In this collection action by the plaintiff, Connecticut Light &Power Company, against the defendants, Bess P. Gilmore, Douglas G. Gilmore, Keith P. Gilmore and Community Club Awards, Inc., for unpaid electric bills, the defendant Bess Gilmore1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the plaintiff. On appeal, the defendant claims that the judgment should be reversed and a

24 This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States
25 District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Leonard D.
26 Wexler, Judge), following a jury trial, declaring, among other
27 things, that plaintiff-appellee Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance
28 Underwriters, Inc., ("Fidelity") has no duty to defend or
29 indemnify defendants-appellants Jasam Realty Corp. ("Jasam

15 Immunotherapy, Inc. and its successor in interest, Vacold LLC (together,
16 “Immunotherapy”), appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court
17 for the Southern District of New York (Richard M. Berman, J.) in favor of
18 Immunotherapy’s former business partner, Cerami Consulting Corporation
19 (“CCC”) and its affiliates, Anthony Cerami, Carla Cerami, and VL

Plaintiffs Glynn Ley and Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeal a district court’s grant of Defendants’ Visteon Corporation, Peter Pestillo, Michael Johnston, Daniel R. Coulson, James Palmer, and Pricewaterhousecooper, L.L.P., (“PwC”) (collectively, “Defendants”) motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ class action securities violation cla

In this case, we primarily consider whether intangible property, in particular a contractor’s license, can be the subject of a claim in tort for conversion. In doing so, we adopt the California definition of “property rights” and the Restatement (Second) of Torts rule defining conversion of “intangible personal property,” and expressly reject the notion that personal property must be ta

This case arises from the settlement of a complex of securities fraud cases involving the sale of municipal bonds for renovation and construction of health care facilities. The litigation was commonly referred to as the In re Heritage Bond Litigation. The district court ultimately approved multiple settlement agreements between different plaintiffs and defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

This is the appeal and cross-appeal of a judgment entered in Scott Circuit Court after a jury found Cincinnati Insurance Company (CIC) liable to George and Kay Hofmeister for fraudulent misrepresentation and for violation of the Kentucky Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (UCSPA), Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 304.12–230. CIC appeals the trial court’s denial of its motions for summary ju

Does damage to a new automobile in a dealer’s inventory, however minor and regardless of repair, necessarily strip the vehicle of its status as “new” under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA; Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.)? After considering the Vehicle Code’s definition of “new vehicle” (§ 430), and its damage disclosure (§§ 9990-9993) and safe harbor provisions for minor repaired

Appellants Rosalind Herman, Gregg Caplitz and Financial Resources Network, Inc. ("FRNI") filed suit in Massachusetts state court against appellees Rudy K. Meiselman and various members of his family. The suit stemmed from Meiselman's employment with FRNI and his participation in a profit-sharing plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"). Meiselman removed the matter

E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company ("DuPont"), based in Delaware, is a well-known maker of chemical and other products. In selling its solid surface materials, DuPont for a number of years franchised distributors, each with an exclusive marketing area or areas (referred to as the franchisee's "GMA"). One of these distributors--Maine based New England Surfaces ("NES")--held the exclusive franchise

Appellant, Joseph Zarzosa, appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellee, Curtis Flynn. Because Zarzosa did not show that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to his claims, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

I. BACKGROUND

Zarzosa was charged with an undisclosed crime following a traffic stop. The reason given for the traffic stop was that Za

This appeal presents the question of whether a plaintiff can state a cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation when the defendant’s alleged misrepresentation is included in a later contract to which the defendant is not a party. We hold that a plaintiff can state such a cause of action under the facts of this case.

