All Courts 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th DC Federal Supreme Court
  
Search
From Date:
[Default]
To Date:
[Default]
Category:
Parties:
Keywords:
 
  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69
Edit Column Delete Column   
Edit Delete 1st Circuit

ERISA, MUNICIPAL LAW

Merit Construction v. Quincy, Jul-16-2014

J. Selya finds that the lower court properly held that ERISA preempted a city ordinance concerning apprenticeships at the city. ERISA is meant to be uniform, and the city ordinance would destroy its benefit. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete 1st Circuit

JURY, EVIDENCE, DRUG OFFENDER

U.S. v. Rodriguez, Jul-16-2014

J. McCafferty finds that the lower court properly allowed the jury to view video of defendant selling cocaine base to a cooperating witness and to confer about what they wanted to see. Appellant was not prejudiced by the jury viewing admitted evidence or their discussion about what evidence to view. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 2nd Circuit

PROPERTY

Kurtz v. Verizon New York, Jul-16-2014

J. Jacobs holds that plaintiffs' takings and due process claims are unripe. Plaintiffs, property owners, alleged in their class action that Verizon installed multi-unit terminal boxes on their property without just compensation. Precedent applies to both physical and regulatory takings, as well as procedural due process claims arising from the same circumstances as a takings claim. Case law states that a takings claim is not ripe for federal review until a final decision has been reached by local authorities and the owner exhausts state remedies. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 3rd Circuit

SENTENCING, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

U.S. v. Flores-Mejia, Jul-16-2014

J. Roth finds that the lower court improperly sentenced defendant without specifically ruling on defendant's mitigation claim based on his cooperation with the government. The court's final question, "Ok, thanks. Anything else?" did not show that it gave meaningful consideration to defendant's argument. The panel promulgated a new rule based on this case, which will require defendants in the future to object to the procedural error complained of after sentence is imposed in order to avoid plain error review on appeal. The appeals of defendants sentenced before this opinion will be reviewed for abuse of discretion. Reversed.

Edit Delete 4th Circuit

EQUAL PROTECTION, DAMAGES, INTERNATIONAL LAW

Ameur v. Gates, Jul-16-2014

J. Agee finds that the district court properly applied a provision in the Military Commissions Act in dismissing plaintiff's claim for lack of jurisdiction. In 2003, plaintiff was detained by the U.S. military as a suspected terrorist in Afghanistan, then later at Guantanamo Bay. Despite being found to be an "enemy combatant," plaintiff was released to his native Algeria in 2008. He then sued former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and other federal officials involved in his detention under the Alien Tort Claims Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the U.S. Constitution. Plaintiff says that money damages are the only remedy for the violations he suffered. But it cannot be assumed "that a constitutionally mandated remedy exists for [plaintiff] merely because he cannot locate a remedy elsewhere." Plaintiff claims that his equal protection rights were violated since the statute only applies to aliens, but Congress' decisions "are consistent with the long-standing differential treatment of enemy aliens during times of war." Affirmed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

CONTRACT, CIVIL PROCEDURE

Warren v. Chesapeake Exploration, Jul-16-2014

J. Owen finds that the lower court improperly dismissed certain plaintiffs' claim that defendant breached royalty provisions in oil and gas leases by deducting post-production costs from natural gas sales proceeds. They have no had a sufficient opportunity to plead their claims since the plaintiffs who have had such an opportunity are not sufficiently similarly situated. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

SOCIAL SECURITY, TAX, EDUCATION

University of Texas System v. U.S., Jul-16-2014

J. Haynes finds that the lower court properly dismissed plaintiff's suit to recover the Social Security component of its paid Federal Insurance Contributions Act taxes. Its medical residents are not considered "students" under the Social Security Act, so they were not exempt. States may voluntarily opt into the social security system via agreement, and Texas did so. Although medical residents receive lessons and training, they are more akin to employees than students. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

INSURANCE, MARITIME, BANKING/LENDING

First American Bank v. First American Transportation Title Insurance, Jul-16-2014

J. Owen finds that the lower court properly decided defendant's liability to plaintiff under a vessel title insurance policy with respect to a loan default. The policy unambiguously requires valuation of the vessels by the date of the foreclosure sale, a requirement with which plaintiff did not comply. Plaintiff is thus due only the difference between the value of its ship mortgages unencumbered and their value under the applicable liens. Defendant thus fulfilled most of its obligations in the first place. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

