In late 2005, Sonny began talking to Winfree about obtaining financing from Colonial Bank ("Colonial"), Winfree's employer, for the purchase of approximately 500 acres of real property in Stapleton, Alabama ("the Stapleton property"). The Nicholses intended to develop the Stapleton property into a subdivision. Both Sonny and Claudene had worked in the real-estate market in Baldwin County for seve

On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 of a unanimous decision
of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 750 S.E.2d 886 (2013), finding no error in
orders entered on 19 September 2011 and 4 October 2011 by Judge Ronald E. Spivey
and a judgment entered on 11 July 2012 by Judge Stuart Albright, in Superior Court,
Guilford County. On 6 March 2014, the Supreme Co

This case encompasses two main related sets of disputes. One dispute arises from a landowner’s replacement of his boathouse and construction of ancillary retaining walls that encroach onto his neighbors’ property. This dispute includes claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages on account of the landowner’s alleged
trespass. The neighbors challenge the trial court’s c

This case arises out of a divorce proceeding between plaintiff
Kenneth Felis and his former wife, Vicki Felis. Defendant Downs Rachlin Martin, PLLC
(DRM) represented Ms. Felis in the divorce proceeding, and defendant Gallagher, Flynn &
Company, LLP (GFC) was retained by DRM on behalf of Ms. Felis to prepare business
valuations related to the proceeding. Plaintiff appeals the

Diana del Grosso, et al. petitioners") petitioned the Surface Transportation Board
("Board") for a declaratory order that state and local regulations
of a facility owned by Grafton & Upton Railroad Company ("G&U")
were not preempted by the Interstate Commerce Commission
Termination Act ("ICCTA"), Pub L. No. 104-88, 109 Stat. 803. The
Board held that state and local regulations

After the South Valley Area Planning Commission (Commission) declined to approve an eldercare facility proposed by appellant Levi Family Partnership, appellant sought administrative mandamus against respondent City of Los Angeles (City). In denying mandamus, the trial court concluded that the Commission’s findings were adequate to support its decision. We affirm the judgment entered by the court

The principal issues concern the application of Los Angeles Municipal Code section 14.3.1, which the Los Angeles City Council enacted in 2006. Prior to the enactment of that provision, developers seeking to build eldercare facilities often had to obtain several permits or variances. (Walnut Acres Neighborhood Assn. v. City of Los Angeles (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1303, 1306 (Walnut Acres).) In 20

Kelly D. Fanti appeals the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees, Troopers with the Pennsylvania State Police and employees of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”),
on her Fourteenth Amendment substantive and procedural due process claims brought under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm.

Fanti

Westfield proposed to renovate a portion of a shopping center located in the City. Originally built in 1969, the project site was developed "as a two- and three-story indoor shopping center with five main anchor department store buildings (i.e., Sears, Macy's, Macy's Men, JC Penney, and the vacant former Robinsons-May) and numerous smaller retail specialty shops." The site contains over 6,400 su

The Anti-Eviction Act (the Act), N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1 to
61.12 permits the “owner of a building of three residential
units or less” to oust a tenant if the owner intends to
“personally occupy a unit.” N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1(l)(3). In this
appeal, the Court determines whether that provision can be
applied to remove a tenant from a two-story single-family house
built in a

In 2011, the named defendant, the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of New Haven (board), granted an appeal forfour variances and an application for a special exception, with conditions, as requested by the defendant applicant, P.T.R., LLC.1 The plaintiffs, 347 Humphrey Street, LLC, Rosemarie Morgan, and Thomas Morgillo,2 thereafter appealed from that decisiontotheSuperiorCourt.Thetrialcourtsus

To understand the arguments that have been raised in this case, it is easier
first to describe what HFA is not, rather than what it is. HFA is not a recorded
subdivision in Sussex County. There is no plot plan, recorded or otherwise,
showing the numbered lots within HFA. Instead, HFA consists of several parcels
of land along a private road near Bridgeville.1 These parcels w

To understand the arguments that have been raised in this case, it is easier
first to describe what HFA is not, rather than what it is. HFA is not a recorded
subdivision in Sussex County. There is no plot plan, recorded or otherwise,
showing the numbered lots within HFA. Instead, HFA consists of several parcels
of land along a private road near Bridgeville.1 These parcels w

