Cases

C. A. 1st Cir. Certio-rari denied.

517 F.Supp.2d 541 (2007) John F. DUNN, Plaintiff v. Dan BROWN, et al., Defendants. C.A. No. 06-30134-MAP. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. September 28, 2007. *542 Gary A. Ensor, South Hadley, MA, for Plaintiff. Gordon P. Katz, Holland & Knight, LLP, Boston, MA, Elizabeth A. McNamara, James E. Rosenfeld,

WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge Appellant John Dunn was convicted by a Clark County jury of simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms, manufacture of two or more grams of methamphetamine, use or possession of paraphernalia to manufacture methamphetamine, and possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine). He was sentenced to an aggregate term of forty years' imprisonment. Appellant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evide

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, (1) the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), entered May 12, 1998, as (a) granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Jason Del Pilar which was for summary judgment dismissing so much of the plaintiff’s fourth cause of action as sought to recover damages based on the alleged negligent entrustment of a dangerous i

Justice BREYER delivered the opinion of the Court. Thirty-one years ago, petitioner James Edmond McWilliams, Jr., was convicted of capital murder by an Alabama jury and sentenced to death. McWilliams challenged his sentence on appeal, arguing that the State had failed to provide him with the expert mental health assistance the Constitution requires, but the Alabama courts refused to gr

CRAIN, J. |2The defendant, Ricky Dunn, appeals his conviction for armed robbery with a firearm and his sentence as a second-felony habitual offender of sixty years, plus an additional five year enhancement, all without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. We. affirm, FACTS On June 24, 2013, Kenneth Pigott Jr. was walking in a housing complex in Boga-lusa, talkin

OPINION & ORDER PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge: This case is before the Court on remand. This Court had dismissed plaintiff Ayshea Dunn’s retaliation claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3), because, under Second Circuit precedent at the time, an oral complaint to a supervisor did not qualify as protected activity under the FLSA. Earlier this year, howev

WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge | appellant appeals from the circuit court’s denial of her petition to modify custody of C.R., born 12/13/07. Appellant argues on appeal that the circuit court erred in finding that (1) there was no material change in circumstances and (2) it was not in C.R.’s best interest to live with appellant and her new husband. We affirm. </

*********************************************** 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

BROWN, Chief Judge. hOn August 1, 2006, plaintiff, Shatara Harris (“Shatara”), filed suit for damages after she was struck by a vehicle driven by defendant, Latiffany Latrice Dunn (“Latif-fany”). Also named as defendants were Latiffany’s liability insurer, USAgencies Casualty Insurance Company, Inc. (“USA-gencies”), as well as State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), the provider of uninsured/underin-sur

Lanzinger, J., concurring. {¶ 27} I concur. As the majority opinion makes clear, the rule requiring evidence of a telephone tip’s reliability is confined to investigatory stops. Maumee v. Weisner, 87 Ohio St.3d 295, 720 N.E.2d 507 (1999). And in specifically holding that the eommunity-caretaking/emergency-aid exception exists, we clarify that police m

MARION F. EDWARDS, Chief Judge. 12Plaintiff/appelIant, Bianca Giovingo (“Ms. Giovingo”), takes this appeal from a judgment by the trial court dismissing her cause of action for medical malpractice against defendant/appellee, David Dunn, M.D. (“Dr. Dunn”), on grounds of abandonment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court for reasons herein. Ms. Giovingo filed a medical malpractice action against Dr.

In re Giovingo, Bianca; — Plaintiff; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 621-198; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 11-CA-781. Denied.

WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge. _JjThis is an appeal from an order making Jaeky F. Dunn, D.O., personally responsible for a debt belonging to Biomed Personal Metabolic and Nutritional Testing, Inc. (“Biomed”) and owed to Sid Womack. Dunn raises four points on appeal. First, he argues that there was not a document produced to satisfy the Statute of Frauds as to him personally. Second, he contends that there was

PER CURIAM: After review of the parties’ briefs and the record, and with the benefit of oral argument, the Court finds no reversible error in the district court’s order, dated March 29, 2010, granting the Defendant-Appellant Norrington’s motion for summary judgment in part and denying that motion in part. We affirm that decision based on the thorough and well reasoned order of the district court. AFFIRMED

621 F.3d 1196 (2010) Dylan Lee DUNN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. J. CASTRO; T. Surges; P. Stockman; D. Ortiz; Y. Yamamoto; A.K. Scribner, Defendants-Appellants. No. 08-15957. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 16, 2010.[*] Filed September 14, 2010. *1197 Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Atto

BROWN, Chief Judge. 11 Defendant, Charles Elbert Brown, filed the instant appeal from the June 23, 2015, judgment which ordered him to pay to Catherine Brown interim periodic support of $3,000 per month for a period of approximately eight months and permanent periodic support of $2,000 per month thereafter.1 He also appealed from an order signed by the trial court on October 12, 2015, on a rule for

PER CURIAM. AEFIRMED. See Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 68, 123 S.Ct. 1166, 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003); Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11, 123 S.Ct. 1179, 155 L.Ed.2d 108 (2003). KAHN, BENTON, and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

MEMORANDUM ** Michael Todd Dunn, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2258, and we affirm. Dunn contends that the sentencing court violated his rights under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakel

631 F.3d 1291 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee v. James DUNN, Appellant. No. 09-3124. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Argued November 16, 2010. Decided February 15, 2011. Mary Manning Petras, Assistant Federal Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the briefs was A.J. Kramer, Federal Publi