DEATH PENALTY, HABEAS, MURDER

Beatty v. Stephens, Jul-16-2014

J. Elrod finds that the lower court properly denied petitioner habeas on his death sentence for murdering his mother. Sentencing counsel adequately investigated defendant's background and the mitigating circumstances. The evidence was more than adequate to convict defendant in the first place. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

INSURANCE, INDEMNIFICATION, CONSTRUCTION

Wisznia v. General Star Indemnity, Jul-16-2014

J. Prado finds that the lower court properly dismissed plaintiff's claim that defendant was required to insure or indemnify it in a lawsuit based on its improper design of a building. The policy covered professional negligence, but plainly excluded engineering or architecture work. Had the underlying suit been for ordinary negligence, defendant might be liable. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit

ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY

U.S. v. American Commercial Lines, Jul-16-2014

J. Higginson finds that the lower court properly found defendant liable for failure to pay amounts due under the Oil Pollution Act following an oil spill. The Act's savings clause does not apply since plaintiff already paid the balance out of its Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit

MEDICARE, INSURANCE

Michigan Spine and Brain Surgeons v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Jul-16-2014

J. McKeague finds that the lower court improperly dismissed plaintiff's claims seeking payment for benefits under Michigan's No-Fault Act, and damages under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act for failing to pay medical expenses for which defendant insurer is allegedly responsible. Plaintiff provided $26,000 worth of treatment to a patient after she sustained injuries in a car accident, but the insurer claimed that the injuries arose from a preexisting condition. "A health care provider can bring the Medicare Secondary Payer Act's private cause of action against a non-group health plan that denies coverage for a reason besides Medicare eligibility," the panel said. Adopting the insurer's interpretation of the law would be contrary to Congress's intent of providing a private cause of action to counter-act escalating healthcare costs. Reversed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT

Cordell v. McKinney, Jul-16-2014

J. Moore finds that the lower court improperly granted immunity to a deputy who allegedly slammed plaintiff, who was handcuffed and restrained, headfirst into a concrete wall. A reasonable jury could find that any jail personnel knew such conduct violated the 8th Amendment and was done with sadistic intent. Reversed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit

DEBT COLLECTION, PROPERTY

Haddad v. Alexander, Zelmanski, Danner & Fioretti, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the 6th Circuit finds that that the lower court improperly found for the defendant law firm in a fair debt collection practices suit. The law firm sent plaintiff an itemized accounting of the money he owed to his condominium association, but did not provide any explanation when asked as to the reason for the original $50 charge, from which all subsequent late fees, fines, and attorney's fees flowed. Based on this notice, plaintiff could not dispute the debt owed, or the subsequent lien on his property, based on the information the firm provided. This notice is therefore not sufficient to verify the debt. However, the lower court correctly ruled that the firm's letter showing the outstanding balances was not misleading. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete 7th Circuit

IMMIGRATION, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Wang v. Holder, Jul-16-2014

J. Wood finds that the Board of Immigration Appeals properly declined to cancel petitioner's removal. Although an alien is eligible for cancellation if he or she is continuously present in the country for 10 years, that presence is deemed to end when the alien receives a notice to appear under the Immigration and Nationality Act, even if the notice does not specify a particular time for the hearing. Petitioner received his notice to appear within two weeks of arriving in 1999, but then avoided authorities for over a decade. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 7th Circuit

KIDNAPPING, COMPETENCE, WITNESS

U.S. v. Jonassen, Jul-16-2014

J. Sykes finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of kidnapping for holding his 21-year-old daughter against her will in a motel and raping her. She was found running from the motel with a rope tied around her leg, screaming for help. Defendant then intimidated her such that, although she had cooperated with the government before the trial, she said "I don't remember" to all of the prosecutor's questions at trial. The court reasonably admitted her prior statements under these circumstances. The court did not unfairly comment on his competency by saying "I still don't know that you know how serious this case is" since this reflected that defendant was choosing not to take things seriously, not that he was incompetent. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 7th Circuit

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

U.S. v. Arrellano, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the circuit finds that its original opinion must be amended such that "protected sweep" reads "protective sweep."

