Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
First Amendment retaliation claim dismissed where plaintiff failed to plead either that defendants had knowledge of plaintiff's protected speech or that such speech was a substantial factor in defendants' decision to terminate plaintiff. Defendants' motion to dismiss granted.
Plaintiffs could not sustain their answer to defendant's joinder complaint, which added additional defendants to this personal injury action, where they offered no excuse for their untimely answer, which was filed long after the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. The court granted the additional defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' answer.
Even though a creditor who repossessed and sold a vehicle failed to indicate whether the sale was a public or private one, the court found the sale was commercially reasonable. The court awarded the creditor a deficiency judgment.
Defendant moved for summary judgment in plaintiff's action asserting gender discrimination in her termination but the only evidence for the non-discriminatory reason for the termination was employer's deposition testimony which raised credibility issues and the court could not assess credibility in deciding a motion for summary judgment. Motion denied.
Plaintiff demonstrated that defendant breached the parties' software development contract by terminating the contract without complying with a right-to-cure clause; however, the facts were insufficient to allow the court to arrive at an intelligent estimate of expectation damages without conjecture. The court awarded plaintiff nominal damages of one dollar.
Defendant school district moved for summary judgment in plaintiff's age discrimination complaint asserting he was denied a promotional opportunity but plaintiff produced sufficient evidence to show that the district's stated reason was pretextual. Motion denied.
Publication Date: 2018-08-22 Practice Area:Bankruptcy | Civil Appeals | Creditors' and Debtors' Rights Industry:Energy Court:U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Judge:Judge Ambro Attorneys:For plaintiff: Philip D. Anker, George W. Shuster, Jr., Benjamin W. Loveland, Adam G. Landis and Matthew B. McGuire for appellants for defendant: Michael D. DeBaecke, Mark D. Kotwick, Bradley R. Aronstam, Nicholas D. Mozal, Benjamin J. Schladweiler, George A. Davis, Jonathan Rosenberg, Daniel S. Shamah, Andrew Sorkin and Peter M. Friedman for appellees; Neil B. Glassman and Michael S. Kim for amicus curiae in support of appellants. Case Number: D68258
Appellants were not entitled to a distribution because they did not qualify for any priority treatment under the waterfall provisions of an inter-creditor agreement.
Parties to contract need not be joined as indispensable parties where plaintiff was not seeking to set aside or rescind contract but instead alleged contract was null and void for failure of condition of closing. Defendant's motion to dismiss denied in part and granted in part.
Prisoner's writ of mandamus for parole denied where completion of minimum RRRI sentence did not mandate parole and where parole board set forth brief statement of reasons for denying parole. Board of Probation and Parole's preliminary objections sustained.