Case Doc 4058 Filed 09/11/14 Entered 09/11/14 19:09:29 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11
|
|
- Michael Stevenson
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Document Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC 1, et al. Debtors. Case No Chapter 11 Jointly Administered DEBTORS MOTION TO PLACE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS IN THE MESOTHELIOMA ESTIMATION RECORD UNDER SEAL Pursuant to this Court s Order Establishing Protocols for Public Access to Sealed Materials in Record of Estimation Proceeding (the Protocol ) (Docket No. 3060), Debtors Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, Garrison Litigation Management Group, Ltd., and The Anchor Packing Company, by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby file this Motion (this Motion ) to place under seal or redact certain materials in the record of the estimation proceeding, described more particularly below, that are (1) subject to protection of the attorneyclient privilege or work product immunity or (2) contain social security numbers, dates of birth, or other information that Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9037 requires to be redacted. Each specific document (or portion of document) or the testimony of any witness that Debtors seek to be sealed or redacted and the reasons for such sealing or redaction are identified and described in Exhibit A to this Motion. In addition, Debtors propose redactions of certain information pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9037 likely to be included in the 1 The debtors in these jointly administered cases, referred to herein as the Debtors or Garlock, are Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC; Garrison Litigation Management Group, Ltd,; and The Anchor Packing Company. 1
2 Document Page 2 of 11 documents listed in Exhibit B. 2 In further support of this Motion and pursuant to the Protocol, Debtors state: SEALING OF PRIVILEGED MATERIALS GARLOCK WAS COMPELLED TO PRODUCE 1. During proceedings to estimate the aggregate amount of allowed present and future mesothelioma claims against Garlock, the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants (the ACC ) and the Future Asbestos Claimants Representative (the FCR ) advanced a settlement approach to estimation pursuant to which they offered evidence of Garlock s settlements of mesothelioma claims prior to bankruptcy as a basis to estimate the aggregate allowed amount of present and future mesothelioma claims against Garlock. 3 A premise of their approach was that Garlock s past settlements reflected Garlock s own view of the amount of its liability for mesothelioma claims. See 2012 Order for Estimation Garlock objected to the settlement approach on numerous grounds, including that it violated Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which prohibits the use of settlements to establish the validity or amount of disputed claims. Id The Court denied Garlock s objections to the settlement approach and its motion to exclude from evidence Garlock s past settlements of mesothelioma claims. 2 The listing of materials in Exhibit B is detailed. Because, in some instances, the detailed descriptions on these exhibits were drawn from exhibit lists that were identified as confidential and are currently under seal, Exhibit B is being served directly to the Court and parties with access pursuant to relevant orders. 3 Briefing and argument on these subjects before the estimation trial were summarized by the Court in its April 13, 2012 Order for Estimation of Mesothelioma Claims (Docket No. 2102) ( 2012 Order for Estimation ). Garlock raised its objections again before trial and at trial. See, e.g., Renewed Motion of Debtors to Exclude Evidence of Debtors Settlements Under Federal Rule of Evidence 408 (Docket No. 2924). 2
3 Document Page 3 of Confronted with the Court s decision to admit Garlock s past mesothelioma settlements in the estimation proceeding, Garlock sought to prove that its past settlements were not a fair reflection of the validity and allowed amounts of mesothelioma claims. Specifically, Garlock contended, (1) the vast majority of settlements were influenced not by Garlock s perception of merit of the settled claims, but by the desire to avoid paying substantial legal fees and expenses necessary to effectively defend the claims and (2) many settlements were infected with the impropriety of certain law firms that, to obtain higher recoveries, suppressed their clients exposures to asbestos containing products of other defendants. 5. In discovery responses served before trial, Garlock identified numerous settled claims that Garlock contended were affected by the suppression of evidence of exposure to other asbestos products. 6. In response to Garlock s denial that its past settlements reflected the merit of claims, the ACC and FCR moved the Court to compel Garlock to produce attorney work product and attorney-client communications setting forth evaluations of settled mesothelioma claims by Garlock and its lawyers and discussing the reasons Garlock such settled cases. The ACC and FCR asserted that, because Garlock disputed the premise that the ACC and FCR put forward that Garlock s settlements were a fair measure of Garlock s liability Garlock impliedly waived privilege protections related to settled Garlock cases. 7. Courts have not recognized an implied waiver in such circumstances. In fact, courts applying precedent applicable in this District 4 have held that, even when a party brings an action alleging that fraud or misrepresentation by a counterparty affected such party s decision to 4 Courts of this District have applied the principles of Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Inc. v. The Home Indemnity Co., 32 F.3d 851 (3rd Cir.1994), in considering whether a party impliedly waives privileges by virtue of its position in litigation. 3
