§Why CasetextPricing

United States of America v. Colorado City, Town of et al

RESPONSE to Motion re: 541 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment

7 Cited authorities

  1. State of Idaho Potato v. G T Terminal Pack

    425 F.3d 708 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 139 times
    Holding that Mendoza applies in a suit against a state agency

  2. Syverson v. Intnl. Business Machines

    472 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 119 times
    Finding a judgment "sufficiently 'final' even though there are to be further proceedings on remand on the merits"

  3. Kamilche Co. v. U.S.

    53 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 53 times
    Holding "[c]ollateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, bars the litigation of issues actually adjudicated in previous litigation between the same parties"

  4. Canady v. Prescott Canyon Est. Homeowners Assn

    204 Ariz. 91 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 13 times

    No. 1 CA-CV 02-0138 November 26, 2002 As Amended and Redesignated as Opinion December 20, 2002 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County Cause No. CV 00-013941, the Honorable Colleen McNally, Judge, REVERSED AND REMANDED. Arizona Center for Disability Law Phoenix by Julianne H. Carter, Attorneys for Appellants James A. Simmons Prescott, Attorney for Appellees EHRLICH, Judge ¶ 1 Prescott Canyon Estates Homeowners Association, its board of directors and its president (collectively "Association")

  5. McCoy v. Foss Maritime Co.

    442 F. Supp. 2d 1103 (W.D. Wash. 2006)   Cited 2 times

    No. C04-2233L. May 31, 2006. Jeffery Michael Campiche, Campiche, Hepburn, Mccarty Bianco, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff. Elizabeth Lynn Hubbard, Anna E. Johansson, Garvey Schubert Barer, Seattle, WA, for Defendant. ORDER ON MOTION IN LIMINE LASNIK, District Judge. I. Introduction This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff's "Motion In Limine Based on the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel" (Dkt. # 17). Plaintiff Tommy McCoy is a chief engineer for the Foss Maritime Company ("Foss"). McCoy argues

  6. Section 3604 - Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices

    42 U.S.C. § 3604   Cited 4,102 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Requiring any "accommodation" in "rules, policies, practices, or services" to be "reasonable"

  7. Section 3617 - Interference, coercion, or intimidation

    42 U.S.C. § 3617   Cited 1,043 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing that it is "unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person" because of "any right granted or protected" under the law