Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 29, 2004

Nexans Wires S.A. v. Sark-USA, Inc.

Plaintiffs Nexans Wires S.A. and Lacroix & Kress GmbH sued defendants Sark-USA, Inc. and Sarkuysan Elektrolitik Bakir Sanayii Ve Ticaret A.S., alleging unfair competition, trade secret misappropriation, and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The core of the federal claim centered on allegations that defendants induced former employees of a customer, AEB, to steal plaintiffs' proprietary information from AEB's computer systems. The court converted the defendants' motion to dismiss the CFAA claims into a motion for summary judgment to assess if plaintiffs met the CFAA's jurisdictional "loss" threshold of $5,000. It determined that the claimed losses, consisting of executive travel expenses and lost revenue unrelated to computer service interruption, did not qualify as "loss" under the CFAA's definition. Consequently, the federal CFAA claims were dismissed, but the court exercised supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

Computer Fraud and Abuse ActCFAASummary JudgmentTrade Secret MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionJurisdictionStandingFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureData TheftProprietary Information

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Wright v. Colvin

Plaintiff Kimmey Wright sought judicial review of a final decision by the Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Carolyn W. Colvin, denying her applications for Social Security Disability (SSD) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Judge William F. Kuntz, II presided over the motions for judgment on the pleadings from both parties. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) had previously denied Wright's applications, finding she was not disabled under the five-step SSA process, determining she had severe impairments but an adequate residual functional capacity (RFC) for certain jobs. Wright challenged the ALJ's decision, arguing a violation of the treating physician rule regarding Dr. Lubin's testimony and that the vocational expert's (VE) testimony did not reflect her RFC. The Court denied Plaintiff's motion and granted the Commissioner's, upholding the ALJ's determination that the ALJ provided sufficient reasons to discount Dr. Lubin's opinion and that the VE's testimony was based on a correct RFC.

Social Security DisabilitySupplemental Security IncomeJudicial ReviewAdministrative Law JudgeTreating Physician RuleVocational Expert TestimonyResidual Functional CapacitySchizophreniaMajor Depressive DisorderPersonality Disorder

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Apr 16, 2014

Brown v. Colvin

Plaintiff Matthew L. Brown initiated this action for judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's final determination denying his application for Supplemental Security Income benefits. Plaintiff alleged disability due to lumbar spine problems. Administrative Law Judge David S. Lewandowski found plaintiff not disabled, a decision upheld by the Appeals Council. Plaintiff moved for judgment on the pleadings, contending the ALJ failed to properly assess credibility, obtain a treating source opinion, improperly relied on VE testimony, and failed to perform a function-by-function analysis of his exertional limitations. The court found that the ALJ's decision was based on correct legal standards and supported by substantial evidence, denying plaintiff's motion and granting the Commissioner's motion.

Social Security ActSSI BenefitsDisability ClaimLumbar Spine DysfunctionRFC AssessmentCredibility AssessmentVocational Expert TestimonyAdministrative Law JudgeJudicial ReviewFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(c)

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Lerner v. FNB Rochester Corp.

This is a shareholder class action brought by Paul Lerner against First National Bank of Rochester, its corporate parent FNB Rochester Corp., certain former directors and officers, their former law firm, and Yapi Ve Kredi Bankasi A.S. The plaintiff alleged securities fraud, misrepresentations, and omissions regarding FNBR's financial health, particularly concerning its loan portfolio and a terminated merger agreement with Yapi. Claims were filed under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, along with common law claims. The court granted the motions to dismiss from all defendants, finding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and did not plead fraud with sufficient particularity under Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). Consequently, the Amended Complaint and pendent common law claims were dismissed with prejudice, without leave to replead.

Securities FraudShareholder Class ActionMotion to DismissFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b)Corporate MismanagementBanking IndustryLoan LossesFailed MergerDuty to Disclose

References

Showing 1-4 of 4 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Nexans Wires S.A. v. Sark-USA, Inc.

Computer Fraud and Abuse ActCFAASummary JudgmentTrade Secret MisappropriationUnfair CompetitionJurisdictionStandingFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureData TheftProprietary Information

Wright v. Colvin

Brown v. Colvin

Lerner v. FNB Rochester Corp.