Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
10 results for '* industry:"Travel and Tourism"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-05-29
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
Judge: District Judge Mehalchick
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 3:22-CV-00572
Breach of promissory note and mortgage claims were arbitrable when the note and mortgage were executed to fulfill a settlement agreement and attached to that agreement, which contained a broad, valid, and binding arbitration agreement. Defendants' motion to compel arbitration granted.
Publication Date: 2023-04-17
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Aerospace | Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Gallagher
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 5:20-cv-01883-JMG
Defendant filed a Daubert motion to exclude testimony of plaintiffs' expert witness. The court denied the motion because the expert's testimony and opinion were sufficiently reliable and relevant at the present stage of the litigation.
Publication Date: 2023-04-11
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Insurance | Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Chagares
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Tamara D. Bruno, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw & Pittman, Houston, TX; Peter M. Gillon, Jesse N. Vazquez, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw & Pittman, Washington, DC; Brandon R. Harper, Carla M. Jones, Jennifer C. Wasson, Potter Anderson & Corroon, Wilmington, DE for appellant.
for defendant: Robert L. Ebby, Ronald P. Schiller, Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, Philadelphia, PA for appellee.
Case Number: 22-1554
The court affirmed the decision of the District Court dismissing an unjust enrichment claim on the basis that an existing enforceable contract between the parties precluded plaintiff's ability to bring an unjust enrichment claim.
Publication Date: 2022-12-26
Practice Area: Dispute Resolution
Industry: Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Alejandro
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-2806
Defendant event management company moved to compel arbitration on an individual basis in plaintiffs' purported class action over defendant's refusal to return "non-refundable" deposits plaintiffs paid for weddings that had to be postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and court found the agreements contained an enforceable arbitration provision, which contained no indicator that the parties had agreed to class-wide arbitration. Motion granted.
Publication Date: 2022-02-21
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Bartle
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0201
The court found that plaintiffs pled sufficient facts to state claims for violations of ERISA stemming from a transaction between the pension fund trustee and defendant owner of the sponsor company. However, where plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient facts about the knowledge of two co-fiduciaries that the transaction was prohibited was cause for dismissal. Motion denied in part, granted in part.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-12-20
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Travel and Tourism
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge New
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1376
While the defendant solicited business from Pennsylvania, including plaintiffs' business, the court lacked specific personal jurisdiction over the foreign corporation because the allegedly injury-causing incident involving the defendant did not occur in this state. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2021-12-20
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Travel and Tourism
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge New
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1377
The court dismissed plaintiff's complaint in this negligence action arising from an accident that occurred in Massachusetts where defendant's unchallenged affidavits demonstrated that both public and private factors demonstrated weighty reasons to overcome plaintiff's choice of forum. The court recommended affirmance.
Publication Date: 2021-02-08
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Travel and Tourism
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
Judge: Judge Zulick
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0086
Husband's signature on release form was not binding on wife, but the court held that the indemnification provision could be valid as to husband.
Publication Date: 2021-02-08
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: E-Commerce | Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Pappert
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0129
Website operators denied dismissal based on immunity under §230 of the Communications Decency Act where plaintiffs alleged the operators' own misrepresentations and omissions induced plaintiffs to make a purchase that led to their injury, meaning that the operators might qualify as information content providers ineligible for §230 immunity. Defendants' motion to dismiss denied.
Publication Date: 2017-12-05
Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Personal Injury
Industry: Travel and Tourism
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge DuBois
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 17-1769
Action dismissed for forum non conveniens, where courts in foreign country where alleged assault occurred were more appropriate forum as they could compel witness testimony and had compelling interest in adjudicating claims of assault within their borders, if plaintiffs claims were not time-barred under local statute of limitations. Defendants motion to dismiss granted.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read