Legal Opinion
Nowling v. Aero Services International, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Decided April 6, 1990No. Civ. A. 90-775PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND REASONS
FELDMAN, District Judge.
After hearing testimony and reviewing the exhibits presented in this case, the Court ruled on several matters. The plaintiffs and counter-defendants, Ronald and Gail Nowling, reurged their Motion to Remand, and that motion is DENIED. Their Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Court Order is also DENIED. The defendants and counter-plaintiffs, Aero and Triton Energy Corp., have applied for a Preliminary Injunction (a temporary restraining order was previously entered), which is GRANTED as to Aero, and DENIED without prejudice as to Triton. This opinion is now…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Pinter v. DahlSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Taylor v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Mississippi Power & Light Co. & Mississippi Public Service Commission v. United Gas Pipe Line Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re TexasDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2000
- Barsam v. Pure Tech International, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- In Re FraserDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1999
- LaFleur v. GuilbeauLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1993
- Keith v. VolpeDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.