4 Document Page 4 of 11 settle, such party does not impliedly waive protections of privilege concerning the settlement decision. For instance, the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi rejected the assertion that a plaintiff that brought suit alleging it was defrauded by a personal injury claimant who provided false information in a pulmonary questionnaire that was a requisite to settling a personal injury claim waives the protection of privileges and immunities surrounding its decision to settle. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Harried, No. CIVA 5:06CV160-DCB-JMR, 2009 WL , at *1 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 6, 2009) (denying discovery of documents and parts of documents to which attorney-client privilege applied) (applying principles of Rhone-Poulenc, 32 F.3d at 864). 8. Likewise, the North Carolina Business Court, in an opinion written by now Fourth Circuit Judge Diaz, held that a plaintiff who alleges fraud or misrepresentation does not impliedly waive privileges concerning the subject of the fraud or misrepresentation. Banc of Am. Securities, LLC v. Evergreen Int l Aviation, Inc., No. 03-CVS-9138, 2006 NCBC 2, 2006 WL , (N.C. Bus. Ct. Jan. 25, 2006) (applying Rhone-Poulenc, 32 F.3d at ). 9. In its May 31, 2012 bench ruling and subsequent June 19, 2012 order, the Court denied the ACC s and FCR s motion The ACC and FCR renewed their motion on May 24, 2013, seeking privileged documents related to certain specific cases Garlock had identified as ones in which plaintiffs attorneys and plaintiffs had withheld evidence (the Designated Claims ). 11. In a June 6, 2013 hearing on the motion (and a subsequent June 18, 2013 Order), the Court reversed, in part, its previous decision, this time ruling Garlock had waived privilege protections pertaining to certain documents related to the Designated Claims. The Court ruled 5 See Order Denying Motion of the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants to Compel on Grounds of Waiver the Production of Certain Documents the Debtors have Withheld as Privileged (Docket No. 2315). 4
5 Document Page 5 of 11 that it did not believe that there s been a wholesale waiver of the privilege, but nonetheless required Garlock to produce specific protected materials. Tr. 6/6/2013 at 159: In particular, the Court compelled Garlock to produce attorney Major Expense Authorization forms ( MEAs ) and Trial Evaluation Forms ( TEFs ). MEAs documented the approval of settlement decisions and contain the mental impressions and opinions of in-house and trial counsel. TEFs were prepared by Garlock s outside counsel and contain trial plans, updates on the status of trial preparation, and counsel s opinion and assessments of cases. The Court also authorized the ACC and FCR to take depositions of two outside lawyers Garlock intended to call as witnesses and a 30(b)(6) witness to answer questions about the Designated Cases without Garlock s interposing privilege objections. 13. The Court s written order declared that the production of documents and [t]estimony regarding the Designated Claims shall not, of itself, be deemed to effect a waiver as to any mesothelioma claims other than the Designated Claims. June 18, 2013 Order at Immediately after the Court s bench ruling, Garlock moved for reconsideration or, in the alternative, for leave to pursue immediate appellate review, which the Court denied. 15. On July 26, 2013, during the estimation trial, the ACC made another, similar request. This time the ACC sought MEAs for a list of 204 cases that had been described by Garlock witness Richard Magee. (These 204 claims included the 26 Designated Claims.) The Court granted the request from the bench, requiring Garlock to produce MEAs for those claims that were additional to the Designated Claims so as to facilitate the cross examination of Mr. Magee. Tr. 1417: In that instance also, the Court made clear the production of MEAs will not be a waiver of anything else. Tr. 1417:
6 Document Page 6 of The Court, over Garlock s continuing objection, admitted the MEAs and TEFs into evidence. The Court then allowed the ACC to cross-examine Garlock s outside lawyers and Mr. Magee using these documents. In cross examination, the ACC probed the extent to which the absence of evidence from plaintiffs of their exposures to other asbestos-containing products, particularly asbestos insulation produced by companies that had previously filed for bankruptcy protection, affected Garlock s defense of mesothelioma claims and its settlement decisions. After considering all of the evidence, the Court found that the manipulation of exposure evidence by plaintiffs and their lawyers had a profound impact on Garlock s settlements. Order Estimating Aggregated Liability (January 10, 2014) (Docket No. 3296) at The documents and testimony the Court compelled Garlock to produce (the Compelled Discovery ) and any related materials were identified as confidential and have, heretofore, been subject to protective orders restricting their disclosure. The Compelled Discovery has never been disclosed to the public. 18. Pursuant to the Protocol, Garlock proposes to seal or redact the Compelled Discovery and any briefs, pleadings, transcripts or other documents that reveal the contents of the Compelled Discovery. The specific documents, pleadings, deposition excerpts, and transcript excerpts are listed in Exhibit A to this Motion (the Proposed Sealed Material ). 19. Debtors propose that the Proposed Sealed Material remain under seal for a period that lasts until the two year anniversary of the closing of these cases. 20. Debtors have, where practical in the Proposed Sealed Material, proposed limited redactions of documents instead of the sealing of documents. 6 Instances where Debtors propose 6 As outlined in Exhibit A, for materials such as briefs and sealed pleadings that do not contain line and page number indications, Debtors will provide an Exhibit C which is a compilation of 6
