Cases

l l DNA Processing Req'uired. 10 U.S'.C. § 1565 GCMO No. 5, 19 J'une 2014, was the last GCMO of this headquarters published in FYl4. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE WARFARE CENTER (ACC) ~ NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, NEVADA 89191-6505 General Court-l\/lartial Order No. 1 ~ ' 15 Septernber 2015 AIRl\/IAN FIRST CLASS JOSHUA A. ARNOLD, XXX-XX-XXXX, United States Air Force, 422d 'l`-est and Ev`aluation Squadron, was arraigned at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on the f

Opinion by Judge KOZINSKI; Dissent by Judge N.R. SMITH. OPINION KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge: Pursuant to a law passed by the Guam legislature, eligible “Native Inhabitants of Guam” may register to vote in a plebiscite concerning Guam’s future political relationship with the. United States. Guam will conduct the plebiscite if and when 70 percent of eligible Native Inhabitants register. Plai

The court delivered a PER CURIAM opinion. SUTTON, J. (pp. 407-12), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. AMENDED OPINION PER CURIAM. This matter is before the Court on the government’s petition for rehearing en banc. Upon consideration of the relevant briefs and the record, we vacate our prior opinion,

237 F.Supp. 323 (1965) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. ARNOLD, SCHWINN & CO., Schwinn Cycle Distributors Association, and the B. F. Goodrich Company, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 59 C 489. United States District Court N. D. Illinois, E. D. January 25, 1965. *324 Earl A. Jinkinson, Joseph Prindaville, Kenneth H. Hanson, and

[1] This is a petitory action, in which one of the plaintiffs, Effie Dexter Arnold, seeks to be recognized as the owner of an undivided one-half interest in 80 acres of land on which there is a producing oil well. This tract is situated in the Parish of Richland, State of Louisiana, and is described as follows: SE 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section 14, and NE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Section 23, Township 17 North, Range 9 East. Each of her coplaintiffs, Robert B. Prentice and Murray Hudson, seeks to be reco

Mr. Presiding Justice Barry delivered the opinion of the court. Appellant and her son-in-law, W. J. Ruediger, executed their promissory note to appellee for $3,000. This suit was brought upon the note against appellant alone. Appellee filed with his declaration an affidavit of claim to the effect that the consideration of the note was money loaned by him to appellant. Appella

PHILIPS, District Judge. This is an action of ejectment for the recovery of certain lands in Clay county, Mo., submitted to the court without the intervention of a jury, on an agreed statement of facts, with other additional facts found by the court on further evidence. Prior to the adoption of the state constitution of 1865, inhibiting special legislation, it is to be conceded to the defendants that it was within

WHEELER, District Judge, (dissenting.) In 1853 Blasius M. Ohesebrough, afterwards known as George M., was about 35 years old, a son of a widow of large means, and had some property of his own. and was a. brother of the defendant Charles A. Ohesebrough. Josephine Oregier was about 10 years old, and the daughter of a widow. Both were horn, and all lived, in the city of Row York. They met at a dancing school in Bond street, in a bui

Mostos, J. The defendant contests one of the items in the plaintiff’s account, on the ground that the beef therein charged was sold in violation of law. It appeared at the trial that the plaintiff is, and was in 1868, an inhabitant of Stow; that on February 15, 1868, he sold the beef in question in that town; and that the weights and scales by which he sold it were not sealed by the sealer of weights and measures appointed for sa

This was an action of trespass and ejectment, brought by the plaintiff, to recover of the defendant possession of one undivided fifth part of a certain parcel of land situate in Burrillville, described in the plaintiff's declaration by metes and bounds, and also as "being a portion of the Sylvanus Cook farm, so called." The action was commenced on the 14th day of November, 1843. On the trial of the action, the plaintiff deduced his title from one Sylvanus Cook, who in the year 1

Page, J. This is a motion made in a supplementary proceeding to compel the receiver appointed therein to deliver to the Humboldt Exploration Company a certain promissory note, made by Adolph Segal to the order of the Greene Gold-Silver Company, for the sum of $171,532.83. The facts, so far as material to this application, are as follows: On the 9th day of July, 1908, a judgment was filed and docketed in the office of the clerk o

Per Curiam. The first objection relied on by the defendant arises on the face of the bond, which was conditioned for Joseph Allen’s appearance at the next county court. It is said there was no court known by that name, and the defendant has argued from this, that the bond was void. — We are all satisfied that this objection cannot prevail. It would be yielding too much to technical nicety. The words <

Ktekpatkick,. 0. J. Abating a little want of courteousness towards the memory of some of the greatest luminaries of the English law, and indeed I may say, some of the greatest men that ever lived, I have been much gratified by the arguments presented by the counsel in this cause.. They have investigated- the subject with great dare, and great ability, and they have certainly thrown much new light upon the view in which it had befor

624 F.3d 178 (2010) John Ashley HALE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ronald KING, Superintendent of Southern Mississippi Correctional Institution; Margaret Bingham, Superintendent of Southern Mississippi Correctional Institution; Christopher Epps, Commissioner of Mississippi Department of Corrections; Mike Hatten, Health Service Administrator of Wexford for Southern Mississippi Correctional Institution; John Doe, Physician at Southern Mississippi Correc

PER CURIAM: No member of the panel nor judge in regular active service of the court having requested that the court be polled on Rehearing En Banc (Fed. R. App. P. and 5th Cir. R. 35), the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED. We GRANT the petition for panel rehearing filed by intervenor the United States and, without hearing oral argument, withdraw our prior opinion, Hale v. King, 624 F.3d 178 (5th Cir.2010) (p

MEMORANDUM McLAUGHLIN, District Judge. This personal injury and wrongful death action arises out of injuries allegedly suffered by the plaintiffs’ son after he ingested a dose of the over-the-counter medication, Children’s Tylenol. The Children’s Tylenol was produced by McNEILPPC, Inc. (“McNEIL-PPC”) at its Fort Washington, Pennsylvania production facility. The plaintiffs allege that their son’

251 F.Supp.2d 1315 (2002) Felicia JAMISON, Laura Jackson, Robert Jackson, Hilton Crumb, Jacqueline Crumb, Plaintiffs, v. The PURDUE PHARMA COMPANY, Purdue Pharma L.P., Purdue Pharma Inc., Purdue Frederick Company, the P.F. Laboratories, Inc., Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Laboratories, Inc., Bankston-Rexall Inc. of Fayette, Byron's Discount Drugs of Natchez, Arnold E. Feldman, M.D., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 5:02CV177BRS.

217 F.Supp.2d 744 (2002) Cedric WELLS, Perry Lee McDonald, Darlisa McDonald, and Jason Vircher Plaintiff v. SHELTER GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, and Kerry Howell Defendant Civil Action No. 301CV999BN. United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Jackson Division. August 2, 2002. *745

476 F.Supp. 984 (1979) Lucille THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. Patricia Roberts HARRIS, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Defendant. Civ. A. No. J-76-C-36. United States District Court, E. D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division. September 21, 1979. David N. Laser, Jonesboro, Ark., for plaintiff. *985 John M. Stokes, Regional A

285 B.R. 519 (2002) The RETIREMENT SYSTEMS OF ALABAMA, consisting of The Employees Retirement System of Alabama and The Teachers Retirement System of Alabama; The Public Education Employees' Health Insurance Fund; The Public Employees Individual Retirement Account Fund; The Clerks' and Registers' Supernumerary Fund; The Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries Fund; The Alabama Cultural Resources Preservation Trust Fund; and The Alabama Trust Fund, Plaintiffs,<