Filter This View

  • March 13, 2013 | The Legal Intelligencer

    Late Pa. Superior Court Judge's Family Sues Savett Over Fatal Fall

    The estate of the late Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge Robert C. Daniels has filed a lawsuit against securities and class-action attorney Sherrie R. Savett and two other defendants over Dan

    1 minute read

  • Intergulf Development v. Superior Court of San Diego (Interstate Fire & Casualty Company)

    Publication Date: 2010-03-25
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2010-03-24
    Court: C.A. 4th
    Judge:
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis and Valentine S. Hoy for Petitioner.
    for defendant:
    Case Number: No. D055459

    Cite as 10 C.D.O.S. 3737INTERGULF DEVELOPMENT, Petitioner, v.SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Responde

  • Proctor v. Vishay Intertechnology, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2013-02-19
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2013-02-19
    Court: C.A. 6th
    Judge:
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Attorneys for Appellants: Hennefer, Finley & Wood and James A. Hennefer Blecher & Collins and Maxwell M. Blecher and Jordan L. Ludwig Green & Noblin and Robert S. Green and James Robert Noblin
    for defendant: Attorneys for Respondent Ernst & Young LLP: Latham & Watkins and Peter A. Wald, David M. Friedman, Lori Alvino McGill, Roman Martinez and Patrick E. Gibbs Attorneys for Respondents Vishay Intertechnology, Inc. Vishay TEMIC Semiconductor Acquisition Holdings Corp., and Estate of Felix D. Zandman: Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel and Alan R. Friedman, Jonathan M. Wagner and Adina C. Levine O'Melveny & Myers and Daniel H. Bookin, Roberta H. Vespremi and Sara M. Folchi
    Case Number: No. H037428

    Cite as 13 C.D.O.S. 1941REBECCA PROCTOR al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,v.VISHAY INTERTECHNOLOGY, INC.

  • October 24, 2005 | The Legal Intelligencer

    Exact Match of Specialties Not Required for Expert Witnesses

    Qualification of expert witnesses under the MCARE Act does not require an exact match of specialty with the defendant physicians, the Superior Court has ruled, extending trial courts' discret

    1 minute read

  • January 7, 2002 |

    Justices Bust Out Heavy-Hitters in 2001

    It's true that, in terms of sheer volume of written opinions, 2001 was not the jewel in the state Supreme Court's crown. But the justices made up for that dearth by handing down more tha

    1 minute read

  • October 4, 2012 | The Legal Intelligencer

    Cozen O'Connor Asks Superior Court to Reopen Case Against Firm

    One of the former Wolf Block lawyers who filed a writ of summons against Cozen O'Connor and then withdrew it told the Pennsylvania Superior Court on Tuesday that Cozen O'Connor can't seek to

    1 minute read

  • June 30, 2003 | New Jersey Law Journal

    Board of Education of the Township of South Brunswick v. Eckert et al,

    TAXATION — Farmland Assessments A-5643-01T3; Appellate Division; opinion by Carchman, J.A.D.; decided and approved for publication June 17, 2003. Before Judges Conl

    1 minute read

  • July 6, 2009 | New Jersey Law Journal

    General Assignment Order, 2009-2010

    SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY It is ORDERED that the following judges of the Appellate Division, Law Division (Civil and Criminal), and Chancery Division (General Equity and

    1 minute read

  • August 29, 2013 | Daily Report Online

    JQC To Judges: Keep Courts Open To Public—No Excuses

    Troubled by reports that judges are barring members of the public from courtrooms across the state, the Judicial Qualifications Commission on Wednesday declared that, except in rare circumst

    1 minute read

  • Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Corp.

    Publication Date: 2000-01-31
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2000-01-31
    Court: Court of Appeal of the State of California
    Judge: McDONALD, WORK, HUFFMAN
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy D. Cohelan, Isam C. Khoury, Margaret L. Coates, et al.
    for defendant: Ronald C. Redcay, Richard C. Morse, et al.
    Case Number: No. D030628

    The full case caption appears at the end of this opinion.The defendants in this class action lawsuit are companies that refine oil and market gasoline to California