7 Document Page 7 of 11 sealing a document in lieu of partial redaction concern MEAs and TEFs which would require substantial redaction and which would leave little unredacted information, all of which would be duplicative of publicly available information. 21. This Court found in rendering its decisions compelling the production of the Compelled Discovery that this information was confidential and otherwise protected by the work product immunity and/or attorney-client privilege. 22. Courts routinely conclude the compelling public interest in protecting the confidentiality of attorney-client communications overcomes the presumption of public access to judicial records, thereby authorizing sealing or redaction of documents and information protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. See, e.g., Siedle v. 147 F.3d 7, (noting that the attorney-client privilege is precisely the kind of countervailing concern that is capable of overriding the general preference for public access to judicial records ); Powers v. Braun, No. ELH , 2013 WL , at *2 (D. Md. Dec. 16, 2013) (surveying decisions regarding motions to seal based on attorney-client privilege, concluding [c]ourts generally accept a claim of privilege as capable of overriding the presumption of public access and thereby justifying redaction of documents, and sealing documents subject to the privilege). 23. Indeed, courts have relied on the attorney-client privilege as a basis to seal documents from public access even in situations, like the instant case, when the court compelled disclosure of some or all of the privileged materials to parties to the action. See Zawadzki v. Cmty. Hosp. Assn., No. 09-CV LTB-MEH, 2010 WL , at *6 (D. Colo. Aug. 6, 2010) (sealing documents subject to the attorney-client privilege, while noting that nothing in proposed, implemented redactions to the Court and parties who have access to such sealed documents under appropriate orders. 7
8 Document Page 8 of 11 this order alters the Court s order that certain information from the submission be disclosed directly to the opposing party ). 24. In addition, Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) gives this Court authority to enter orders that provide that even though privileged documents have been disclosed in one proceeding, such disclosure is also not a waiver in any other federal or state proceeding. Id. 25. Notably, the compelled disclosure of these documents came about as a result of the ACC and FCR s settlement approach to estimation, not an approach that Debtors instigated or otherwise sponsored. Debtors, in fact, argued pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 408, that Garlock s settlements should not be considered at all. It was the ACC and FCR, not the Debtors, who put the Debtors settlements at issue. 26. The Court s rulings concerning the Compelled Discovery were limited in nature. The Court stated in connection with its first ruling that, although it was ordering the production of protected materials, it did not believe that there s been a wholesale waiver of the privilege. Tr. 6/6/2013 at 159: The Court further stated that the documents produced and [t]estimony regarding the Designated Claims shall not, of itself, be deemed to effect a waiver as to any mesothelioma claims other than the Designated Claims. June 18, 2013 Order at 7. And, in its additional ruling compelling further production, the Court stated that the production of protected documents will not be a waiver of anything else. Tr. 1417: Consistent with these limitations, Debtors request that the Court order the Proposed Sealed Material sealed. Sealing these documents is necessary to ensure that the documents disclosure is confined to the context in which their production was ordered; namely, the contested estimation trial. 8
9 Document Page 9 of Sealing these documents would help prevent a third party from contending that the privileges and immunities attached to the Compelled Discovery were somehow waived for other, separate litigation proceedings. Sealing also would ensure that no third party could contend that the Court s rulings compelling disclosure in the estimation trial context should be extended to additional privileged materials in another litigation context. 29. Finally, Debtors expect the ACC, plaintiffs and their lawyers in the claims that are the subject of the Compelled Disclosure, and other persons to raise a host of grounds for protecting documents and testimony related to settlements reached between asbestos claimants and Garlock and asbestos claimants and other defendants. Debtors reserve the right, should this Court approve such other grounds warranting the sealing of documents and information subject to the Protocol in the context of motions to seal pursuant to the Protocol, to offer such grounds as bases to seal the Proposed Sealed Documents. PROTECTION OF INFORMATION SUBJECT TO RULE Garlock proposes to redact from all documents or testimony in the record for the estimation proceeding references to an individual s social-security number, taxpayeridentification number; birthdate; name, if the individual is known to be and identified as a minor; financial account numbers; and medical information (except for an asbestos-claimants claimed disease). The specific documents, deposition excerpts and transcript excerpts where such information is likely to be found are listed in Exhibit B to this Motion. 31. Pursuant to the Protocol and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9037, such information must be redacted. 32. Redacting the information as required by Rule 9037 is the least restrictive mechanism for protecting such information. 9
