Cases

PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in the majority opinion, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. We remand this case to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the *554trial court so that additional proceedings may be held not inconsistent with the opinion. AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.

Matter of Angel L. (Angel L.) (2025 NY Slip Op 00865) Matter of Angel L. (Angel L.) 2025 NY Slip Op 00865 Decided on February 13, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judici

Matter of Angel L. (Angel L.) (2025 NY Slip Op 00864) Matter of Angel L. (Angel L.) 2025 NY Slip Op 00864 Decided on February 13, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judici

169 S.W.3d 45 (2004) GENERALI-U.S. BRANCH v. Hector Angel MARTINEZ and Leticia Martinez. No. 03-1210. Supreme Court of Arkansas. May 13, 2004. J. Robin Nix, II, and Snellgrove, Langley, Lovett & Culpepper, by: Lacey C. Nix, Jonesboro, for appellant. Mixon Parker & Hurst PLC, by: Donn Mixon, Jonesboro, for appellees. PER CURIAM. Appellees

Angel v Strulovich (2025 NY Slip Op 04150) Angel v Strulovich 2025 NY Slip Op 04150 Decided on July 16, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is unc

Angel v Strulovich (2025 NY Slip Op 04149) Angel v Strulovich 2025 NY Slip Op 04149 Decided on July 16, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is unc

701 F.Supp.2d 835 (2010) VILLAS AT PARKSIDE PARTNERS d/b/a Villas at Parkside, et al., and Valentin Reyes, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS, Defendant. Civil Action Nos. 3:08-CV-1551-B, 3:03-CV-1615. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. March 24, 2010. *838 James S. Renard, C. Dunham

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

HAYNES, Circuit Judge: Relator Branch Consultants appeals the district court’s dismissal of its False Claims Act (FCA) complaint under the FCA’s first-to-file jurisdictional bar. See 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(5) (1994). The district court found the bar applicable because Branch’s complaint alleges “the same general conduct and theory” of Katrina-related insurance f

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. Before the Court is defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (R. Doc. 116). For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. I. Background This case arises out of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The storm struck southern Louisiana and Mississippi in late August of 2005, causing damage

ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. In this False Claims Act case arising out of Hurricane Katrina, defendants American Reliable Insurance Company, Standard Fire Insurance Company, Colonial Claims Corporation, Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, SIMSOL Insurance Services, Inc., American National Property & Casualty Company (“ANPAC”), Fidelity National Insurance Compan

ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. Qui tam plaintiffs move to strike Fidelity’s Third-Party Complaint against its policyholders. (R. Doc. 253). Because Fidelity’s claims do not meet the appropriate standard under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and because third-party practice is considerably restricted in False Claims Act actions, the motion is GRANTED.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-2381 ANGEL COMBS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States D

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

USCA11 Case: 22-11873 Document: 75-1 Date Filed: 06/26/2024 Page: 1 of 24 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-11873 ____________________ In re: JANUARY 2021 SHORT SQUEEZE TRADING LITIGATION,

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § UNIT 82 JOINT VENTURE, § FIVE STAR HOLDING COMPANY, INC., FIVE STAR HOLDING § MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., AND 1320/1390 DON HASKINS, LTC., No. 08-13-00088-CV §

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 24, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D23-1879 Lower Tribunal No. F13-11161 ________________ Jose Angel Patlan, Appellant,

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.