The court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs, because defendant insurers were obligated to provide insurance coverage even though third parties provided some of the funds to pay plaintiffs' settlement.

Where plaintiff terminated a merger agreement, the termination provision in the agreement prevented plaintiff from re-covering against defendant for breach of contract.

County board of adjustment correctly concluded that respondent was seeking an area variance, not a use variance.

Bankruptcy court properly interpreted a disputed term based on the plain language of the contract itself, so extrinsic evidence was not necessary.

The court granted defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiff's breach of fiduciary duty claims, because plaintiff did not establish any improper conduct in connection with a merger.

The court denied a motion to dismiss because plaintiff adequately alleged claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing where defendant purportedly structured a settlement with a third party to avoid paying plaintiff.

The court denied plaintiffs' motions in limine with respect to defense experts, because those witnesses had specialized and relevant knowledge.