10 Document Page 10 of After reviewing the materials listed in Exhibit B and identifying such information, Garlock proposes to permanently redact such information in accordance with the guidelines in the Protocol and Rule WHEREFORE, Garlock respectfully requests that the documents and testimony identified in Exhibit A be sealed until the second anniversary of the closing of these cases and the materials identified in Exhibit B be permanently redacted as proposed. 10
11 Document Page 11 of 11 This 11th day of September, Respectfully submitted, _s/garland s. Cassada Garland S. Cassada N.C. Bar No Jonathan C. Krisko N.C. Bar No Richard C. Worf, Jr. N.C. Bar No ROBINSON BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A. 101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900 Charlotte, North Carolina Telephone: (704) Facsimile: (704) Special Corporate and Litigation Counsel to the Debtors Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, Garrison Litigation Management Group, Ltd., and The Anchor Packing Company 11
Case 10-31607 Doc 4115 Filed 10/02/14 Entered 10/02/14 16:24:08 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6
Document Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607 Chapter
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4460 Filed 03/31/15 Entered 03/31/15 15:58:10 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10
Case 10-31607 Doc 4460 Filed 03/31/15 Entered 03/31/15 15:58:10 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4110 Filed 10/02/14 Entered 10/02/14 14:19:56 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 15
Document Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division ) In Re: ) Chapter 11 ) GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES ) Case No. 10-31607 LLC, et al. 1
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4432 Filed 03/16/15 Entered 03/16/15 09:10:55 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9
Document Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division ) In re: ) ) Case No. 10-31607 GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES ) LLC, et al., ) Chapter
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MEMORANDUM OPINION 2
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN RE: Specialty Products Holdings Corp., et al. Bankruptcy No. 10-11780 Debtor(s) 1 Chapter 11 (Jointly Administered) Related to Doc.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division. Chapter 11
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607 Chapter 11 Jointly Administered
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division. Chapter 11
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607 Chapter 11 Jointly Administered
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4960 Filed 11/04/15 Entered 11/04/15 16:49:23 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6
Document Page 1 of 6 CHARLOTTE DIVISION In re: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC., et al. Chapter 11 Case No. 10-31607 Debtors. MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF PAUL M. MATHENY NOW COMES, counsel for
More informationCase 2:11-cv-01174-TS-PMW Document 257 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:11-cv-01174-TS-PMW Document 257 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION, a Utah municipal corporation;
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DIVISION IN RE: * * [Debtor s Name] * (***-**-last four digits of SSN) * Case No. - [Joint Debtor s Name, if any * Chapter 13 (***-**-last
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION BRIAN Z. FRANCE, v. MEGAN P. FRANCE, Plaintiff, Defendant. Case No. 3:11-CV-00186 PLAINTIFF S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 5192 Filed 12/29/15 Entered 12/29/15 17:35:23 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3
Case 10-31607 Doc 5192 Filed 12/29/15 Entered 12/29/15 173523 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division In re Case No.
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 3802 Filed 06/24/14 Entered 06/24/14 15:57:28 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 23
Case 10-31607 Doc 3802 Filed 06/24/14 Entered 06/24/14 15:57:28 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE:
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA RONALD DUTTON, : : Consolidated Under Plaintiff, : MDL DOCKET NO. 875 : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. : 09-62916 TODD SHIPYARDS CORP.,
More informationCOMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES Pursuant to Section 5.10 of the Combustion Engineering 524(g) Asbestos PI Trust Distribution Procedures (
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division. Chapter 11
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607 Chapter 11 Jointly Administered
More informationIN RE GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, ET AL.
