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.
11 opinions for “ESTHER L VELEZ MIRANDA”
Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr
David Gordan Schmidt (d/B/A ABC Bonding Company) and Greenbrier Equities, LLC v. Brenda Crawfordpublic domain
In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00846-CV ——————————— DAVID GORDON SCHMIDT D/B/A ABC BONDING COMPANY AND GREENBRIAR EQUITIES, LLC, Appellants V. BRENDA CRAWFORD, CARLOS PEREZ, ANTHONY WILLIAMS, ANNIE J. BUTLER, ANTHO
David Gordan Schmidt (d/B/A ABC Bonding Company) and Greenbrier Equities, LLC v. Brenda Crawfordpublic domain
Opinion issued August 20, 2019 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00846-CV ——————————— DAVID GORDON SCHMIDT D/B/A ABC BONDING COMPANY AND GREENBRIAR EQUITIES, LLC, Appellants V. BRENDA CRAWFORD, CARLOS PERE
David Gordan Schmidt (d/B/A ABC Bonding Company) and Greenbrier Equities, LLC v. Brenda Crawfordpublic domain
Opinion issued August 20, 2019 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00846-CV ——————————— DAVID GORDON SCHMIDT D/B/A ABC BONDING COMPANY AND GREENBRIER EQUITIES, LLC, Appellants V. BRENDA CRAWFORD, CARLOS PERE
United States v. Vilches-Navarretepublic domain
OPINION & ORDER PEREZ-GIMENEZ, District Judge. Before the Court is defendant Pedro Valladares-Benitez’s “Motion to Dismiss Indictment and to Suppress Evidence and *63Statements” (Docket No. 95).1 For the reasons set forth below, defendant Valla-dares-Benitez’ motion is DENIED with regards to dismissal and
United States v. Vilchenavarretepublic domain
413 F.Supp.2d 60 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Luis Segundo VILCHENAVARRETE, et al., Defendants. No. 05-66 (PG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. January 27, 2006. *61 *62 Rosa E. Rodriguez-Velez, United States Attorney's Office, Torre Chardon, Rose M. Vega, Unite
ACCEPTED 15-25-00013-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 12:26 PM No. 15-25-00013-CV
ACCEPTED 15-25-00012-cv FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 3:13 PM No. 15-25-00012-CV
Rios v. Marshallpublic domain
530 F.Supp. 351 (1981) Juan Valderrama RIOS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Secretary of Labor F. Ray MARSHALL, et al., Defendants. No. 79 Civ. 5711. United States District Court, S. D. New York. November 23, 1981. *352 *353 *354 *355<
215 F.Supp.2d 795 (2002) In re NORPLANT CONTRACEPTIVE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. MDL No. 1038. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division. August 14, 2002. *796 *797 Christopher Matthew Parks, Parker & Parks, Port Arthur, TX, for Plaintiffs. F. Lane Heard III, Williams