Employment Law Court Rulings

Petition for writ of mandamus is denied. Magistrate did not err in his determination that OneSource failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the requested relief or that the commission was under a clear legal duty to provide it.

The defendant property owners appealed from the trial court's judgment determining that they had breached the terms of a restrictive covenant that runs with their property by constructing a six car commercial garage and operating a commercial roofing business therefrom without having received prior…

This opinion addresses Civil Practice & Remedies Code Chapter 33's definition of "responsible third party" and the meaning of "the harm for which recovery of damages is sought," as used therein. This Opinion addresses the enforcement of a mandatory Buy-Sell Option clause and its specific…

Summary judgment

In this complex suit over a breach of a contract to sell real estate, the trial court dismissed one of the plaintiffs in an order certified as final under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 54.02, but it reinstated that plaintiff two years later. The court awarded the plaintiff-buyers specific…

Summary judgment granted to employer on workers' compensation claim; "qualifying chemical test"

R.C. 2711.03; enforcement of arbitration provision; oral hearing unequivocally and specifically requested is mandatory; abuse of discretion. Appellants appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to stay and enforce an arbitration agreement before conducting an oral hearing as requested in…

Contempt; final appealable order; untimely; purge; first time on appeal. Appellants appealed from the trial court's order finding that two nonparty witnesses remained in contempt of court, stemming from a previously issued contempt order. Neither of appellants' arguments are properly before the…

The plaintiff service station owners appealed from the trial court's judgment for the defendant in their action alleging, inter alia, that the defendant's termination of certain lease agreements was in violation of the Connecticut Petroleum Franchise Act (§ 42-133j et seq.). The plaintiffs claimed…

Relator Kathleen Smith appeals the decision of the board of directors (the board) of respondent Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) denying Smith's application for total and permanent disability benefits. Smith argues that the board's decision is not supported by substantial evidence and the…

Petitioners Sierra Club, Vote Solar, Union of Concerned Scientists, and the Minnesota Solar Energy Industries Association (together, Sierra Club) appeal from a decision by an administrative-law judge (ALJ) that dismissed their petition for a declaration that respondent Minnesota Public Utilities…

¶1 In this deprived child proceeding, Appellant, Asheley Teague, the biological mother of J.S., JR. (JSJ), the minor child, appeals from the district court's order terminating her parental rights. The State of Oklahoma (State) moved to terminate Mother's parental rights, Mother waived a jury trial,…

This case addresses whether the Uniform Arbitration Act confers subject matter jurisdiction on Tennessee courts to confirm an arbitration award when the parties' arbitration agreement specified that arbitration would occur in another state. Berkeley Research Group, LLC and Southern Advanced…

Whether an employee's injury, caused by an accidental discharge of the handgun he wascarrying in his waistband, arose out of his employment in the sense that it wascaused by a risk of employment or was incidental to his work duties.

The petitioner, who had been convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree, attempt to commit robbery in the first degree, and assault in the first degree in connection with the shooting of a pizza delivery driver, sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming, inter alia, that his trial…

In this dispute related to a harassment restraining order (HRO), pro se appellant argues that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. Because the district court did not err in determining that it had personal jurisdiction over appellant, we affirm.

Appellants argue that the district court erred by denying their motion to compel arbitration. Because the claims asserted against appellants fall outside the scope of the arbitration agreement, we affirm.

Reconsideration; App.R. 26(A)(1)(a); error of law; contract; breach of contract; conspiracy to commit fraud; fraud; consumer sales practices act ("CSPA"); permit; employee; employer; relevant evidence; Evid.R. 401; Evid.R. 403; damages; insufficient evidence; manifest weight; unfair or deceptive…

An order from a district court granting a motion to disqualify an attorney is not appealable under N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02(3) or the collateral order doctrine. Supervisory jurisdiction may be exercised to review an order granting a motion to disqualify an attorney because a civil litigant has a…