IN RE GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, ET AL. STATEMENT OF JOSEPH W. GRIER, III, THE FUTURE CLAIMANTS REPRESENTATIVE, IN SUPPORT OF THE DEBTORS SECOND AMENDED PLAN OF REORGANIZATION In asbestos bankruptcy
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION
More informationPersonal injury claim" does not include a claim for compensatory benefits pursuant to worker s compensation or veterans benefits.
Wisconsin AB 19 (2013) (a) Personal injury claim" means any claim for damages, loss, indemnification, contribution, restitution or other relief, including punitive damages, that is related to bodily injury
More informationTRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST. Individual Review and Arbitration Procedures for Category A and Category D Personal Injury Claims
TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST Individual Review and Arbitration Procedures for Category A and Category D Personal Injury Claims Pursuant to Sections 3.4 and 3.5 of the Tronox Tort Claims Trust Distribution
More informationIN RE: SKECHERS TONING SHOE : CASE: 3:11-md-02308-TBR PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION : : MDL No.: 2308
Case 3:11-md-02308-TBR-LLK Document 68 Filed 05/03/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1322 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTIRCT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION IN RE: SKECHERS TONING SHOE : CASE: 3:11-md-02308-TBR
More informationCase 2:08-cv-83111-ER Document 55 Filed 01/04/10 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:08-cv-83111-ER Document 55 Filed 01/04/10 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA REGINALD DENT : CONSOLIDATED : MDL 875 v. : : EDPA CIVIL ACTION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. v. * Civil Action No.: RDB 10-1895 MEMORANDUM OPINION
Joel I. Sher, Chapter 11 Trustee, * IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Plaintiff, * v. * Civil Action No.: RDB 10-1895 SAF Financial, Inc., et al., * Defendants. * * * * *
More informationSTATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Patricia L. Acampora, Chairwoman Maureen F. Harris Robert E. Curry, Jr. Cheryl A. Buley STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION At a session of the Public Service Commission
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCION
Case :-cv-00-rsm Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE CGI TECHNOLOGIES AND SOLUTIONS, INC., in its capacity as sponsor and fiduciary for CGI
More informationSSSHHHHH THERE S AN INSURANCE BROKER IN THE ROOM!
ABA Section of Litigation 2012 Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee CLE Seminar, March 1-3, 2012: Hey! Give Me Back That Document! Privilege Issues in Insurance Coverage Disputes SSSHHHHH THERE S AN
More informationCase 2:07-cv-02175-JPM-dkv Document 85 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:07-cv-02175-JPM-dkv Document 85 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION SPINE SOLUTIONS, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
More informationCase 3:12-cv-00165-LRH-VPC Document 50 Filed 06/07/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case :-cv-00-lrh-vpc Document 0 Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 GINA NELSON, Plaintiff, vs. NAV-RENO-GS, LLC, et al., Defendants. :-CV-0-LRH (VPC ORDER 0 This discovery
More informationSIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010.
SIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010. CRAIG A. GARGOTTA UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION IN RE: ' CASE NO. 09-12799-CAG
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. SUPERIOR COURT BENEDETTO ROSSI and SILVIA ROSSI v. C.A. No. 96-1295 AC&S, INC., et al. LEONARD S. MACAIONE and LOIS G. MACAIONE v. C.A.
More informationDrafting the Joint Defense Agreement
Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement (with Sample Provisions) Daralyn J. Durie Joint defense agreements have some obvious advantages, but some not-so-obvious disadvantages. If you plan to enter into one,
More informationCase 05-00262-8-JRL Doc 142 Filed 06/04/07 Entered 06/04/07 17:00:30 Page 1 of 5
Case 05-00262-8-JRL Doc 142 Filed 06/04/07 Entered 06/04/07 17:00:30 Page 1 of 5 SO ORDERED. SIGNED this 04 day of June, 2007. J. Rich Leonard United States Bankruptcy Judge IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY
More informationCase 3:12-cv-08123-HRH Document 521 Filed 10/27/14 Page 1 of 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case 3:12-cv-08123-HRH Document 521 Filed 10/27/14 Page 1 of 7 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) TOWN OF COLORADO CITY,
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4599 Filed 05/08/15 Entered 05/08/15 15:48:18 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 12
Document Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Document Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION IN RE: MICHAEL TODD CHRISLEY, Chapter 7 Case No. 13-56132-MGD Debtor. JASON L. PETTIE, CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:13-cv-00464-MOC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:13-cv-00464-MOC LEGAL NEWSLINE, ) ) Plaintiff(s), ) ) Vs. ) ) ) GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, ) ) Defendant(s).
