Cases

59 F.Supp.2d 474 (1999) Tito POLLICE and Violet Pollice, et al., Plaintiffs, v. NATIONAL TAX FUNDING, L.P. et al., Defendants. Gladys Houck, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Capital Asset Research Corp. Ltd., et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 98-813. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. July 29, 1999. *475

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA September 2013 Term ______________ FILED October 8, 2013 No. 11-1674 released at 3:00 p.m. ______________ RORY L.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT MICHAEL RODGERS, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. )

ORDER C. WESTON HOUCK, District Judge. I. BACKGROUND This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ motion to dismiss and motion to strike (ECF No. 19). For the reasons set forth in this order, the motion to dismiss is granted. The motion to strike is moot. A. Facts On a motion to dismiss, the Court accepts as true the well-pleaded facts of the

3 A.3d 806 (2010) 298 Conn. 209 STATE of Connecticut v. Christopher JENKINS. No. 18077. Supreme Court of Connecticut. Argued October 28, 2009. Decided September 7, 2010. *812 James M. Ralls, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Scott Murphy, state's attorney, an

Judgment rendered November 19, 2025. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 922, La. C. Cr. P. No. 56,462-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA ***** STAT

652 F.Supp.2d 345 (2009) THE SHINNECOCK INDIAN NATION, Plaintiff, v. Dirk KEMPTHORNE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, James E. Cason, Associate Deputy Secretary of the Department of the Interior, and The United States Department of the Interior, Defendants. No. 06-CV-5013 (JFB)(ARL). United States District Court, E.D. New York. September 9, 2009.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IVA ROBBINS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 24-cv-318 (CRC) MOLLY C. DWYER, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Pro se plaintiff Iva Robbins filed two appeals in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, but they were dismi

ORDER C. WESTON HOUCK, District Judge. This matter is before the Court upon the plaintiffs motions for judicial confirmation of an interest-arbitration award and a grievance-arbitration award. The defendant has counterclaimed for declaratory and injunctive relief and seeks to vacate both arbitration awards. For the reasons discussed below, the Court hereby confirms the arbitration awards.

MEMORANDUM OPINION CHRISTOPHER R. COOPER, United States District Judge The Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”) establishes dollar limits on com tributions that individuals and certain entities may make "to a single federal candidate or political-party committee in a given election cycle. In 1998, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs concluded that c

James K. Bredar, Chief Judge Mirna Rubidia Artiga Carrero ("Plaintiff") filed a two-count complaint against Baltimore County Police Officer Christopher Farrelly in his individual capacity and against Baltimore County seeking declaratory relief and compensatory damages stemming from her alleged unlawful arrest in 2014. The Court previously disqualified Baltimore County Attorney James Nolan from representing Officer Farrelly going fo

Justice GINSBURGdelivered the opinion of the Court. An unsuccessful litigant in a federal district court may take an appeal, as a matter of right, from a "final decisio[n] of the district cour[t]." 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The question here presented: Is the rig

NORTHCUTT, Judge. Luis Gonzalez appeals following his convictions for the August 8, 2008, offenses of failing to stop or remain at the scene of a crash resulting in death and of manslaughter. He challenges the reclassification of his manslaughter offense from a second-degree to a first-degree felony based on the use of a “weapon,” which in this ease was actually an automobile. W

K. K. HALL, Circuit Judge: W. F. Parker appeals from a district court order awarding attorney fees to the appellee John Fox pursuant to the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976 (the Act). Upon consideration of the briefs, the oral arguments and the record, we affirm the district court in part, vacate in part and remand the case with instructions.

WINTER, Circuit Judge: George Banta Company, Inc. (the Company) petitions us to review and vacate an order of the Office of General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, sustaining in part a decision of the Regional Director. The Regional Director had withdrawn and determined not to reissue a complaint that initiation fees to be charged persons seeking membership in Tri-Cities

[Cite as Slabe v. Slabe, 2025-Ohio-4722.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAKE COUNTY KIMBERLY SLABE, CASE NO. 2024-L-075 Plaintiff-Appellant/ Cross-Appellee, Civil Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, - vs - Domestic Rela

OPINION BY LAZARUS, J.: *423 Christopher Russell appeals from the judgment of sentence, entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, after a jury found him guilty of multiple counts of aggravated assault, robbery and related offenses. Upon careful review, we affirm.

Justice PLEICONES. Petitioners Savannah Riverkeeper, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, South Carolina Wildlife Federation, and Conservation Voters of South Carolina (collectively, Conservation Groups) petitioned this Court to hear this matter in our original jurisdiction to determine whether the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) acted illegally and usurped the authority of the Savan

The opinion of the court was delivered by Rosen, J.: Deandre Harris appeals from the denial of his motion filed under K.S.A. 60-1507 alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Harris and codefendant Code Laster were charged and jointly tried for the 1996 shooting death of Paul Moore. Each maintained his own and the other’s innocence, identifying a third person, an individual named Terrock, as the initiator and

RENDELL, Circuit Judge. This case arises out of a dispute over whether employees divested in connection with the merger between Mobil Corporation and Exxon Corporation are entitled to severance benefits. In preparation for the merger, Mobil implemented an Enhanced Change-in-Control Retention/Severance Plan (the “CIC Plan”).