Circle K, Inc. v. Webster
This dispute involved a land transfer. Circle K appealed from the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants and argued that the trial court misinterpreted a Right of
This dispute involved a land transfer. Circle K appealed from the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants and argued that the trial court misinterpreted a Right of
The New Jersey Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s order granting, in part, the plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion. The Court affirmed the order denying the defendants’ partial summary-judgment cross-motion.
In Allen v. Cape May Co., Plaintiff sued and alleged that Defendants retaliated against her for engaging in Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA)-protected activity arising from two incidents. The New
In Peroza-Benitez v. Smith, Plaintiff sued members of the City of Reading Police Department pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth
In Dansko Holdings, Inc. v. Benefit Trust Co., a shoe company hired a trustee for its employees’ stock ownership plan. Afterward, the trustee hinted that it would help the shoemaker
After the Securities and Exchange Commission commenced an action against Robert Bentley for an alleged Ponzi scheme, the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of PA appointed Marion receiver.
Having granted rehearing with the judges who participated in the original decision, in Ezaki Glico Kabushiki Kaisha v. Lotte Intern’l Am. Corp., the 3rd Circuit re-issued its initial opinion. A
Cruz was arrested and indicted for murder. After spending two years in jail, a jury acquitted him. Thereafter, he filed a civil action alleging that the lead detective misled the
Clark v. Nenna arose out of a surgical procedure that the defendant performed on the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged emotional distress caused by the defendant’s professional negligence, i.e., failure to
In Woodford v. Commonw. of Penn. Ins. Dept., the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was called on to decide whether an insurance broker violated the state’s Insurance Department Act of 1921 by
Copyright Sullivan Simon.
All rights reserved.