More informationUnited States District Court
Case:0-cv-0-JSW Document Filed0//0 Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 Tim Galli, v. Plaintiff, Pittsburg Unified School District, et al., Defendants. / No. C 0- JSW
More informationSTIPULATION AND ORDER. Whereas the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of the above-captioned debtors
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------- X In re Chapter 11 Case No. MOTORS LIQUIDATION COMPANY., et al., 09-50026 (REG) f/k/a
More information2015 IL App (1st) 143589-U. No. 1-14-3589 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 143589-U SIXTH DIVISION September 11, 2015 No. 1-14-3589 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. DEBORAH B. GIBSON Case No. 04-11822
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA IN RE: DEBORAH B. GIBSON Case No. 04-11822 Debtor ORDER GRANTING THE TRUSTEE S MOTION TO COMPEL ENFORCEMENT OF THE SETTLEMENT Melissa W. Wetzel,
More informationTORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER. Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and Plaintiff's Treating Physicians
This article originally appeared in The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 25, No. 26, June 1996. by Jeffrey R. Pilkington TORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. The memorandum disposition filed on May 19, 2016, is hereby amended.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED JUN 30 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Connecticut corporation, v. Plaintiff - Appellant,
More informationCase 1:13-cr-20850-UU Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/14/14 11:43:07 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:13-cr-20850-UU Document 43 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/14/14 11:43:07 Page 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. RAFAEL COMAS, Defendant. / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI
More informationCase 2:13-cv-01419-JWS Document 413 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case 2:13-cv-01419-JWS Document 413 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA LAURIE MILLER, BRIAN DIMAS, KIM MILLS, ANTHONY SOZA, BRUCE CAMPBELL, KELLIE 2:13-cv-1419
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Kimlyn Cline Plaintiff, v. Advanced Medical Optics, Inc., Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08-CV-62 (TJW) MEMORANDUM
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION. Case No. 2:11-cv-162-FtM-36SPC ORDER
GAVIN'S ACE HARDWARE, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION Plaintiff, -vs- Case No. 2:11-cv-162-FtM-36SPC FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ORDER
More informationCase 1:09-cv-00554-JAW Document 165 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2495 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Case 1:09-cv-00554-JAW Document 165 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 2495 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE MICHAEL HINTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) 1:09-cv-00554-JAW ) OUTBOARD MARINE
More informationCase 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9
Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 MARY SOWELL et al., Plaintiffs, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION Page 1 of
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 3002 Filed 07/08/13 Entered 07/08/13 18:38:20 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 31
Document Page 1 of 31 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division IN RE: GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES LLC, et al., Debtors. 1 Case No. 10-BK-31607
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CIVIL ACTION : No. 97-2312 v. : : CRIMINAL ACTION SONNY SIGNO : No. 96-562-1 M E M O R A N D U M
More informationMISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION 2013
MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION 2013 By: Representative Turner To: Judiciary A HOUSE BILL NO. 529 1 AN ACT TO REQUIRE CLAIMANTS IN ASBESTOS TORT ACTIONS TO MAKE 2 CERTAIN DISCLOSURES PERTAINING
More informationCase 2:07-cv-10945-SFC-MKM Document 132 Filed 05/27/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:07-cv-10945-SFC-MKM Document 132 Filed 05/27/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DURA GLOBAL, TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL
More informationGarlock Bankruptcy Overview of the Disclosure Statement and the Plan of Reorganization
Garlock Bankruptcy Overview of the Disclosure Statement and the Plan of Reorganization There is a Chapter 11 bankruptcy case involving Garlock Sealing Technologies ( GST ) about the production of asbestos-containing
More informationDean M. Trafelet (the Future Claimants Representative ), as legal. representative for holders of future asbestos personal injury claims against
STUTZMAN, BROMBERG, ESSERMAN & PLIFKA A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Sander L. Esserman (Admitted Pro Hac Vice Robert T. Brousseau (Admitted Pro Hac Vice Peter C. D Apice Jo E. Hartwick (Admitted Pro Hac Vice
More informationWhat to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration
What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration Russell R. Yurk Jennings, Haug & Cunningham, L.L.P. 2800 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-1049 (602) 234-7819
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 14-80374-CIV-COHN/SELTZER ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISQUALIFY DEFENSE COUNSEL
