MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER D.P. MARSHALL JR., District Judge. This is an ERISA case with a conflict-of-interest twist. Ronnie Turman, a former Crane Corporation employee, claims that he is entitled to receive at least $33,000.00 in long-term disability benefits under an employee-welfare-benefit plan that Crane sponsored. 29 U.S.C.A. 1002(1) (West 2008). Standard Insurance Company issued the disability policy to Crane. In June 2006, Turman had a heart condition that required him to stop...
MEMORANDUM OPINION GARNETT THOMAS EISELE, District Judge. Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Petitioner Artie Jackson pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The Court has carefully reviewed the entire file in this matter, including the Proposed Findings and Recommendations prepared by Magistrate Jerome Kearney, Petitioner's objections thereto, and Respondent Larry Norris's response to Petitioner's objections. The Court also heard oral argument from counsel, at a...
REMAND ORDER WM. R. WILSON, Jr., District Judge. Pending is Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 20). Defendants have responded. 1 A telephone conference was held on June 9, 2010 2 ; then the parties submitted additional briefs. 3 I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs' Complaint alleges that the Bayer Defendants 4 ("Bayer") "contaminated commercial rice supplies consisting of non-genetically modified Arkansas rice and land" with its genetically modified rice. 5 Plaintiffs assert that Separate...
Memorandum Opinion and Order SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, District Judge. Plaintiff B & B Hardware, Inc. ("`B & B)" brought this action against defendant Hargis Industries, Inc. ("Hargis") for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false designation of origin. Hargis counterclaimed, alleging B & B obtained its trademark registration fraudulently, and asserting claims of copyright infringement, false advertising, false designation of origin, and unfair competition. The matter was tried before...
JOINT MEMORANDUM ORDER WM. R. WILSON, JR., District Judge. A. Introduction The primary question in this litigation is whether the plaintiffs developed breast cancer from hormone replacement therapy (HRT) medications. Most plaintiffs received Prempro, a combined hormone replacement therapy (CHRT) consisting of estrogen and progesterone. The parties have already litigated the admissibility of expert testimony on whether CHRT causes breast cancer. Some plaintiffs received Premarin, which...
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, District Judge. Plaintiff Thomas J. Musticchi, a police officer within the City of Little Rock, Arkansas Police Department ("LRPD"), brings this collective class action against the City of Little Rock ("City") pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq., for the alleged failure of the City to pay LRPD officers properly time and one-half their regular rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours...
OPINION AND ORDER J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge. Jack Harold Jones, Don W. Davis, Alvin Bernal Jackson, Kenneth Dewayne Williams, Stacey Eugene Johnson, Jason Farrell McGehee, and Bruce Ward brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging that Arkansas's recently enacted Methods of Execution Act 1 ("MEA") violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the ex post facto clause in Article I, Section 10 of the United States...
OPINION AND ORDER J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge. Robert Hall, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, commenced this putative class action against Equity National Life Insurance Company, Life Investors Insurance Company of America, and Aegon USA Inc. on November 3, 2009. The defendants have moved this Court to deny class certification and eliminate Hall's class action allegations pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(d)(1)(D). The defendants argue that Hall's...
ORDER WM. R. WILSON, JR., District Judge. Pending is Defendant's Motion to Suppress (Doc. No. 94). The Prosecution has responded. 1 Oral arguments were held on April 15, 2010, 2 and supplemental briefs were submitted by the parties. 3 For the reasons set out below, Defendant's Motion to Suppress is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. BACKGROUND Defendant Silas Roynel Swift moves to suppress drug-related evidence found in his SUV and house. These are the facts: 4 On the afternoon of...
ORDER JAMES M. MOODY, District Judge. The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Henry L. Jones, Jr. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, the transcript of the hearing held on February 2-4, 2010 and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. The Court is not persuaded by the parties' objections regarding liability of the...
ORDER J. THOMAS RAY, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs Application for Attorney's Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"). (Docket entry # 19). On August 26, 2009, Plaintiff filed this action challenging the decision of an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denying her claim for social security benefits. (Docket entry # 2). On June 16, 2010, the Court entered a Memorandum Order (docket entry # 16) reversing the ALJ's decision and remanding the...
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER D.P. MARSHALL JR., District Judge. The question presented is whether Arkansas's statute defining a political party—how a group of voters becomes a party and stays a party—is unconstitutional when applied to the Green Party of Arkansas. The Party and two of its members (collectively the Green Party) challenge Ark. Code Ann. 7-1-101(21) (Supp.2009) as imposing an unconstitutional burden on their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to participate in State...
ORDER GARNETT THOMAS EISELE, District Judge. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment 1 filed by Separate Defendant Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. ("WKH"). The motion was originally filed as a Motion to Dismiss, but the Court converted the motion to one for judgment as a matter of law in its April 12, 2010 Letter Order 2 which provided the parties the opportunity to supplement their filings and to submit additional materials outside the pleadings. Before the motion was converted,...
