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"
In this case, plaintiffs sued where the police had a valid search warrant that named the correct address but they executed the warrant at an incorrect address.
After selling a firearm to a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives' confidential informant, appellant was arrested during a routine visit with his supervisor parole officer for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
Following a bench trial for a trademark infringement dispute brought under the Lanham Act, the district court determined that appellees infringed appellant's trademark but refused to disgorge appellee of its profits after finding that the laches defense applied.
Appellant appealed his guilty-plea conviction and 151-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, arguing appellee breached the plea agreement by opposing a sentencing reduction for acceptance of responsibility, which he claimed constituted plain error.
Appellees are two veterinarians who signed employment contracts in 2014 with their original employer Gulf Coast Veterinary SurgerySan Antonio PLLC that contained a binding arbitration provision.
A personal injury plaintiff, who appealed her take-nothing judgment as a death-penalty sanction, successfully proved on appeal that she was entitled to relief.
After a jury awarded appellee, a district sales manager for FedEx, $366,160,000 for retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. §1981 and Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2000e17, FedEx appealed.
In this divorce case, appellant appealed the trial court's judgment that he committed fraud against the community estate and the division of the community estate.