Case law

Burley v. Sumner County 18th Judicial Drug Task Force

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Dec 30, 2022

Brown v. Fifth Jud. Dist. Drug Task Force, 255 F.3d 475, 477 (8th Cir. 2001) (quoting Roby v. The Corp. of Lloyd’s, 796 F.Supp. 103, 109–10 (S.D.N.Y. 1992)). … Brown v. Fifth Jud. Dist. Drug Task Force, 255 F.3d 475, 477 (8th Cir. 2001) (collecting cases); see also Eversole v.

Gaylord Entertainment Co. v. Gilmore Entertainment Group, LLC.

187 F. Supp. 2d 926 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 8, 2002

See Opryland USA Inc. v. The Great American Music Show, Inc., 970 F.2d 847, 849 (Fed.Cir.1992). The Board granted GEG’s motion for summary judgment. See id. at 850 . … The Board also held that Opry-land was collaterally estopped from disputing the generic nature of the term “Opry” due to the decision of WSM, Inc. v. Hilton, 724 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir.1984). See id.

Allen v. Newport

427 F. Supp. 42 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 5, 1976

Plaintiff, a Kentucky citizen, filed this action pursuant to the Tennessee Medical Malpractice Review Board and Claims Act, T. … Defendant Bethel V.

Tennessee Products & Chemical Corp. v. United States

199 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 7, 1961

On July 1, 1929, taxpayer’s board of directors authorized a salary of $36,-000 per annum for W. J. Cummins, its chairman of the board. During the period involved, Mr. … United States v. Virgin, 5 Cir., 230 F. 2d 880 ; Clark v. Commissioner, supra; Alexander & Baldwin v. Kanne, 9 Cir., 190 F.2d 153 . 5.

Warfield v. Washburn

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jan 7, 2020

On July 5, 2019, Sergeant Hudson conducted a disciplinary hearing at the plaintiff’s cell without disciplinary board members present. (Id. at 8.) … See Brown v. Cuyahoga Cty., Ohio, 517 F.

Ford v. Nicks

703 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 9, 1988

United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711, 715-16 , 103 S.Ct. 1478, 1481-82 , 75 L.Ed.2d 403 (1983). … Copeland v. Martinez, 603 F.2d 981, 985 (D,C.Cir.1979).

Regions Bank v. JP Realty Partners, Ltd.

912 F. Supp. 2d 604 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Dec 6, 2012

The only authorities interpreting Tennessee law on this issue are Brown v. Yencap, 2004 Tenn.App. LEXIS 3424, at *13-15 (Tenn.Ct.App. … Although In Re RCS involved the application of Michigan law, not Tennessee law, the Sixth Circuit’s analysis is consonant with that of the Tennessee Court of Appeals in Brown v. Yencap.

Bennett v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson Cnty.

383 F. Supp. 3d 790 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Apr 11, 2019

Board of Education , 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968), to determine if plaintiff's free speech interests outweigh the efficiency interests of her government employer. Scarbrough v. Morgan Cty. … See, e.g., Brown v. City of Trenton , 867 F.2d 318 , 322-23 (6th Cir. 1989).

Slater v. Illinois Cent. R.

209 F. 480 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Sep 30, 1911

A. 559 ; Railroad v. Meacham, 91 Tenn. 428, 431 , 19 S. W. 232 ; Hoskins v. Railroad (Ky.) 30 S. W. 643 ; Brown’s Adm’r v. Railroad, 97 Ky. 228 , 30 S. W. 639 ; Gherkins v. Railway Co. (Ky.) 30 S. … Co. v.

Fell v. Armour

355 F. Supp. 1319 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 27, 1972

Phillips v. Dime Trust & S. D. Co., 284 U.S. 160, 167 , 52 S.Ct. 46 , 76 L.Ed. 220, 224 ; Brown v. Helvering, 291 U.S. 193, 199 , 54 S.Ct. 356 , 78 L.Ed. 725, 730 . … Slochower v. Board of Education of New York, 350 U.S. 551, 559 , 76 S.Ct. 637, 641 , 100 L.Ed. 692 (1956), quoting from Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v.

