3249 search results for query *

Summary: 434 F. Supp. The Court has raised, sua sponte, the question of the continued participation of Mitchell Breit, a partner in the New York law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP ("Milberg Weiss"), as a member of the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee ("PSC") in this matter. See In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 932 (8th Cir.2005) ("the district court acts as a fiduciary, serving as a guardian of the rights of the . . . class members"); Pigford v. more.

Summary: 91 F. Supp. In this order the referee ordered the trustee to withhold, (1) three per cent of the total moneys due the petitioning secured creditor and to pay the same to the Clerk of Court for credit to the referees' salary and expense funds, and (2) the sum of $900 representing the petitioner's share of the costs incurred by the trustee in the care, custody and liquidation of encumbered property. *54 Thereafter, the trustee and petitioner agreed that, subject to approval by the referee, the more.

Summary: 36 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (1999) Dorothy I. FEIST, individually and as trustee for the heirs and next of kin of Brian Keith Feist, deceased, Plaintiff, v. Bradley Jon SIMONSON, Kim Johnson, Robert Glasrud, Matthew Blade, Craig Nordby and the City of Minneapolis, Defendants. Dorothy Feist commenced this action against the City of Minneapolis ("City") and members of the Minneapolis Police Department ("MPD") seeking damages resulting from the death of her son, Brian Keith Feist ("Feist"). Plaintiff more.

Summary: 179 F. Supp. Enterprise Bank v. Magna Bank, 92 F.3d 743, 747 (8th Cir.1996). Krenik v. County of Le Sueur, 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir. 2d 202 (1986); Krenik, 47 F.3d at 957. Hukkanen v. Int'l Union of Operating Eng'rs, Hoisting & Portable, 3 F.3d 281, 285 (8th Cir.1993) (when Title VII violations are continuing in nature, the limitations period does not begin to run until the last occurrence of discrimination); see also Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250, 257-58, 101 S. Ct. 498, more.

Summary: 25 F. Supp. See O.R.S. Distilling Co. v. Brown-Forman Corp., 972 F.2d 924, 925-27 (8th Cir.1992). Mar. 17, 1995); McDonald's Corp. v. Nelson, 822 F. Supp. 597, 609 (D.Iowa 1993), aff'd sub nom, Holiday Inns Franchising, Inc. v. Branstad, 29 F.3d 383 (8th Cir.1994). Whirlpool Corp. v. Ritter, 929 F.2d 1318, 1322 (8th Cir.1991) (quoting Allied Structural Steel, 438 U.S. at 245, 98 S. Ct. 2716). Mar. 17, 1995) (quoted in Anderson Marketing, Inc. v. Design House, Inc., 70 F.3d 1018, 1019 n. 3 (8th more.

Summary: 121 F. Supp. Following these negotiations and on March 15, 1949 Gamble paid bankrupt $500 toward the purchase of a 1947 Autocar tractor and bankrupt delivered to Gamble a writing signed by its authorized officer and in the following form: "March 15, 1949 "Received this day, March 15, 1949 of Mr. Ray B. Gamble, 3245 Hennepin Ave., Minneapolis, Minn. a $500.00. Petroleum Carriers Company went into bankruptcy and Gamble filed his claim in the amount of $6,566.58, asserting a contract for a period more.

Summary: 577 F. Supp. The FUND FOR ANIMALS, INC., Friends of Animals and Their Environment (FATE), Wild Canid Research and Survival Center, Wildlife Education Program for a Living Future, North American Wildlife Park Foundation, Inc., Sierra Club, Help Our Wolves Live, Inc., International Fund for Animal Welfare, Defenders of Wildlife, Animal Welfare Institute, Humane Society of the United States, Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, International Ecology Society, Animal Rights Coalition, and more.

Summary: 141 F. Supp. The Complaint alleges that: (1) UPS intentionally violated section 703 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2, by excluding medically approved prescription treatments for female hormonal disorders, while not excluding any approved prescription treatments for male hormonal disorders (Compl.śś 7, 10); and (2) UPS's Plan discriminates against and has a disparate impact on female employees and spouses of male employees. Ctr., 915 F. Supp. UPS's reliance on Saks v. Franklin Covey Co., 117 F. more.

Summary: 322 F. Supp. & Admin., 229 F.3d 721, 723 (8th Cir.2000); Calvit v. Minneapolis Pub. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 256, 106 S. Ct. 2505; Krenik v. County of Le Sueur, 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir.1995); Elayaperumal v. Medtronic, Inc., Civ. Burkett v. Glickman, 327 F.3d 658, 661 (8th Cir.2003). Marzec v. Marsh, 990 F.2d 393, 395-96 (8th Cir.1993); see also Barge v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 87 F.3d 256, 258-59 (8th Cir.1996). See Floyd v. Missouri Dept. of Social Servs., 188 F.3d 932, 936 (8th Cir.1999) ( more.

Summary: 259 F. Supp. Although we agree with the Defendant, that those facts could arguably have been relevant to the issues which were raised earlier in the pleading process, we find the Reply Affidavit to be directly responsive to the Defendant's contention, in its Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, that the Plaintiff was offered the opportunity to retest for the CSS position, after having failed the initial testing, but that he failed to appear for that more.