The primary issue that we must address in this appeal is whether, in an action brought by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection (commissioner)1 pursuanttoGeneralStatutes§ 22a-430(d),2 the trial court, upon finding that any person had caused pollution of the waters of the state, is required to order that person to remediate the effects of the pollution pursuant to applicable standards promu

For  nearly  a  decade,  plaintiff‐appellant  the County of Westchester (the “County” or “Westchester”) has been engaged in  litigation with the United States Department of Housing and Urban  Development  (“HUD”  or  “the  Government”)  over  whether  the  County  has  adequately  analyzed—in  its  applications  for  HUD  funds—impediments  to  fair  housing  within  the  County’s  jurisdic

The trial court found, or the record supports, the following facts. The petitioner owns an unimproved parcel of land in Surry with frontage on a Class VI road. The property is approximately 1,000 feet from a Class V road. Under
the Town’s zoning ordinance, to build on its property, the petitioner must establish that the property has at least 200 feet of frontage on a public street, which is

This  appeal  has  a  long history  that,  as  mentioned  above, 5  
includes three lawsuits. While much of that background is described 6  
here, a more detailed history can be found in the district court’s 7  
prior opinions in those cases. See Citizens Against Casino Gambling in 8  
Erie Cty. v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (“CACGEC I”), amended 9  
on reconsideration by 

We summarize the board's findings.2 In 1992,
the taxpayer, Russell Block Associates, constructed a twenty
four story residential building (Tower) in the city of
Worcester. The Tower development project was conditioned on the
construction of a parking garage.3 The five-story garage in
issue contains 300 parking spaces and is located across a small
side street from t

In 2004, appellants Land Baron Investments, Inc., Michael
Chernine, and Robert Black, Jr. (collectively, Land Baron), contracted to
purchase land for $17,190,000 from respondents Bonnie Springs Family
Limited Partnership, Bonnie Springs Management Company, Alan
Levinson, Bonnie Levinson, and April Boone (collectively, Bonnie Springs)
for the express purpose of building a s

This case involves the jeopardy element of the tort for
wrongful discharge against public policy and whether the administrative remedies
available under the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA), 1 49
U.S.C. § 31105, preclude Charles Rose from recovery under a common law tort
claim. This is one of three concomitant cases2 before us concerning the "adequacy
o

Ericka Rickman served as director of Ucentris Insured Solutions from August
2004 until her termination in November 2009. Ucentris, a subsidiary ofPremera, is a
general insurance agency that sells a variety of health care insurance plans and risk
management products to individuals and businesses. Two distinct events transpired
relevant to Rickman's termination.
HIPAA Concer

In three issues, Appellant American Homeowner Preservation Fund, LP (American) appeals a judgment declaring null and void its lien on property
2
purchased by Appellee Brian J. Pirkle at a tax-foreclosure sale, declaring null and void a note executed by Cathy Lewis1 and secured by the property, dismissing American’s constitutional takings claims against the taxing authorities involved in th

On December 30, 2011, Joel Estaban Perez was
seriously injured while working for Kevin Spicer, doing business
3 Established by St. 1985, c. 572, § 55, the Fund "provide[s], among other things, a source of payment for an employee who suffers a work-related injury while working for an employer who does not have workers' compensation insurance in violation" of G. L. c

Since 1975, we have held that provisions precluding government employees
4 from seeking elective office are constitutionally permissible personnel rules
5 regulating conflicts of interest. See State ex rel. Gonzales v. Manzagol, 1975-NMSC-
6 002, ¶¶ 18-19, 87 N.M. 230, 531 P.2d 1203. These personnel rules act as conditions
7 of employment, and therefore do not constitute added qual

Plaintiffs John (“Paterek”)1 and Cynthia Paterek (“the Patereks”),
along with their company Paterek Mold & Engineering, Inc. (“PME”), (collectively “Plaintiffs”),
appeal the district court order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants Ben Delecke,
Commissioner of the Village of Armada Planning Commission, and the Village of Armada
(collectively “Defendants”), in this § 198