32 Cited authorities

  1. Reiser v. Residential Funding Corporation

    380 F.3d 1027 (7th Cir. 2004)   Cited 226 times
    Holding that the district court must adhere to the Seventh Circuit's interpretation of state law unless and until a "decision by a state's supreme court terminates the [Seventh Circuit decision's] authoritative force"
  2. Chemetron Corp. v. Jones

    72 F.3d 341 (3d Cir. 1995)   Cited 266 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that publication in two national newspapers and seven local newspapers was constitutionally sufficient
  3. Desiano v. Warner-Lambert Co.

    467 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2006)   Cited 152 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FDCA did not preempt a Michigan statute, which eliminated immunity for manufacturer of a FDA approved drug if that manufacturer misrepresented or withheld material information that would have altered FDA's approval decision, because such suits depended primarily on traditional and preexisting tort sources, not at all on a “fraud-on-the-FDA” cause of action created by state law, and forbidden under Buckman
  4. Thommes v. Milwaukee Ins. Co.

    641 N.W.2d 877 (Minn. 2002)   Cited 128 times
    Concluding that an insurance policy with the same exclusion 2(j) was ambiguous with respect to its applicability to damage to the property of third parties
  5. Motorsports Racing Plus, Inc. v. Arctic Cat Sales, Inc.

    666 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 2003)   Cited 119 times
    Discussing Milk Products
  6. Barron v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada Ltd.

    965 F.2d 195 (7th Cir. 1992)   Cited 156 times
    Holding that North Carolina's seat belt exclusionary rule, while a substantive law, is inapplicable to the present case because the use of evidence "was not to show that [Plaintiff] failed to mitigate the consequences of the accident but to show that [Defendant] had been reasonable"
  7. Booking v. General Star Management Co.

    254 F.3d 414 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 102 times
    Finding conflict between New York and Texas laws regarding notice defects
  8. Meadowbrook v. Tower Ins. Co.

    559 N.W.2d 411 (Minn. 1997)   Cited 114 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding "arising out of" means "causally connected with"
  9. Lewis v. University of Pittsburgh

    725 F.2d 910 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 130 times
    In Lewis v. University of Pittsburgh, 725 F.2d 910 (3d Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 892, 105 S.Ct. 266, 83 L.Ed.2d 202 (1984), the case upon which the appellants primarily rely, we rejected the plaintiff's contention that she had to prove that race was only a "motivating" factor or a "substantial" factor for the defendant-employer's refusal to promote her. Rather, we required proof of "but for" causation in the sense that race played "the determinative" factor in the employment decision.
  10. Yang v. Voyagaire Houseboats, Inc.

    701 N.W.2d 783 (Minn. 2005)   Cited 65 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where company providing houseboat acted as innkeeper providing regulated public service, with duty to protect guests, exculpatory clause not enforceable
  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 285,057 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
  12. Section 815 ILCS 665/10 - Application of laws of another state

    815 ILCS 665/10   Cited 11 times

    A provision contained in or executed in connection with a building and construction contract to be performed in Illinois that makes the contract subject to the laws of another state or that requires any litigation, arbitration, or dispute resolution to take place in another state is against public policy. Such a provision is void and unenforceable. 815 ILCS 665/10 P.A. 92-657, eff. 7-16-02.


    Minn. Stat. § 60A.06   Cited 7 times

    Subdivision 1.Statutory lines. Insurance corporations may be authorized to transact in any state or territory in the United States, in the Dominion of Canada, and in foreign countries, when specified in their charters or certificates of incorporation, either as originally granted or as thereafter amended, any of the following kinds of business, upon the stock plan, or upon the mutual plan when the formation of such mutual companies is otherwise authorized by law; and business trusts as authorized