⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

14 opinions for “Beryl Michelle Parker”

District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1999-05-18 · Published · cited 1× · 48 F. Supp. 2d 1095; 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7572; 1999 WL 322602
48 F.Supp.2d 1095 (1999) Rosalind WARNELL, Suzette Wright, Madonna Howarth, Cynthia Smith, Beryl Parker, Sharon Dunn, Vera Boyland, and Latanja Manson, each individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Ford Chicago Stamping Plant and Ford Chicago Assembly Plant, Defendants. No. 98 C 1503. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2002-06-11 · Published · cited 0× · 205 F. Supp. 2d 956; 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10472; 2002 WL 1286618
205 F.Supp.2d 956 (2002) Rosalind WARNELL, Suzette Wright, Madonna Howarth, Cynthia Smith, Beryl Parker, Sharon Dunn, Vera Boyland and Latanja Manson, each individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant Althea Rapier, Jodi Farris, Rhonda Evans, Gwanjuana Gray, Victoria Williams and Deanne Harrigan, individually and as class representatives v. Ford Motor Company, Defendant</
Hiler v. Statepublic domain
Supreme Court of Alabama · 2009-12-04 · Published · cited 1× · 44 So. 3d 543; 2009 Ala. LEXIS 289; 2009 WL 4506558
The State of Alabama petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Criminal Appeals' decision reversing Beryl R. Hiler's conviction for falsely reporting an incident, a violation of § 13A-11-11, Ala. Code 1975. Hiler v. State, [Ms. CR-07-0361, May 1, 2009] 44 So.3d 535 (Ala.Crim.App. 2009). We granted certiorari review to consider, as a material *Page 54
Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2023-04-20 · Published · cited 0× · 2023 Ark. 67
Cite as 2023 Ark. 67 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE SUSPENSION OF Opinion Delivered: April 20, 2023 ATTORNEYS WHO FAILED TO PAY 2023 ANNUAL ATTORNEY-LICENSE FEE PER CURIAM The final deadline for attorneys to pay the 2023 annual attorney-license fee was April 17, 2023.1 As required by Rule VII(C)(9) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar, attached
District Court, District of Columbia · 2011-08-16 · Published · cited 28× · 802 F. Supp. 2d 185; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90790; 2011 WL 3582152
802 F.Supp.2d 185 (2011) JUDICIAL WATCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF the TREASURY, Defendant. Civil Action No. 10-00302(BAH). United States District Court, District of Columbia. August 16, 2011. *189 David Francis Rothstein, Paul J. Orfanedes, Judicial Watch, Inc., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Michelle Renee B
Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2021-04-22 · Published · cited 0× · 2021 Ark. 92
Cite as 2021 Ark. 92 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE SUSPENSION OF Opinion Delivered April 22, 2021 ATTORNEYS WHO FAILED TO PAY 2021 ANNUAL ATTORNEY- LICENSE FEE PER CURIAM The final deadline for attorneys to pay the 2021 annual attorney-license fee was April 15, 2021. Rule VII(C) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar imposes an automatic suspension on th
Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2022-04-21 · Published · cited 0× · 2022 Ark. 94
Cite as 2022 Ark. 94 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE SUSPENSION OF Opinion Delivered April 21, 2022 ATTORNEYS WHO FAILED TO PAY 2022 ANNUAL ATTORNEY-LICENSE FEE PERCURIAM The final deadline for attorneys to pay the 2022 annual attorney-license fee was April 15, 2022. As required by Rule VII(C)(9) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar, attached
District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1999-10-15 · Published · cited 6× · 189 F.R.D. 383; 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16563; 76 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 46,137; 1999 WL 967518
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER BUCKLO, District Judge. The plaintiffs here are present or former employees at Ford Motor Company (“Ford”) who allege that they and other women employees of Ford were subjected, among other wrongs, to pervasive and systematic sexual harassment at work. Two separate groups of plaintiffs sued Ford, alleging claims as individuals and class members for race and sex discrim
District Court, District of Columbia · 2013-08-15 · Published · cited 145× · 960 F. Supp. 2d 101; 2013 WL 4111616; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115184
MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. The plaintiff National Security Counselors (“NSC”) brought these three related actions against six federal agencies pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, claiming that the defendant agencies have violated the FOIA in numerous ways.
District Court, District of Columbia · 2019-06-27 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WILLIAM M. SCHOOLEY, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 17-1376 (BAH) v. Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et al., Defendants. ME
District Court, N.D. Alabama · 2013-05-17 · Published · cited 8× · 946 F. Supp. 2d 1153; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70280; 2013 WL 2249051
MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR., District Judge. Before the court is a motion for summary judgment filed by defendant National Vision, Inc. (“NVI”). (Doc. 39). The motion seeks dismissal of the above-entitled action brought by plaintiff Aretha M. Edwards (“Edwards”). Edwards, a black female, sued NVI, her former employer, for race discrimination and harassment in violation of 42 U.S.C
Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988-06-07 · Published · cited 23× · 424 N.W.2d 800; 3 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 629; 1988 Minn. App. LEXIS 537; 46 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1686; 1988 WL 55802
424 N.W.2d 800 (1988) Neil K. JOHNSON, Respondent, v. RAMSEY COUNTY, the State of Minnesota, Defendants, Alberto O. Miera, Appellant. No. C9-87-1638. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. June 7, 1988. Review Denied August 24, 1988. *801 Alf E. Sivertson, Michelle M. Barrette, Sivertson & Barrette, St. Paul, for
District Court, District of Columbia · 2012-08-28 · Published · cited 29× · 887 F. Supp. 2d 133; 2012 WL 3671924; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121685
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) STATE OF TEXAS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 11-1303 ) (TBG-RMC-BAH
District Court, W.D. Texas · 1999-07-01 · Published · cited 9× · 65 F. Supp. 2d 431; 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16349; 1999 WL 528848
65 F.Supp.2d 431 (1999) Isabel G. ANDRADE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Phillip J. CHOJNACKI, et al., Defendants. Civil Nos. W-96-CA-139 to W-96-CA-147, W-96-CA-373. United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Waco Division. July 1, 1999. *432 *433 *434 <