The trial court’s final judgment provides a very detailed descrip

We affirm the order dismissing the instant action with prejudice against Lee Milich and Lee Milich, P.A., because we agree that the seventh iteration of the instant complaint again fails to allege the essential elements of a cause of action for legal malpractice (whether denominated negligent misrepresentation or otherwise) or fraud. See Lopez-Infante v. Union Cent. Life Ins. Co., 809 So. 2d 13, 1

Howard Curd and several other commercial fishermen (the fishermen) appeal an order dismissing their proposed class action lawsuit against Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC. The fishermen claim that Mosaic's phosphogypsum storage facility polluted the waters of Tampa Bay, reducing the available supply of fish, which in turn damaged their businesses and reduced their income. We agree with the trial court that

The district court concluded that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “improperly revived” U.S. Patent No. 7,056,215 after it was abandoned during prosecution, and therefore held it (and the continuation patent that followed it) invalid on summary judgment. We conclude that “improper revival” is not a cognizable defense in an action involving the validity or infringement of a patent. Thus

In this interlocutory appeal, appellants the City of League City, Texas ("the City") and League City police officers Raymond Singleton and Walter Hammann (collectively "the officers") appeal the trial court=s order denying their motion to dismiss. In their sole issue on appeal, appellants contend the trial court erred in denying their motion to dismiss the claims filed by appellee, Kenneth Castee

In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court erred in refusing to set aside a jury verdict in favor of a plaintiff on claims of constructive fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

I. Procedural History

In July 2005, Jonathan F. Johnson, former owner of several grocery stores in the Richmond area, filed an amended motion for judgment in the circuit court, in

In this case, objectors to a class-action settlement appeal the trial court's approval of a settlement agreement. ORCP 32 D. (1) Specifically, objectors argue that the trial court erred by approving a settlement that (1) purported to release unpleaded claims that did not arise from the same factual predicate as the claims pleaded in the underlying class action and (2) provided inadequate and misle

Defendant appeals a judgment awarding plaintiff $175,000 in punitive damages for defendant's failure to comply with ORS 659A.043(1) when it did not reinstate plaintiff as an employee after he had recovered from a work-related injury. (1) Defendant makes two assignments of error: (1) the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict on plaintiff's claim for punitive damages, and (2

Appellant, Window Fashions Professionals, Inc. (WFP), a Texas Corporation, sold a window coverings franchise to respondents, Ron Winter and Rochelle Winter. The franchise agreement provided that, in the event of a dispute between the parties, binding arbitration would be held in Texas and Texas law would be applied. However, the Uniform Franchise Offering Circular provided by WFP stated that the a

¶1 The Oklahoma Bar Association (Bar Association), the complainant, filed a complaint against Stephen E. Lile, the respondent, alleging specific acts constituting professional misconduct in violation of the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (ORPC), 5 O.S.2001, ch. 1, app. 3-A, Rule 8.4. Such a violation is grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to Rule 1, § 1.3 of the Rules Governing Disc

In this nationwide class action, 50 million present and former policyholders of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) contend that during the class period, 1983 to 1998, State Farm breached a duty to pay billions of dollars in dividends and, as a result, created an excessive surplus.

State Farm moved for summary judgment based on the business judgment rule, asserting t

In two published decisions the United States District Court for the Central District of California denied class certification in putative class actions brought by current and former users of the prescription drug Paxil against GlaxoSmithKline, Inc. (GSK), the drug’s manufacturer, which alleged GSK had deceptively advertised Paxil as nonhabitforming.

Relying upon those decisions and Alvare

Appellant Larry Wages filed suit against Respondent Matt Young, alleging that Young breached their agreement for repair of Wages' automobile. The circuit court dismissed Wages' Petition on the basis that it was time barred. We affirm.

I. Facts

Wages initially filed suit against Young on June 8, 2006, in the Circuit Court of Chariton County (the "2006 action"). Wages' First Amended Pe

Joseph Tauvar's automobile liability policy, issued by American Family Mutual Insurance ("American Family"), provided for up to $10,000 in medical benefits in the event of an accident. Tauvar was injured in a car accident in October 1997. He subsequently filed $10,000 worth of claims for medical expenses associated with the car accident.

American Family investigated the claims, asking Dr. J