Edit Delete 7th Circuit

DRUG OFFENDER, PAROLE, EVIDENCE

U.S. v. Mosley, Jul-16-2014

J. Manion finds that the lower court properly revoked defendant's supervised release on his cocaine possession conviction, which he violated by possessing drugs again. The court reasonably admitted a hearsay statement from a woman who bought drugs from him since it was made against her penal interest and seemed trustworthy. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 7th Circuit

PROPERTY, CONTRACT

Knight v. Enbridge Pipelines, Jul-16-2014

J. Easterbrook finds that the lower court properly denied plaintiffs' request to quiet title in their favor, but should have dismissed the question of farmability. The dispute arose when a pipeline operator with an easement on the land to build two pipelines attempted to build the second 60 years after the easement was signed. The right to build a pipeline under an easement has no time limit. However, the operator has since built a second pipeline so far from the first that it cannot be constructed under the easement, but this took place under eminent domain and is irrelevant. The fact that no construction of a nearby pipeline under the easement did not prohibit the court from considering the dispute. The Rule Against Perpetuities does not bar this sort of option contract. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

OBSTRUCTION, FIREARMS, RESTITUTION

U.S. v. Doering, Jul-16-2014

J. Colloton finds that the lower court properly sentenced defendant to prison for tampering with evidence, but improperly imposed restitution. He participated in a western-themed charity event in South Dakota "that involved the reenactment of a shoot-out during which the thespians were supposed to fire blanks," but used live ammunition and wounded three spectators. He then lied to officers about the incident. However, the court should not have imposed restitution without considering defendant's ability to pay. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

SEARCH, BURGLARY, FIREARMS

U.S. v. Hayden, Jul-16-2014

J. Colloton finds that the lower court properly entered defendant's guilty plea to firearm possession and declined to suppress evidence found on his person. Two St. Louis police officers saw him standing near a vacant house in a high crime area and stopped and frisk him without any information connecting him to a crime. Defendant was not seized when an officer shined a flashlight on him and said "police!" Self-identification is not a command such as "halt!" The officers could have reasonably assumed that defendant was casing a house for a burglary. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

HABEAS, DEATH PENALTY

Middleton v. Roper, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the circuit finds that the lower court improperly stayed respondent's execution. He has not shown a substantial likelihood that his federal habeas petition will succeed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTION

Smith v. Conway County, Jul-16-2014

J. Riley finds that the lower court properly denied defendants qualified immunity on plaintiff's civil rights claim. A Vietnam War veteran with PTSD, he was arrested for hydrocodone delivery and put in jail, where guards tased him for failing to leave his cell at the right time. This took place as he lay moaning in pain in his bunk, unable to get up. The jail had a sign that said "failure to immediately comply with orders of jail staff, you will be tased." Defendant supervisors failed to train some of the guards in proper taster use and may be liable for plaintiff's injuries. Tasers should not be used simply to cause pain so as to force inmates to follow orders when there is no need for physical force. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

INSURANCE, SECURITIES, TAX

George K. Baum & Co. v. Twin City Fire Insurance, Jul-16-2014

[Consolidated.] J. Riley finds that the lower court properly settled the parties' liabilities with respect to various municipal bonds that plaintiff sold or underwrote. It represented that the bonds' interest was tax exempt, but the IRS determined the contrary. The insurance policy issued by defendant covers this type of loss. It is irrelevant that plaintiff's derivatives litigation was not timely reported because defendant was not prejudiced. Under New York law, defendant must cover plaintiff because the derivatives litigation and the IRS liability arose from the same wrongdoing. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

INSURANCE, CONTRACT

Young v. Allstate Insurance, Jul-16-2014

J. Colloton finds that the lower court properly found for defendant in plaintiffs' suit for coverage under a fire insurance policy. Defendant was not required to show that plaintiffs were dishonest in failing to discover inaccuracies in their initial claim. Their recklessness as to the truth of the claim was sufficient, and the court was not required to include the word "reckless" in its instructions. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit

CIVIL RIGHTS, EVIDENCE

McDowell v. Blankenship, Jul-16-2014

J. Riley finds that the lower court properly found for defendant in plaintiffs' excessive force claim. Two officers stopped the decedent for running a red light and got into a physical fight. Police removed a knife from his pocket as well. They then pinned him to the ground, where he vomited and died from, according to an autopsy, hypertensive heart disease exacerbated by methamphetamine and the fight. The court was not required to produce a certain one of the several deputies present because he was in Afghanistan training canine units and thus unavailable. A deposition was adequate, especially given that live testimony would likely have harmed plaintiff's case. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 9th Circuit

SECURITIES, FRAUD

Police Retirement System of St. Louis v. Intuitive Surgical Inc., Jul-16-2014

J. McKeown finds that the district court properly dismissed plaintiff's securities fraud action. Plaintiff claimed that defendant's executives made false statements about the relative health of the company, but the statements merely expressed "garden variety corporate optimism." Affirmed.

