michael Mitchell appeals from an order of the Fayette Circuit Court granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees, the University of Kentucky and several of its employees and entities (collectively "UK"), in a suit where Mitchell claimed UK terminated his employment in violation of public policy. We conclude that Mitchell's discharge was contrary to a fundamental and well-defined publi