Cases

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Barbara Kim Dang appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her adversary proceeding that was filed in the bankruptcy court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION TO DISMISS ROBERT J. FARIS, Bankruptcy Judge. The plaintiff in this adversary proceeding, Dane Field, is Judith Lynn Gibbs’ bankruptcy trustee. The trustee claims that defendant Bank of America, N.A. (BANA), improperly foreclosed a mortgage made by Ms. Gibbs. The trustee’s complaint asserts violations of the power of sale in the mortgage, Hawaii’s nonjudicial fo

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2319 Doc: 62 Filed: 07/29/2025 Pg: 1 of 19 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-2319 BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, f/k/a NationsBank, f/k/a BankAmerica Corporation, f/k/a FleetBoston Financial Corporation, f/k/a BankBoston

467 B.R. 227 (2012) In re Brenda Linh DANG, Debtor. No. 3:11-bk-2970-PMG. United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division. March 12, 2012. *228 E. Warren Parker, Jr., Felecia L. Falana, Parker & DuFresne, Jacksonville, FL, for Debtor. ORDER ON TRUSTEE'S AMENDED OBJECTION TO CONFIRMATION PAU

LUCERO, Circuit Judge. Hoc H. Dang, a former employee of Ingram Industries Inc., brought this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132, seeking to recover benefits pursuant to his former employer’s long-term disability plan. The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma granted judgment in favor of defendant UNUM

977 P.2d 29 (1999) 95 Wash.App. 670 Tham Thi DANG and Patrick Tran, a married couple, Appellants, v. Tom EHREDT and Jane Doe Ehredt; Earline Duhon and John Doe Duhon; Seafirst Bank; S.D. Stevens and Jane Stevens; L.E. Hill and Jane Doe Hill; the City of Seattle; City of Seattle Police Department; Norm Stamper, Chief; and Seattle Filmworks, Respondents. No. 42236-7-I. Court of Ap

Opinion of the Court by WATANABE, J. This negligence case arises from an October 23, 1991 accident in which Plaintiff Appellant/Cross-Appellee Jade Wemple (Jade), then seven years old, emerged suddenly from behind a van parked on a privately owned road (also referred to as “the road”) that ran in front of the Summer Villa condominium (the SV), where she was temporarily residing with her grandmother, and was str

22-239; 22-243; 22-503 Phx. Light SF Ltd. v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon; Phx. Light SF DAC v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon; Phx. Light SF Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2022 Argued: April 12, 2023 Decided: April 26, 2023

*996 D.W. NELSON, Senior Circuit Judge. Proposed class representatives of Vietnamese bank depositors seek to recover the dollar value of bank deposits made in Saigon, South Vietnam, before April 1975. On appeal, they challenge the district court’s orders dismissing as time-barred their complaint against

*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX 09-MAR-2023 08:30 AM

*** NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-XX-XXXXXXX 22-FEB-2023 08:24 AM

RECKTENWALD, C.J., NAKAYAMA, McKENNA, POLLACK, AND WILSON, JJ. OPINION OF THE COURT BY McKENNA, J. *1176 I. Introduction Dentons represents itself as the world's largest law firm. Dentons US LLP maintains offices throughou

224 F.Supp.2d 283 (2002) Elizabeth A. McLAUGHLIN, Plaintiff v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Athena Neurosciences Inc. Long Term Disability Plan, Defendants No. 02-67-P-S. United States District Court, D. Maine. October 8, 2002. *284 *285 Charles W. March, Esq., Reben, Benjamin, &

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION TO DISMISS Robert J. Faris, United States Bankruptcy Judge This is a “wrongful foreclosure” action. Defendant HSBC Bank USA, N.A. (“HSBC”), joined by the other defendants except defendant American Savings Bank, F.S.B., moves the court to dismiss this adversary proceeding. For the reasons that follow, I will grant the motion in one respect and deny it in all other respects.

*1325 SCHLESINGER, District Judge: We have been asked to determine if a debtor can “strip off” a wholly unsecured junior mortgage in a Chapter 20 case. We conclude the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AMERICA FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 25 - 662 (SLS) v. Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION

KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge. The district court suppressed evidence because a police officer testifying at the search warrant hearing deliberately or recklessly withheld crucial information undermining an informant’s credibility. We affirm. ■FACTS A state investigation and state search warrant led to a federal prosecution of Ronald

KANNE, Circuit Judge. For many years, Archer Daniels Midland Co.’s philosophy of customer relations could be summed up by a quote from former ADM President James Randall: “Our competitors are our friends. Our customers are the enemy.” This motto animated the company’s business dealings and ultimately led to blatant violations of U.S. antitrust law, a guilty plea and a staggering c

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 25-cv-804 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell KENNETH JACKSON, in his official capacity, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION The U.S. I

Cindy K. Jorgenson, United States District Judge Pending before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss ("MTD") (Doc. 27) filed by State Defendants and the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 35) filed by Plaintiff Roy E. Spears ("Spears"). The parties have thoroughly presented the facts and briefed the legal issues. Therefore, the Court declines to set this matter for oral argument. See LRCiv 7.2(f); 27A Fed.Proc., L.Ed. §