Edit Delete 9th Circuit

CIVIL RIGHTS

Van Der Hule v. Holder, Jul-16-2014

J. Fletcher finds that the district court properly ruled that plaintiff is prohibited from owning a gun under federal law. Plaintiff pleaded guilty to sexual assault and sexual intercourse without consent in Montana and spent more than a decade in prison. That Montana still bars him from carrying a concealed weapon is enough to trigger a federal law prohibiting him from owning any handgun. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 9th Circuit

BANKING/LENDING, CIVIL PROCEDURE

Merritt v. Countrywide Financial Corp., Jul-16-2014

J. Berzon finds that the district court improperly dismissed plaintiffs' claims under the Truth in Lending Act. A rescission claim does not always require plaintiffs to pay back the value of their loan prior to filing suit. Reversed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal

ROBBERY, DRUG OFFENDER, MURDER

People v. Fiore, Jul-16-2014

J. Humes finds that a trial court incorrectly convicted defendant of robbery, but correctly found him guilty of a variety of other crimes, including murder. To be guilty of robbery, defendant had to take property from a victim through "force or fear." But since the purported victim lacked constructive possession of the marijuana defendant allegedly took from him, since it did not belong to him or anyone he had a close connection with, defendant could not have robbed him of the drugs in the eyes of the law. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal

WARRANTY

Brand v. Hyundai Motor America, Jul-16-2014

[Modified opinion.] J. Aronson finds that a trial court incorrectly dismissed plaintiff's lemon law action against defendant for failing to state a claim. Plaintiff correctly argued that no reasonable jury would conclude that the sunroof in a brand new vehicle would spontaneously open and close while driving, and that such a situation would not pose a warranty-related safety hazard. Reversed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal

JUVENILE LAW, RESTITUTION

People v. Anthony S., Jul-16-2014

J. Brick finds that a juvenile court correctly ordered defendant to pay $81,000 in restitution to his victim, whom he assaulted with a firearm. Defendant claims the restitution is unwarranted because the victim suffered no economic harm since the treating hospital wrote off his debt. But the victim does still, in fact, owe the hospital over $400,000, whether the hospital is actively trying to collect or not, and nothing bars the hospital from seeking reimbursement at a later time. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Court Of Appeals For The Armed Forces

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

U.S. v. Treat, Jul-16-2014

J. Ohlson finds that the lower court properly convicted appellant based on a charge that was altered by the military judge, stemming from allegations of desertion, missing movement, and other charges. The changes, though material, did not prejudice appellant. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Court Of Federal Claims

TAX

Free-Pacheco v. U.S., Jul-16-2014

J. Horn finds that plaintiff cannot sue the government to recover $16 million in taxes collected from his gambling winnings by claiming his slot-machine betting was a "trade or business." The record shows plaintiff did not gamble regularly enough, or show any real intent to make a profit, in order to avoid having his gambling winnings taxed as such.

Edit Delete Court Of Federal Claims

DISCOVERY, EVIDENCE

Fairholme Funds v. U.S., Jul-16-2014

J. Sweeney finds that the government needs to provide detailed privilege logs during discovery to explain why some of the documents plaintiff requests in its Fifth-Amendment takings claim cannot be released. Plaintiff is suing over the dividend stock price for Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which plaintiff claims the government pushed to zero and thus took shareholder property without compensation.

Edit Delete Court Of Federal Claims

CIVIL PROCEDURE, DISCOVERY

Alta Wind I Owner v. U.S., Jul-16-2014

J. Wheeler finds that discovery in this case--in which the company claims the government owes them an additional $226 million--is appropriate. The record shows the company invested in wind power facilities in California and wants to reap the benefits offered through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. To determine that rebate, the government must explore the facts surrounding the company's transactions in order to respond to the company's claims, which must be done in discovery.

Edit Delete Delaware Court of Chancery

FIDUCIARY DUTY, SECURITIES

Friedman v. Expedia, Jul-16-2014

Plaintiff fails to satisfy either prong of "Aronson" in failing to plead with particularity that making a demand on the Expedia board of directors was futile. Plaintiff claims that defendants breached their fiduciary duties by issuing excessive compensation to Dara Khosrowshahi under the company's 2005 Stock and Annual Incentive Plan. The Compensation Committee accelerated the vesting of a grant of restricted stock units amounting to 400,000 shares of Expedia common stock, but Chancellor Bouchard finds that they had the authority to waive the restrictions under the award plan. Defendants rightly exercised their business judgment and plaintiff fails to raise a reasonable doubt related to a potentially ambiguous provision in the award plan.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit

PENSIONS, JURISDICTION

Lemus v. DOJ, Jul-16-2014

J. Chen holds that appellant may not extend time for her notice of appeal challenging the denial of benefits under the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act for the death of her spouse. Appellant filed her notice of appeal after the 90-day deadline. The deadline is not subject to equitable tolling, as it is jurisdictional.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit

TRADEMARK

Stoncor Group v. Specialty Coatings, Jul-16-2014

J. Hughes holds that defendant's Armorstone mark did not infringe on plaintiff's Stonshield mark. Although the parties are competitors, there is no likelihood of confusion between the two marks. The marks are distinct in "sound, appearance and commercial impression." Armorstone is not merely descriptive of defendant's products. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

JURISDICTION

Central Mortgage Co. v. Callahan, Jul-16-2014

J. Lagoa holds that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to consider a motion for a determination of assessments due to three condo associations after borrowers defaulted on their loan. "Entitlement to assessments was neither litigated nor adjudicated." Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

DRUG OFFENDER, JURY

Landis v. Florida, Jul-16-2014

J. Klingensmith finds that the trial court improperly convicted defendant of trafficking in cocaine. The state's use of a peremptory challenge to an African-American, and the state's "race-neutral" reason for the exemption, were unsupported by sound reason. While the prospective juror's job as kitchen manager of a restaurant placed him in a profession with a high rate of drug use, the state failed to question the juror on his views on drug usage. Therefore, the reason for the strike "is insufficient to show that the trial court properly considered the issue of genuineness." Reversed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

PROPERTY

5F v. Dresing, Jul-16-2014

J. Black finds that appellant was not collaterally estopped from contesting respondents' right to build a pier on submerged land that it owns. While the prior decisions involved the same property and appellant's predecessor in title, respondents were not parties to those cases. However, appellant's claims are without merit because under Florida law, riparian owners have a right to construct piers to the point of navigability, even if the submerged lands are privately owned. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

CIVIL PROCEDURE

C.C-R. v. Department of Children and Families, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the circuit court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit entered a proper ruling. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Palm Beach Park Centre 4 v. Palm Beach, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the trial court properly dismissed plaintiff's amended complaint for declaratory relief, as plaintiff is not entitled to a suit seeking a declaratory decree. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

MURDER

Campbell v. State, Jul-16-2014

J. Rothenberg holds that defendant's postconviction claim—his 11th—regarding his second-degree murder conviction is completely without merit. However, the court gives defendant the "benefit of the doubt" when he argued that he should have an opportunity to respond before preventing him from making further filings.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

SENTENCING, CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, MURDER

Dawson v. Florida, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the trial court improperly sentenced a juvenile defendant for first-degree murder. While a sentence of life without parole remains constitutional in homicide cases, the court is permitted to consider whether the juvenile's sentence must revert to life with the possibility of parole after twenty-five years. Reversed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, WITNESS, EVIDENCE

Maine v. Florida, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the trial court properly ruled on the opinion in question, as defendant attempts to raise issues that were not preserved for appeal. In addition, the issue of improper testimony is without merit, as any error was harmless. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

SENTENCING

DeAngelo v. State, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the sentencing court properly denied appellant credit for time served in an out-of-state jail, though appellant has a right to challenge that decision in a motion seeking postconviction relief. However, the postconviction court should not have summarily denied appellant's facially sufficient claim that he did not receive credit for time spent in a Florida county jail. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Suggs v. Florida, Jul-16-2014

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that the trial court improperly denied defendant post-conviction relief, as the court improperly held that defendant was attempting to amend an original motion. Reversed.

Edit Delete Florida Courts Of Appeal

ATTORNEY FEES, DEFAMATION

Andrist v. Spleen, Jul-16-2014

Plaintiff contended that defendants, certain stand-up comedians, defamed him in their comedy act by creating a plan to falsely accuse plaintiff of molesting one of them when he was a minor. On their Twitter and Facebook accounts, defendants said they were going to confront plaintiff at a hotel with a camera crew and show the interview during their act. J. May finds that the trial court improperly limited defendants' award of attorney fees to $100 after defendant admitted on tape that the allegation was true. Because defendants were not provided notice of the request for a temporary injunction, they were deprived of the opportunity to prove a higher bond was warranted, and they "acted diligently" in their efforts to dissolve the injunction. Reversed.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69