Reiser v. Residential Funding Corporation
380 F.3d 1027 (7th Cir. 2004) Cited 258 timesHolding 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"
Chemetron Corp. v. Jones
72 F.3d 341 (3d Cir. 1995) Cited 290 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that "[i]nadequate notice is a defect which precludes discharge of a claim in bankruptcy"
Desiano v. Warner-Lambert Co.
467 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 181 times 11 Legal AnalysesHolding 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
Motorsports Racing Plus, Inc. v. Arctic Cat Sales, Inc.
666 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 2003) Cited 142 timesDiscussing Milk Products
Thommes v. Milwaukee Ins. Co.
641 N.W.2d 877 (Minn. 2002) Cited 135 timesConcluding 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
Barron v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada Ltd.
965 F.2d 195 (7th Cir. 1992) Cited 167 timesHolding 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"
Booking v. General Star Management Co.
254 F.3d 414 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 116 timesFinding conflict between New York and Texas laws regarding notice defects
Meadowbrook v. Tower Ins. Co.
559 N.W.2d 411 (Minn. 1997) Cited 126 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding "arising out of" means "causally connected with"
Lewis v. University of Pittsburgh
725 F.2d 910 (3d Cir. 1983) Cited 139 timesIn 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.
Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. v. Integrity Mut. Ins. Co.
819 N.W.2d 602 (Minn. 2012) Cited 56 timesHolding that negligent construction can be deemed an "occurrence" under policy language identical to that in this case
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,115 times 158 Legal AnalysesHolding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 815 ILCS 665/10 - Application of laws of another state
815 ILCS 665/10 Cited 14 timesA 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.
Section 60A.06 - KINDS OF INSURANCE PERMITTED
Minn. Stat. § 60A.06 Cited 7 timesSubdivision 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