A probate court found that a trustee breached her duties by transferring property from the trust to herself.

Sherman Act violation claim failed under the rule of reason where plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to define the relevant geographic or product market, but removal of plaintiff's products from a website, which hampered its ability to compete, was sufficient evidence of refusal to deal.

Appellant owned and operated a property management company and executed a series of contracts with Schnur and Anderson that essentially merged their businesses and formed a new entity to solicit new investors to purchase additional properties.

Receipt of notice of infringement only a day prior to the filing of the complaint was insufficient to charge defendant with pre-suit knowledge of the asserted patents.

The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' derivative complaint which alleged that one defendant had made a sham offer to purchase another defendant's high vote stock to trigger a call right, which in turn resulted in significant monetary benefits to both defendants and harm to nominal defendant.

Member controlling general partner in Master Limited Partnership was correct party to determine whether opinion of counsel to exercise call right was acceptable, meaning that general partner and related entities were exculpated from liability to limited partners due to the presumption of good faith in reliance on opinion of counsel imposed by the limited partnership agreement.

Special committee directors were dismissed from case challenging merger transaction, where plaintiff could not show that directors lacked independence from corporate controller or had engaged in willful dereliction of duty to the level of bad faith.

Lanham Act Counterclaim Dismissed; Defendant Is Not a 'Market Participant'

State Law Tort Claims Arising from Climate Change Caused by Use of Fossil Fuel Products Did Not Create Federal Question Permitting Removal to Federal Court

Emergency stay of bankruptcy court's adverse grant of judgment in adversary proceeding denied where appellants were unlikely to prevail on the merits of their appeal and where harm to Chapter 11 debtor outweighed the harm that might come from the reduction of appellants' claims.