48 results for 'judge:"Cole"'.
J. Cole grants, in part, the insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings, ruling the policyholder's failure to include in its complaint an allegation that it complied with occurrence notice provisions in the life insurance policy renders its contract claim defective; therefore, the complaint will be dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv407, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Cole denies, in part, the payroll company's motion to dismiss, ruling that while the previous state court lawsuit filed by the trucking company involved the same parties and issues, its dismissal was not a decision on the merits that would preclude the trucking company from filing this federal lawsuit. However, because the unjust enrichment claim is based on the same conduct as the contract claim and is governed exclusively by the terms of the contract, it must be dismissed as duplicative.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv655, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Civil Procedure, Contract
J. Cole grants, in part, the credit card services company's motion to dismiss, ruling the unjust enrichment claim filed by the client must be dismissed. It is duplicative of the contract claim, while the client's negligence claim also fails because any duties breached by the services company stem from the parties' contract and, therefore, are covered by the contract claim in the complaint.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 1:24cv163, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Negligence, Banking / Lending, Contract
J. Cole mostly denies a class of truck drivers’ motion for more discovery in this long-running case over a railroad operator potentially violating biometric privacy law. The court broadly sides with the railroad operator in its assertion that it has already provided the class of drivers with all the discovery documents they are entitled to, but nevertheless orders the operator to compile a privilege log regarding its communications with a third-party software company.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv390, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Privacy, Discovery, Class Action
J. Cole partially grants a former electronics salesman’s motion to compel his former employer, an electronics retailer, to produce a privilege log. The former electronic salesman claims his employer fired him over his disability and use of FMLA leave, and seeks documents that could corroborate his allegations of discrimination. The court instead asks the parties to confer “in good faith,” and reach a “negotiated result” over discovery within the next two weeks.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2639, NOS: Family and Medical Leave Act - Labor, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Discovery, Employment Discrimination
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Cole denies motions to dismiss and strike allegations outlined in the second amended complaint of a cellular telephone customer who claims the telephone company made unwanted sales calls to her phone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The telephone company’s motion to dismiss brought arguments that had already been reviewed by the court, and the judge denies the motion as a request for reconsideration because it does not present new evidence or show a change in law or error in the prior decision. Although several of customer’s allegations in the second pleading involve internet job postings raising concerns about hearsay, the customer’s claims do not centrally rely on these postings. The judge finds the new evidence relevant as presented and denies the motion to strike allegations.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv152, NOS: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) - Other Suits, Categories: Communications, Consumer Law
[Consolidated.] J. Cole finds that the lower court improperly dismissed the charges against defendants in these consolidated cases "based on alleged defects in the charging complaints." The circuit court did not lack subject matter jurisdiction over the appeals from municipal court, since its jurisdiction is derived from the municipal court conviction and not the complaint. Additionally, defendants failed to raise any objections in the municipal court. Reversed.
Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: CR-2023-0348, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Jurisdiction
J. Cole finds the lower court properly granted the freight broker's motion to compel arbitration with the trucking company. The Section 1 exemption of the Federal Arbitration Act, which excludes employment agreements between companies and rail workers, does not apply to this case, which involves a contract between two business entities. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 23-1777, Categories: Arbitration, Employment, Contract
J. Cole denies the restaurant employees' motion for class certification, ruling that while the lead plaintiff cites his own experiences of being denied tips during the Covid-19 pandemic, his complaint says nothing about the experiences of other waitstaff and, therefore, cannot satisfy typicality or commonality requirements.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv377, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: Evidence, Class Action, Labor
J. Cole denies the union's motion for a preliminary injunction, ruling that even if its claims regarding the potential for the two trustees to vote in their own favor and block the union's preferred actions are true, all of the proposed harms could be satisfied with monetary damages and do not require an injunction. Meanwhile, the trustees' motion to dismiss fiduciary duty claims will be granted because the conduct at issue - amending the trust agreement - does not involve action undertaken as a fiduciary.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv502, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Erisa, Fiduciary Duty, Labor / Unions
J. Cole denies the property seller's motion to dismiss, ruling its assignment of its interests in the property at issue to a third party does not absolve it from liability on all the contract claims brought by the buyer. Specifically, the seller could still be held liable for its failure to deliver an environmental viability certificate following the removal of underground fuel storage tanks.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv727, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Civil Procedure, Contract
J. Cole denies the Jeep hardtop cover patent holder's motion to expand the court's previous injunction, ruling the sale of two allegedly patent-infringing hardtops by the manufacturer the day the injunction was entered does not violate the order considering the time difference between this court's location in Cincinnati and Thailand, the location of the manufacturer. Meanwhile, the publication of an FAQ and assembly guide on the manufacturer's website does not constitute a violation of the injunction, which prohibits any advertising, because the documents have no promotional effect and cannot be considered marketing materials.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv918, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, Injunction
J. Cole grants Wal-mart's motion to strike portions of the injured shopper's declaration, ruling her clarifications of the alleged defect in the tile floor that caused her to trip and fall contradict previous versions of her story, including the one taken in her deposition, and constitute sham issues of fact that cannot be considered on the parties' competing motions for summary judgment. Therefore, because the shopper put forth no concrete evidence of a defect in the floor and no evidence the employees of the store were aware of any dangerous defect, Wal-mart's motion for summary judgment is granted and the case is dismissed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv670, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, Premises Liability
J. Cole finds that the lower court improperly entered judgment on an application for writ of habeas corpus, instructing the Alabama Department of Corrections to calculate the correctional-incentive time due to the applicant. The applicant did not use the "proper legal mechanism" to challenge the department's decision regarding correctional-incentive time. Accordingly, the matter is remanded so that the case can be transferred to Montgomery Circuit Court, where the petition should be treated "as a petition for a writ of certiorari." Reversed.