Appleton v. Deloitte & Touche L.L.P.

168 F.R.D. 221 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jul 3, 1996

In Falcon, 457 U.S. at 156-59 , 102 S.Ct. at 2370-71 , the Supreme Court rejected the “across the board” class action rule that had been adopted by the Fifth Circuit in Johnson v. … In applying Footnote 15, the courts have required plaintiffs to show that a defendant’s decisionmaking process is entirely subjective before permitting an across the board attack. For example, in Vuyanich v.

Randolph v. Craig

267 F. 993 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 23, 1920

Brown v. Telephone Co. (C. C.) 181 Fed. 246, 247 . They must hence be overruled. *995 2. The fourth, fifth and sixth grounds of demurrer are special. … Kitts v. Kitts, 136 Tenn., supra.

Johnson v. Griffin

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Mar 3, 2023

Blessing v. Chandrasekhar, 988 F.3d 889, 904 (6th Cir. 2021) (quoting Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945)). … Id. at 501 (citing Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011)).

United States ex rel. Tennessee Valley Authority v. Bagwell

698 F. Supp. 135 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 2, 1988

Ryerson & Son, Inc. v. H.A. Crane & Brother, Inc., 417 F.2d 1263, 1264 (3d Cir.1969) (referring to “combustible materials, including wooden boards, wooden pallets”); Proler Steel Corp. v. … "The Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority have been given the sole authority by Congress to dispose of property owned by the United States and operated by TVA.” United States ex rel. TVA v.

Beaver v. Hamby

587 F. Supp. 88 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Nov 17, 1983

Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 450 , 73 S.Ct. 397, 404 [2], 97 L.Ed. 469 (1953). … United States v. Battista, 646 F.2d 237, 246 [18] (6th Cir.1981), (citing Holland v.

United States v. Blue Bell, Inc.

395 F. Supp. 538 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 19, 1975

V. THE LINE OF COMMERCE A. The Applicable Law In Brown Shoe Company v. … Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 324 , 82 S.Ct. 1502, 1523 (1962). See International Telephone and Telegraph Corp. v.

Altruist, LLC v. Medex Patient Transp., LLC

308 F. Supp. 3d 943 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Apr 9, 2018

Brown , 568 S.W.2d 100 , 102-03 (Tenn. 1978) when the court observed that, while rescission "[u]sually ... involves a refund of the purchase price or otherwise placing the parties in their prior status," a "purchaser who … arbitrators' award are limited solely to instances where the award was obtained through fraud or other misconduct, see 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(1)-(5), or the award is miscalculated, based on a matter not submitted before the board

Thruston v. Nashville & American Trust Co.

32 F. Supp. 929 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Apr 26, 1940

Co. v. C. R. … On January 17, 1930, the board of directors of the Trust Company, which was also the board of directors Of the National Bank, adopted resolutions authorizing and directing its officers to join with the officers of the National

Rao v. Quorum Health Corp.

221 F. Supp. 3d 987 · District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Dec 13, 2016

See e.g., Aronson v. McKesson HBOC, Inc., 79 F. Supp.2d 1146, 1155 (N.D. Cal. 1999) (holding that a lead plaintiff movant that did not file the complaint did not have to file a certification); Chill v. … If any discovery disputes arise during this time period, the parties are to immediately contact Magistrate Judge Brown’s chambers so that he may help resolve the dispute. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Pratt v. Kijakazi

District Court, M.D. Tennessee · Sep 20, 2022

Miller v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 811 F.3d 825, 833 (6th Cir. 2016) (quoting Blakley v. Comm’r of Soc. … Brown’s opinion persuasive. In the Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record, Plaintiff pointed to Ealy v. Comm’r of Soc.