State v. Erickson :: 1989 :: Minnesota Supreme Court Decisions :: Minnesota Case Law :: Minnesota Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia
State v. Erickson - 449 N.W.2d 707| Justia Law
State v. Erickson - 449 N.W.2d 707| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Commonwealth v. Johnson, A.| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the California Code | Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Law, Case Law, Codes, Statutes & Regulations| law.justia.com
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Hall v. State - 268 Ga. 89, 485 S.E.2d 755| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
JRJ Pusok Holdings, LLC v. The State of Texas and Kyle Madsen in his Official Capacity as Director of Right of Way Appeal from Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County| Justia Law
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's action alleging that Domino's Pizza's website and mobile application were not fully accessible to a blind or visually impaired person, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act.| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Illinois Compiled Statutes | Justia Law
Joseph Heid filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Orange County Sheriff's Deputies Mark Rutkoski and Forrest Best, alleging they used unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The incident occurred after Heid had a domestic dispute, left his house, and later returned armed with a rifle. He engaged in a gunfight with deputies in his backyard and then re-entered his house. When he exited the house again, Deputies Rutkoski and Best, believing he was still armed, shot him...| Justia Law
The issue before the Supreme Court in this matter centered on a Court of Chancery decision arising from a 2011 acquisition by MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc. (M&F), a 43% stockholder in M&F Worldwide Corp (MFW), of the remaining common stock of MFW. M&F’s proposal to take MFW private was made contingent upon two procedural conditions. Appellants initially sought to enjoin the transaction. They withdrew their request for injunctive relief after taking expedited discovery, including severa...| Justia Law
Legislature v. Deukmejian (1983), Supreme Court of California| Justia Law
Price v. Valvoline, No. 23-20131 (5th Cir. 2023) case opinion from the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Nevada Revised Statutes | Justia Law
In 2008 Plaintiff Bill Grubb signed an employment agreement with Defendant DXP Enterprises to lead the development and production of horizontal pumps. The agreement recited that the parties intended to create a new company to produce the pumps, and Grubb would own 10%. If the project became a success, Grubb had the right under the employment agreement to require DXP to buy his ownership stake at a price based on the new company’s gross revenue. The project was successful; in March 2019, Gru...| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Utah Code | Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Hawaii Revised Statutes | Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Louisiana Laws | Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Ala. Code § 16-6C-2 - School Grading System. from 2024 Code of Alabama| Justia Law
This "highly contentious" marriage dissolution case had heretofore been active for more than fourteen years, and had an "astonishing" six hundred and fifty docket entries. Through it all, the parties had shown an utter unwillingness to co-parent. "Making no secret of the disdain they have for each other," they continued to fight over their son, then age thirteen. Accepting review in its original jurisdiction, the Colorado Supreme Court determined this case presented a rare opportunity to addr...| Justia Law
Kadrey et al v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 3:2023cv03417 - Document 598 (N.D. Cal. 2025) case opinion from the Northern District of California U.S. Federal District Court| Justia Law
David Kinyua Mwongera, Petitioner, v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Respondent, 187 F.3d 323 (3d Cir. 1999) case opinion from the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit| Justia Law
State v. Hoffman - 328 N.W.2d 709| Justia Law
There Is a Newer Version of the Georgia Code | Justia Law
J.A.V. et al v. Trump et al, No. 1:2025cv00072 - Document 58 (S.D. Tex. 2025) case opinion from the Southern District of Texas U.S. Federal District Court| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued a request for quotes for leasing a cranial surgical navigation system. Beacon Point Associates LLC submitted a quote, which included a payment schedule and terms stating the government must exercise all renewal options if it obtained sufficient funds. The VA awarded the contract to Beacon Point, which included the same payment schedule but did not explicitly incorporate the terms of Beacon Point’s quote.| Justia Law
Brett Jens resigned from his position at Wilbur-Ellis Company, LLC, and subsequently joined a competitor, J.R. Simplot Company. Wilbur-Ellis filed a lawsuit against Jens and Simplot, seeking a preliminary injunction to enforce restrictive covenants in Jens’s employment agreement and to prevent Simplot’s alleged tortious interference with the agreement. The district court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction, concluding that the restrictive covenants were no longer enforceable.| Justia Law
In September 2019, Sweet Additions Ingredient Processors, LLC (Sweet Additions) and Meelunie America, Inc. (Meelunie) entered into a fixed-price sales contract for the supply of organic tapioca starch for the 2020 calendar year. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Meelunie faced supply chain disruptions and failed to deliver the full quantity of tapioca starch. Meelunie suggested that Sweet Additions cover higher shipping costs, which Sweet Additions declined. Sweet Additions then contracted with a...| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
REEVE v. MONEX INC. et al, No. 1:2024cv00408 - Document 51 (D.D.C. 2024) case opinion from the District of Columbia US Federal District Court| Justia Law
Justia Free Databases of U.S. Laws, Codes & Statutes| Justia Law
Plaintiff, a long-time customer with a visual disability who must access websites with screen reader software, filed suit against Winn-Dixie under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after he was unable to access Winn-Dixie's website with his software. The district court found that Winn-Dixie's website violated the ADA.| Justia Law
Plaintiffs, a transgender youth, their parents, and two healthcare professionals, sought to enjoin Arkansas Act 626, which prohibits healthcare professionals from providing gender transition procedures to any individual under the age of 18 or from referring any such individual to any healthcare professional for gender transition procedures. The district court enjoined the Act, and the State appealed.| Justia Law
State v. Walsh - 495 N.W.2d 602| Justia Law
Arkansas Constitution| Justia Law
Gingles v. Edmisten, 590 F. Supp. 345 (E.D.N.C. 1984) case opinion from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina| Justia Law
Ashton, a transgender high school senior, requested to use the boys’ restroom while at school. The Kenosha School District denied the request, indicating that Ashton’s mere presence would invade the privacy rights of his male classmates. In his suit under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act and the Equal Protection Clause, Ashton sought preliminary injunctive relief, asserting that his attempts to avoid using the bathroom exacerbated his vasovagal syncope, which renders Ashton suscep...| Justia Law
Leppert v. Leppert - 519 N.W.2d 287| Justia Law
There is a newer version of the Colorado Revised Statutes | Justia Law
In the case of West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Moelis & Company, the plaintiff, a stockholder of Moelis & Company (the "Company"), challenged the validity of certain provisions in a Stockholder Agreement between the Company and its CEO, Ken Moelis. The agreement gave Moelis extensive pre-approval rights over the Company's board of directors' decisions, the ability to select a majority of board members, and the power to determine the composition of any board committee. The plaint...| Justia Law
National Association of Manufacturers et al v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission et al, No. 7:2022cv00163 - Document 21 (W.D. Tex. 2022) case opinion from the Western District of Texas US Federal District Court| Justia Law
Plaintiffs, authors of published books under copyright, filed suit against Google for copyright infringement. Google, acting without permission of rights holders, has made digital copies of tens of millions of books, including plaintiffs', through its Library Project and its Google books project. The district court concluded that Google's actions constituted fair use under 17 U.S.C. 107. On appeal, plaintiffs challenged the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Google. The co...| Justia Law