Court: Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: CR-2023-0426, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Prisoners' Rights
J. Cole denies the city's motion to dismiss, ruling the position of the fire chief is a public employment position for which the employee can only be fired for cause, which creates a property interest protected by due process and allows the former chief to bring his due process claims. Furthermore, because the termination letter published by the city was written as a formal way to inform the public of its decision, statements about the chief's workplace culture and possible misconduct are "falsifiable statements of fact" that allow the chief's defamation claim to proceed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv230, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Defamation, Due Process
J. Cole grants the pharmaceutical company's motion for judgment on the podiatrist's junk fax claim, ruling unrebutted testimony from its owner that it sent faxes only to medical practices that requested them, alongside evidence the podiatrist had previously received samples and was in the pharmaceutical company's contact list, is sufficient to prove the podiatrist or someone in her office solicited the fax.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 1:16cv945, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Evidence, Consumer Law
J. Cole denies the government’s motion to compel a pharmacy chain to produce nearly 21,000 documents on its privilege log. This case is over whether the pharmacy chain, for years, kept government Medicare and Medicaid overpayments on patient prescriptions that it was supposed to have refunded. The government is now pursuing extensive discovery in the already six-year-old case, but the court finds that the pharmacy chain’s privilege log is so fundamentally flawed that it needs to be revised before the government can order the production of documents. Given the time it would take to complete such an overhaul, the court instead suggests the parties arrive at “a creative method for resolving the conflict” instead.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv6494, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Medicaid, Medicare, Discovery
J. Cole finds the lower court properly denied two of the Cincinnati police officers' motion for immunity on civil rights claims filed by the victims of a collision during a high-speed chase. Although the chase was the result of a joint investigation with the ATF, neither of the officers were deputized or under the direct command of a federal officer; therefore, they were not federal employees acting within the scope of their official duties. Affirmed in part.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Cole, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 22-5496, Categories: Civil Rights, Government, Immunity
J. Cole grants the Republican Senatorial Committee's motion to certify, ruling the question of whether coordinated party expenditure limits in the Federal Election Campaign Act violate the committee and candidate's First Amendment rights must be posed to the en banc Sixth Circuit. The committee and Senator J.D. Vance have altered fundraising operations under threat of enforcement, which grants them standing to challenge the restrictions, and while the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the constitutionality of expenditure limits in Colorado II, the specific nature of the question at issue in this case warrants consideration by the appeals court regardless of binding precedent.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv639, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Constitution, Elections, First Amendment
J. Cole partially grants the plaintiff financial services company’s motion to compel the defendant credit union to produce five categories of documents. This case concerns the financial services company’s “M1” logo and whether the credit union’s “M1st” logo is in breach of trademark. The services company wants access to the credit union’s merit marketing materials, brand guidelines, third-party mark use agreements, 2003 charter amendments and materials from prior litigation. The court orders the credit union to produce specific documents from these categories, but also orders the financial services company to clarify its demands regarding other documents.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1162, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, Business Practices, Discovery
J. Cole grants the suing property investor’s motion to compel production of documents from the sued fast food franchise operators. This case is a dispute over the finances and transactions needed to establish a a Hardee’s restaurant in Oswego, Illinois, over which the investor has accused the franchisers of racketeering in an effort to skip out on rent payments. The court finds that, given the RICO accusations, it’s important to uncover any evidence which could establish a record of communications between the individual operators.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Cole, Filed On: January 17, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv2697, NOS: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) - Other Suits, Categories: Property, Real Estate, Racketeering
J. Cole denies the insurer's motion to dismiss, ruling Ohio's conflict-of-laws principle requires the court to apply Ohio's 6-year statute of limitations, rather than the 4-year limitation present in California, which renders the estate's life insurance contract claim timely.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv122, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Civil Procedure, Insurance, Contract
J. Cole denies the parties' motion to approve a class action settlement, ruling that while the class of customers who purchased bedsheets from Macy's based on inflated thread counts meets all commonality and typicality requirements, the "cy pres" award of leftover settlement funds to a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that focuses primarily on climate change issues - not textile goods or misleading labels - makes the settlement unlawful because it does not benefit the class members in any way.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 1:17cv754, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, Settlements, Class Action
J. Cole denies, in part, the chemical solvent company's partial motion to dismiss, ruling that at this stage of the litigation, its agreement with the Chinese distribution company is a valid contract. Allegations in the complaint support the distribution company's claim that certificates of exclusivity, which do not include all terms of the agreement, are merely evidence of a contract and not the contract itself. Additionally, Ohio law requires a distributor to use its best efforts to promote the sale of a company's goods in an exclusivity agreement, which, in itself, qualifies as a consideration for the solvent company and renders the contract valid.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv117, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Contract