Summary: 264 F. Supp. See State of Michigan v. Morton Salt, 259 F. Supp. United States v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 247 F. Supp. 185 (S.D.N.Y.1965); Public Service Company v. Federal Pacific Electric Co., 210 F. Supp. 1 (D.N. M.1962); Bruner v. Republic Acceptance Corp., 191 F. Supp. Stern Fish Company v. Century Seafoods, Inc., 254 F. Supp. 151 (E.D.Pa.1966); Ohio-Midland Light & Power Co. v. Ohio Brass Co., 221 F. Supp. See Independent Productions Corporation v. Loew's, Inc., 148 F. Supp. See more.

Summary: 688 F. Supp. 2d 419 (1982) ("There is no general requirement that the complex schedule of the various employee benefits withstand judicial review on an undefined standard of reasonableness"); Vorpahl v. Retirement Plan for Employees of Union Oil Company of California, 749 F.2d 1266, 1270 (8th Cir.1984). Breach of Fiduciary Duties Plaintiffs allege defendants have breached the fiduciary duties imposed by 29 U.S. C. § 1104 by establishing requirements for participation in the ESOPs that were not more.

Summary: 58 F. Supp. While the appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court was pending, the court granted the petition of one Nathan Lieberman to intervene, and at the same time—August 3, 1943—appointed Maurice W. Stoffer as general receiver for the debtor corporations and all their property. Section 8013 provides: "Sequestration—Receiver—Distribution— Upon complaint of a person obtaining judgment against a corporation or his representatives, made after the return unsatisfied of an execution issued thereon, more.

Summary: 711 F. Supp. This case is one of thousands of product-liability actions filed in recent years in the District of Minnesota by plaintiffs who have no connection to Minnesota against defendants who have no connection to Minnesota regarding events that did not occur in Minnesota and that had no impact within Minnesota.2d 443 (1990) (a § 1404(a) transfer does not change the law applicable in a diversity case); Eggleton v. Plasser & Theurer Export Von Bahnbaumaschinen Gesellschaft, MBH, 495 F.3d 582, more.

Summary: 431 F. Supp. Dep't of Fire & Safety Servs., 224 F.3d 735, 738 (8th Cir.2000). & Admin., 229 F.3d 721, 723 (8th Cir.2000); Calvit v. Minneapolis Pub. Schs., 122 F.3d 1112, 1116 (8th Cir.1997). See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 256, 106 S. Ct. 2505; Krenik v. County of Le Sueur, 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir.1995). Pope v. ESA Servs., Inc., 406 F.3d 1001, 1010 (8th Cir.2005) (discussing burdens under the Whistleblower Act) (citing Cokley v. City of Otsego, 623 N.W.2d 625, 630 (Minn.Ct. Indus., Inc., 371 F.3d more.

Summary: 301 F. Supp. This is a civil action commenced under the Federal Civil Rights Act challenging on constitutional grounds the Civil Service Rules of the University of Minnesota and the dismissal thereunder of plaintiff, a University employee. See Whitner v. Davis, 410 F.2d 24 (9th Cir. Though at the close of the argument both parties agreed that the trial of the action *1358 on the merits should be advanced and consolidated with the hearing on the application for preliminary injunction pursuant to more.

Summary: 808 F. Supp. The above-entitled matter came before the Court on Friday, October 30, 1992, on defendant's motion for partial summary judgment on plaintiff's fraudulent misrepresentation and consequential damages claims pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant's present motion seeks partial summary judgment against Count II, plaintiff's cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation, and against any claim for consequential damages in the two remaining counts. 2d more.

Summary: 630 F. Supp. The government contends that taxpayer Gerald P. Jaeger fraudulently transferred the subject property, through an alter ego, to plaintiff, a Minnesota business trust, in order to avoid paying his income tax liability. In order to grant defendant's motion for summary judgment the court must find 1) that at the time of the transfer of the property to BBCA, Inc., Sun Down Company was taxpayer Jaeger's alter ego; and 2) that the transfer of the subject property *351 was fraudulent more.

Summary: 100 F. Supp. The defendant is a Minnesota corporation engaged in selling livestock on the market at South St. Paul as a commission merchant and is licensed as a market agency under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 42 Stat. The plaintiffs contend: (1) That where property is sold and a check is given in payment such payment is conditional and delivery of title to the property likewise is conditional; (2) that if the check is dishonored title to the property does not pass to the purchaser and more.

Summary: 758 F. Supp. I. BACKGROUND On January 26, 2009, 594 F. Supp. On April 26, 2006, the Master Executive Council (MEC), the member-elected representatives of ALPA at Northwest, unanimously resolved to adopt a target plan to distribute Northwest's retirement contributions. Union, 588 F.3d 568, 572 (8th Cir.2009). 2d 473 (1971); see also Vaughn v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l, 604 F.3d 703, 709 (2d Cir.2010). "Vaughn, 604 F.3d at 712 (citing Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 345 U.S. 330, 338, 73 S. Ct. 681, more.