From Hodczak v. Latrobe Spec. Steel Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21267 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 9, 2010):
The Federal Magistrates Act provides two separate standards for judicial review of a magistrate judge’s decision: (i) “de novo” for magistrate resolution of…
From In re Texans-Cuso Ins. Group, LLC, 421 B.R. 769 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2009):
The Debtor relies on section 10(a)(4) of the FAA *** for its argument that the Accounting Arbitration Award should be vacated. The FAA provides that an…
From Willey v. J.P. Morgan Chase, N.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57826 (S.D.N.Y. July 7, 2009):
[I]pse dixit pleading is insufficient. *** Iqbal unequivocally rejects the notion that conclusory statements unsupported by factual allegations can subject a defendant to the…
From SEC v. Tambone, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 5031 (1st Cir. March 10, 2010):
Rule 10b-5(b), promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the aegis of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), renders…
From State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Cohan, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125653 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 30, 2009):
The plaintiff argues, first, that it has sufficiently alleged that the defendants constitute an “association-in-fact enterprise” for RICO purposes. RICO defines an…
From United States v. Boender, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20670 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 8, 2010):
Unless limited by the U.S. Constitution, an Act of Congress, or a Supreme Court Rule, privileges are “governed by the principles of the common law…
From In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Pracs. Litig., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19752 (D. Kan. Mar. 4, 2010):
In the first motion, plaintiffs sought information and documents from certain defendants relating to their communications with trade associations, weights and…
From Goldberg v. UBS AG, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19754 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2010):
A district court has the discretion to certify an order for interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) if the court “is of the opinion…
From Howard v. St. Germain, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4727 (5th Cir. Mar. 5, 2010):
Appellants do not seek review of the district court’s decision to remand. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d). Thus, we only consider the district court’s decision…