Search

The article discusses a court case of Sierrapine v. Refiner Products Mfg., Inc. wherein fiberboard manufacturer filed state-court action against the supplier of wood refiner due to the breach of warranties related to work. The supplier transferred action to federal court and the manufacturer filed for motions to compel for discovery. The district court of the U.S. denied the plaintiff's motion to compel.

The article presents information on the U.S. District Court case Stark-Romero v. National R.R. Passenger (Amtrak) in which action against defendants was brought by the intervening plaintiffs. The defendants removed the case to federal Court and moved to compel answers to requests for admission for administering the federal grade crossing improvement program in the State of New Mexico. The defendants' motion was granted in part and denied in part by the Court.

The article discusses a court case of In re M3 Power Razor System Mktg. & Sales Practice wherein consumers filed class action against manufacturers in different courts based on misrepresentation in marketing. The actions in state court were removed to the U.S. federal courts and the manufacturer filed motion for class certification of settlement class. The U.S. district court granted class certification for the settlement class and issued date for final hearing.

The article discusses the appeal of Joseph P. Nacchio regarding his procedural error in the calculation of his sentence due to incorrect calculation of the gain resulting from the offense under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual. Accordingly, the net-profit sentencing approach was being used by the district court, which allows the extent of the punishment imposed on defendant. Hence, Nacchio is then entitled for resentenced while the district court should focus on arriving at a figure.

The article discusses a court case Endress v. Gentiva Health Services, Inc. wherein the class action was filed by the plaintiff against the defendant due to putative securities fraud. The motion to intervene was filed by the plaintiff and the district court warranted the permissive intervention by the pension fund. The federal court of the U.S. granted the motion filed by the plaintiff in part and denied it in part.

The article discusses a court case Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain, wherein the plaintiff Claude Cassirer filed a lawsuit in California federal court after unsuccessfully regained the painting of his grandmother. It notes that the paintings are displayed at the Museum of the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation (Foundation) in Madrid. In this regard, district court denied the challenges to personal jurisdiction.

The article presents a court case wherein Howard O. Kieffer, former prisoner, was charged for fraudulently representing defendants in federal court in the U.S. The Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota has issued a show cause order to Kieffer after the District court clerk's investigation on his credentials. The Chief Judge of the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction and sentence of Kieffer, who faces the same charges in other states.