Cases

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Illinois Official Reports Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this

ORDER The court’s opinion filed on April 5, 2016, appearing at 818 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2016), is hereby amended. An amended opinion, including a concurrence by Judge Berzon, is filed herewith. Judges Berzon and Christen voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Pregerson so recommended. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge requested a vote on

BREWER, C. J. Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010, and driving while his license was suspended, ORS 811.182. The state appeals from a trial court order excluding evidence certifying the accuracy of the machine on which defendant performed a breath test.1 We reverse and remand. There is no dispute about the facts on which the t

PER CURIAM In a joint motion, the parties request that we vacate the judgment and remand this case to the trial court to reconsider the judgment. ORS 138.227(1). We grant the motion and remand this case to the trial court for reconsideration. When the defendant was sentenced, he was serving a 19-month prison sentence on a different case out of Marion County. The trial court intended to give defendant credit

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE FILED AT KNOXVILLE August 12, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. JULY 1999 SESSION Appellate C ourt Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) NO. 03C01-9808-CR-00299

BRIGHT, Circuit Judge. Eugene Holt, a Missouri state prisoner, appeals from an order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Holt’s first trial for murder ended in a mistrial. In his second trial, the jury convicted Holt of second degree murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed Holt’s conviction in an exten

HOLLOWAY, Chief Judge. The government appeals from a pretrial order of the district court granting the defendant-appellee’s motion to suppress evidence as to two tape recordings in this criminal proceeding. This court has jurisdiction of the appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3731. I A. Defendant-appellee Don

SETH, Circuit Judge. The appellant was charged with transporting or causing to be transported in interstate commerce a forged check in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314. He was tried by a jury, convicted and sentenced. The record shows that the defendant used a check drawn on a Missouri bank to purchase tires and t

LOTTINGER, Judge. This is an action ex delicto by Donald Rowe, an employee of Ace Electric Company, against Cargill, Inc. and its insurer for injuries sustained while Rowe was performing electrical work pursuant to a contract between Ace Electric Company and Cargill, Inc. The trial judge entered a summary judgment in favor of Cargill, Inc. and its insurer. From this judgment Rowe appeals. FACTS

792 P.2d 1240 (1990) 102 Or.App. 97 Harvey J. DAY, Appellant, v. Maurice B. VITUS, Jr., and C. James Vitus, Personal Representative of the Estate of Loretta F. Day, Respondents. 16-88-00431; CA A50734. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted November 15, 1989. Decided June 6, 1990. Reconsideration Denied July 25

Bell, Judge: This is an action in negligence for professional malpractice. Muriel Hume, as executrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Donald E. Hume, sued John D. Long, III, and O. Eugene Powell, Jr., two lawyers who formerly represented the estate in a potential medical malpractice suit. She alleges that Long and Powell let the statute of limitations run on her husband’s claim while they were acting as his attorneys.

PER CURIAM: In this class action lawsuit parents of black school children challenge that portion of the district court’s desegregation plan which does not require the DeKalb County school system to provide transportation for kindergarten children who elect to participate in the voluntary majority-to-minority transfer program. We h

213 P.3d 1275 (2009) 230 Or. App. 142 Pam M. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kristie A. FUNK, Defendant-Respondent. 06CV3105CC; A136778. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted November 13, 2008. Decided August 5, 2009. Derek Snelling, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant. Donald Johns

GIBSON, Chief Judge. Defendant, Henry Eugene Webb, was convicted in a jury trial of possessing an unregistered firearm (a .20 gauge short barrelled shotgun) in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5861(d) and 5871 (1970), and sentenced to three years in prison. On appeal defendant asserts as error: (1) the District Court’s 1 refus

Kelly, Judge: This action is before the court on a United States Court of International Trade Rule 56.2 motion for judgment on *1366the agency record challenging certain aspects of the U.S. Department of Commerce's ("Department" or "Commerce") final determination in the countervailing duty ("CVD") investigation of certain corrosion-resista

145 P.3d 180 (2006) 208 Or. App. 229 Meghan Christine HABRAT, Respondent, v. Donald Ray MILLIGAN, Appellant. 18-05-08866; A128520. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted March 10, 2006. Decided September 27, 2006. *181 Jeffrey E. Potter argued the cause for appellant. With him on

JUDGMENT Court of Appeals First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00027-CV JUAN ALANIZ, ET AL., Appellants1 1 The appellants are: Bernardino Acevedo, Juan A. Alaniz, Rafael Alaniz, Louie Albarado, Walter Albro, Haskell Andrews, Johnny Anazaldua, Jose Manuel Araujo, James D. Archer, Roberto Ovalle Armendariz, Matthew Auguste, David Bachus, Richard

797 F.Supp. 341 (1992) Naomi T. CRUMLEY, Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE STATE COLLEGE, Defendant. Donald B. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff, v. HERCULES INCORPORATED, Defendant. Karin B. KUNTZ, Plaintiff, v. PENCO CORPORATION and William D. Houser, Defendants. Civ. A. Nos. 90-429MMS, 90-711MMS, 91-89MMS, 92-25MMS. United States District Court, D. Delaware. June 11, 1992.</

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

Cite as 2025 Ark. 59 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE SUSPENSION OF Opinion Delivered: May 1, 2025 ATTORNEYS WHO FAILED TO PAY 2025 ANNUAL ATTORNEY-LICENSE FEE PER CURIAM The final deadline for attorneys to pay the 2025 annual attorney-license fee was April 15, 2025. As required by Rule VII(C)(9) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar, the clerk of t