⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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.

13 opinions for “GRAY v. LAW OFFICES OF PEGGY L BROWN PC”

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-01-23 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-14-00726-CV 3887778 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 1
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-04-27 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-14-00706-CV 5038192 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1994-02-12 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 8, 2008 Session ANDRE BLAND v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. P-20147 W. Fred Axley, Judge No. W2007-00020-CCA-R3-PD - Filed April 3, 2009 Capital Petitioner, Andre Bland, appeals as of right the judgment of the Shelby
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-07-14 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-14-00518-CV 6061835 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
United States Court of Federal Claims · 2017-10-10 · Published · cited 0×
In the United States Court of Federal Claims Nos. 17-1189L, 17-1191L, 17-1194L, 17-1195L, 17-1206L, 17-1215L, 17-1216L 17-1232L, 17-1235L, 17-1277L, 17-1303L, 17-1300L, 17-1332L, 17-1390L, 17-1374L, 17-1391L, 17-1393L, 17-1394L, 17-1395L, 17-1396L, 17-1397L, 17-1398L, 17-1399L, 17-1408L, 17-1409L, 17-1423L, 17-1427L, 17-1428L, 17-1430L, 17-1433L, 17-1434L, 17-1435L, 17-1436L, 17-1437L, 17-1438L, 17-1439L, 17-1450L, 1
Baskin v. Boganpublic domain
District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2014-05-08 · Published · cited 1× · 983 F. Supp. 2d 1021; 2014 WL 1814064; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63421
ENTRY ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION RICHARD L. YOUNG, Chief Judge. Plaintiffs, Amy Sandler (“Amy”), Nikole (“Niki”) Quasney, A.Q.-S. and M.Q.-S asked this court to grant them a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and a preliminary injunction requiring the State of Indiana to recognize the out-of-state marriage of Amy and Niki. (Filing No. 31). The court granted the TRO, which expir
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2017-08-25 · Published · cited 2× · 276 F. Supp. 3d 324
MEMORANDUM OPINION EDWARD G. SMITH, J. The current issue before the court— whether the court should issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting a school district from maintaining its practice that started in the 2016-17 school year of allowing transgender students 'to use the bathrooms and locker rooms of the sex to which they identify—involves intricate and genuine issues, relating to, inter alia,
District Court, M.D. Alabama · 2002-03-08 · Published · cited 3× · 191 F. Supp. 2d 1292; 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4547; 2002 WL 416891
191 F.Supp.2d 1292 (2002) HOUSEHOLD BANK, f.s.b., Plaintiff, v. JFS GROUP, et al., Defendants, H & R Block, et al., Plaintiffs/Intervenors. No. CIV.A. 01A1405N. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division. March 8, 2002. *1293 *1294 Stewart M. Cox, Andrew J. Noble, II
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · 2012-12-31 · Published · cited 0× · 485 B.R. 743
MEMORANDUM OPINION AFTER TRIAL ON THE MERITS IN SUPPORT OF JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF RELATED RELIEF JAMES S. STARZYNSKI, Bankruptcy Judge. This matter came before the Court for trial on the merits of the claims of AG NEW MEXICO, FCS, ACA (“ACA”), AG NEW MEXICO, FCS, PCA (“PCA”), and AG NEW MEXICO, FCS, FLCA (“FLCA”) (collectively “Plaintiffs” or “AGNM”) against Joe Bettencourt Borges (“Mr. Borges”) an
District Court, S.D. New York · 2005-11-16 · Published · cited 4× · 235 F.R.D. 199; 2005 WL 3036505
OPINION AND ORDER PECK, United States Chief Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffs have moved to compel the production of documents from non-parties McGraw-Hill Companies and Intelligence Press, Inc. (collectively, “the Publications”) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45. (Dkt. No. 310: Pis. Notice of Motion.) For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2015-05-06 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-15-00085-CV 5176028 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · 2015-04-08 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 01-14-00870-cv FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 4/8/2015 12:33:22 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE