21-CV-848 Estate of Alvin Cole et al v. Mensah et al
21-CV-848 Estate of Alvin Cole et al v. Mensah et al
Order
You are here
Lynn Adelman
24-CV-524 ANR Pipeline Company v. 9.33 Acres More or Less in Washington County Wisconsin et al
24-CV-524 ANR Pipeline Company v. 9.33 Acres More or Less in Washington County Wisconsin et al
Decision and Order
22-CV-1122 Vander Plaats et al v. Crisis Prevention Institute Inc
22-CV-1122 Vander Plaats et al v. Crisis Prevention Institute Inc
Decision and Order
24-CV-940 The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al v. LaFontain et al
24-CV-940 The Prudential Insurance Company of America et al v. LaFontain et al
Order
24-CV-536 ANR Pipeline Company v. 2.99 Acres More or Less in Winnebego County WI and Nancy L. Sturn
24-CV-536 ANR Pipeline Company v. 2.99 Acres More or Less in Winnebego County WI and Nancy L. Sturn
Decision and Order
22-CR-113 US v. Pease
22-CR-113 US v. Pease
Statement of Reason Memorandum
The court set forth the reasons for the sentence imposed on the defendant. The court explained the basis for the mitigating role adjustment awarded the defendant and discussed flaws in the sentencing guideline for methamphetamine offenses.
23-CV-434 Tran v. Wells
23-CV-434 Tran v. Wells
Decision and Order
23-CV-1355 Russo et al v. BRP US Inc et al
23-CV-1355 Russo et al v. BRP US Inc et al
Decision and Order
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
Decision and Order
The court decided a partial motion to dismiss a class action complaint in a consumer multidistrict litigation alleging economic losses caused by a defective solar energy power system.
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
23-MD-3078 Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
Decision and Order
The court determined that it had diversity and supplemental subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act even though the claim did not satisfy the amount-in-controversy and other requirements of the Act’s jurisdiction-conferring provision.
Pages