PHARMA SUPPLY, INC., v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 14-80374-CIV-COHN/SELTZER MITCHELL A. STEIN and STEIN LAW, P.C., Defendants. / ORDER DENYING MOTION
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:09-cr-00188-MEF-WC Document 64 Filed 03/15/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) CR CASE
More informationCase: 1:11-cv-09187 Document #: 161 Filed: 09/22/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:<pageid>
Case: 1:11-cv-09187 Document #: 161 Filed: 09/22/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PETER METROU, ) ) Plaintiff, ) No. 11 C 9187
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION ORDER
Case 4:02-cv-00066-HL Document 136 Filed 02/10/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : ex rel. GLENN F. NICHOLS
More informationCase 0:12-cv-60597-JIC Document 108 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/13 12:33:23 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:12-cv-60597-JIC Document 108 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/13 12:33:23 Page 1 LISA KOWALSKI, a Florida resident, v. Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, JACKSON NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Michigan
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAY 19 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Connecticut corporation, v. Plaintiff
More informationASBESTOS LITIGATION UPDATE: Richard O. Faulk Partner, Hollingsworth LLP Washington, DC
ASBESTOS LITIGATION UPDATE: OR Richard O. Faulk Partner, Hollingsworth LLP Washington, DC Asbestos Litigation: The Neverending Story This case is prompted by the elephantine mass of asbestos cases,...
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JAMES MICHAEL WATSON 03-13355 DEBTOR CHAPTER 7
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE: CASE NO. JAMES MICHAEL WATSON 03-13355 DEBTOR CHAPTER 7 SECURITY RESOURCES, L.L.C. ADV. NO and INTERFACE SECURITY SYSTEMS, L.L.C. 04-1005
More information(129th General Assembly) (Amended Substitute House Bill Number 380) AN ACT
(129th General Assembly) (Amended Substitute House Bill Number 380) AN ACT To enact sections 2307.951, 2307.952, 2307.953, and 2307.954 of the Revised Code to require claimants in asbestos tort actions
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA M E M O R A N D U M. STENGEL, J. November, 2005
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE : COMPANY of AMERICA, : CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff : : v. : NO. 04-462 : PAUL M. PRUSKY, : STEVEN G. PRUSKY,
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Keller v. Kehoe, 2007-Ohio-6625.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 89218 C. REYNOLDS KELLER PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. ROBERT D.
More informationTITLE I REDUCTION OF ABUSIVE LITIGATION
109 STAT. 737 Public Law 104 67 104th Congress An Act To reform Federal securities litigation, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America
More informationUnited States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division. Transmittal Sheet for Opinions for Posting
United States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division Transmittal Sheet for Opinions for Posting Will this opinion be published? Yes Bankruptcy Caption: Carl P. Amari Bankruptcy
More informationMARYLAND STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS REPRESENTING CHILDREN IN CUSTODY CASES
MARYAND JUDICIAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON FAMILY LAW CUSTODY SUBCOMMITTEE HON. MARCELLA HOLLAND, CHAIR MARYLAND STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS REPRESENTING CHILDREN IN CUSTODY CASES TEXT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION In re: ) Chapter 7 Liquidation ) marchfirst, INC., et al., ) CASE NO. 01 B 24742 ) (Substantively Consolidated)
More informationGLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS Sources: US Courts : http://www.uscourts.gov/library/glossary.html New York State Unified Court System: http://www.nycourts.gov/lawlibraries/glossary.shtml Acquittal A
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ENTRY ON DEFENDANT S MOTION TO CAP DAMAGES
FULMORE v. M & M TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC. Doc. 112 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION CARL S. FULMORE, Plaintiff, v. M & M TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC., Defendant.
More informationNOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Filed 8/27/14 Tesser Ruttenberg etc. v. Forever Entertainment CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying
More informationCase 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Case 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE DAVID WIMBERLY, CASE NO. 05-81669-G3-13 Debtor,
More informationCase 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: <pageid>
Case 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION DARYL HILL, vs. Plaintiff, WHITE JACOBS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 3:13-cv-30138-MGM Document 100 Filed 08/12/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS PREFERRED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 13-30138-MGM LEONARD
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT
BAP Appeal No. 05-36 Docket No. 29 Filed: 01/20/2006 Page: 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT IN RE RICHARD A. FORD and TONDA L. FORD, also known as Tonda Yung, Debtors.
