Cases

U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________ No. 201800126 _________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. Jae P. CHO Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellan

782 F.Supp. 317 (1992) NAVIERA MAERSK ESPANA, S.A. v. CHO-ME TOWING, INC. Civ. A. Nos. 91-CV-575, 91-CV-822 and 91-CV-1645. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. January 22, 1992. *318 Robert Hugh Murphy, Thomas Deming Forbes, Chaffe, McCall, Phillips, Toler & Sarpy, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff in No. 91-CV-575.</

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), *249entered on or about January 13, 2000, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to set aside the jury verdict on the ground that the court erroneously failed to give the requested charge on res ipsa loquitur, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the jury verdict reinstated. Plaintiffs’ appeal from order, same c

OPINION OF THE COURT BY MARUMOTO, J. On June 22, 1942, You Dong Men, petitioner, filed a petition for dissolution of partnership and accounting against Cho Kyung Ai, respondent, in the circuit court of the first circuit. Respondent filed her answer on June 29 of the same year. No further proceeding was had until November 16, 1954, when respondent filed suggestion of death of petitioner on February 24, 1948, a

IVERS, Chief Judge: Before the Court is Rhonda Serra’s application for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of $11,465.40. Also before the Court is her “Motion to Substitute a Party,” the Secretary’s “Motion to Recall Mandate,” and two supplemental EAJA applications. For the reasons set forth below, the C

371 F.2d 772 TAI MUI, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.P. A. ESPERDY, as District Director of the Immigration andNaturalizationService for the District of NewYork, Defendant-Appellee.CHAN HING and Lai Cho, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.P. A. ESPERDY, as District Director of the Immigration andNaturalizationService for the District of NewYork, Defendant-Appellee.WOO CHENG HWA, Petitioner,v.IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATIO

OPINION Opinion By Justice MORRIS. In this appeal, AutoGas Acquisitions Corporation and its parent company Auto-Gas Systems, Inc. challenge the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Dana Kelman. Kelman sued on an alleged severance agreement he entered into with his boss, John Cullen, AGA’s president and chief operating officer. Bec

649 F.3d 197 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patrick Albert BYERS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank Keith Goodman, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 09-4439, 09-4677. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued: January 28, 2011. Decided: May 6, 2011.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (CIVIL NO. 11-1-2482-10 (ECN)) MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge. Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (“AHM”) filed a motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings as to plaintiff Vince Eagen. The Court finds this matter appropriate for disposition without oral argument. See Civil Local Rule 7 — 1(b). Having considered the parties’ papers and the evidentiary record, the Court hereby

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS BY DEFENDANT ALPINE AUDIO NOW AND DEFENDANTS GLCC, COMITY, AND NELSON MARK W. BENNETT, District Judge. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 970 II. LEGAL ANALYSIS 971 *970A. AudioNow’s Motion To Dismiss 971</

79 F.Supp.2d 1375 (1999) Woon OH, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Samuel Oh, his deceased son; and Choonee Kim, Individually and as Mother of Samuel Oh, her deceased son, Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY and Eun Shin Cho, d/b/a Kids and Kids Academy, d/b/a Sae Sak Education Center, Defendants. No. CIV.A. 1:99CV2610TWT. United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division.

Ernest M. Robles, United States Bankruptcy Judge To adjudicate objections asserted by the California Attorney General (the "Attorney General") to the Debtors' motion for authorization to sell Saint Louise Regional Hospital ("St. Louise") and O'Connor Hospital ("O'Connor," and together with St. Louise, the "Hospitals") to the County of Santa Clara ("Santa Clara"), the Court ordered the Debtors, the Attorney General, Santa Clara, an

ON REHEARING GRANTED JAMES F. McKAY III, Judge. We granted a rehearing in order to reconsider our earlier opinion in this matter. In our earlier opinion, we granted the outstanding motions to supplement the record and found that the motion to strike the defendants’ assignments of error was moot because the two appeals had been consolidated. We affirmed the portion of the trial court’s

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs1 want sanctions imposed on defendants2 for the alleged spoliation of evidence following the inception in June 2008 of an investigation by the Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) into allegations of price-fi

Ii ARMSTRONG, J. In these consolidated writ applications, the relators complain of the trial courts’ overruling of their exceptions of improper cumulation of actions. Because we find that the result reached by the trial courts *144was correct, we will deny the writ applications. These are asbestos actions. In each case, there are numerous plaintiffs

Erlenback v Congelli (2025 NY Slip Op 04323) Erlenback v Congelli 2025 NY Slip Op 04323 Decided on July 25, 2025 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is

*1186ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS Marsha J. Pechman, United States District Judge THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Dkt. No. 372.) Having considered 'the Parties’ briefing and all related papers, the Court GRANTS the motion. Background

344 S.W.3d 321 (2010) James McKay ANDREWS v. Susie Heasook Cho ANDREWS. No. W2009-00161-COA-R3-CV. Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Western Section, at Jackson. April 21, 2010 Session. August 31, 2010. Permission to Appeal Denied by Supreme Court March 11, 2011. *323 Donald Capparella, Nashville, T

OPINION OF THE COURT BY McKENNA, J. I. Introduction Pretrial detainees-individuals who have been arrested and charged, but remain in jail while awaiting trial-have a due process right to be free from punishment until convicted of a crime. Bell v. Wolfish ,