More informationTkaczyk v 337 E. 62nd LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 31522(U) August 11, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 160264/2013 Judge: Cynthia S.
Tkaczyk v 337 E. 62nd LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 31522(U) August 11, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 160264/2013 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN STEVEN OLSON, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 12-C-1126 BEMIS COMPANY, INC. et al., Defendants. DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 13-20764 Document: 00512823894 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/03/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, L.P., Plaintiff - Appellee v. United States Court
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) STIPULATION
1 1 1 1 1 BOURNE INTERNATIONAL, INC., v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Plaintiff, CHET STOLER; SOUTH SEAS TRADING CO., Defendants. STIPULATION NO. C0-0RJB PROTECTIVE ORDER
More informationCase: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172
Case: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JAMES MEYER, v. Plaintiff, DEBT RECOVERY SOLUTIONS
More informationGUIDELINES FOR ATTORNEYS TAXATION OF COURT COSTS IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
GUIDELINES FOR ATTORNEYS TAXATION OF COURT COSTS IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO The purpose of these guidelines is to explain the standard and customary practices of the Clerk s Office of the United
More informationAppendix I: Select Federal Legislative. Proposals Addressing Compensation for Asbestos-Related Harms or Death
Appendix I: Select Legislative Appendix I: Select Federal Legislative is and Mesothelioma Benefits Act H.R. 6906, 93rd 1973). With respect to claims for benefits filed before December 31, 1974, would authorize
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION In re: JOSEPH R. O LONE, Case No.: 3:00-bk-5003-JAF Debtor. Chapter 7 / FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This case
More informationCase 7:10-cv-00006-HL Document 40 Filed 09/20/10 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION
Case 710-cv-00006-HL Document 40 Filed 09/20/10 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION BEATRIZ NAVARRO, surviving spouse and natural heir to
More informationCase 2:12-cv-02198-JWS Document 113 Filed 05/12/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case 2:12-cv-02198-JWS Document 113 Filed 05/12/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Mary M. Murphy, individually and as conservator for her minor children, W. M. and L. M.,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231-F
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:07-CV-231-F PAMELA L. HENSLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) PROPOSED JOINT JOHNSTON COUNTY BOARD
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Robison v. Orthotic & Prosthetic Lab, Inc., 2015 IL App (5th) 140079 Appellate Court Caption RANDY ROBISON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ORTHOTIC & PROSTHETIC LAB, INC.,
More informationASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
In re: UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Case No. 90-10016-8G1 Chapter 11 THE CELOTEX CORPORATION, Debtor. / ORDER ON (1) MOTION OF THEARTHUR AARON AND OTHER SIMILARLY
More informationHOUSE BILL No. 4917. July 18, 2013, Introduced by Rep. Heise and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
HOUSE BILL No. HOUSE BILL No. July, 0, Introduced by Rep. Heise and referred to the Committee on Judiciary. A bill to amend PA, entitled "Revised judicature act of," (MCL 00.0 to 00.) by adding chapter
More informationCase 10-31607 Doc 4802 Filed 09/02/15 Entered 09/02/15 16:32:39 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 30
Case 10-31607 Doc 4802 Filed 09/02/15 Entered 09/02/15 16:32:39 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division ) In Re: ) Chapter
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 05-1452 PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,
More informationDefendant: PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY COURT USE ONLY Counsel for Plaintiff: Marc R. Levy, #11372
GRANTED Movant shall serve copies of this ORDER on any pro se parties, pursuant to CRCP 5, and file a certificate of service with the Court within 10 days. Dated: May 27, 2010 DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND
More information2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227
More informationJUDGMENT AFFIRMED. Division A. Opinion by JUDGE NIETO. Casebolt and Dailey, JJ., concur
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS February 15, 2001 Court of Appeals No. 98CA1099 El Paso County District Court No. 96CV2233 Honorable Theresa M. Cisneros, Judge Carol Koscove, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Bolte,
More informationEXHIBIT A Proposed Notice UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN You have been identified as a member of a class which has been the subject of a settlement. This settlement may
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. v. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY et al Doc. 324 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
More information