Cases

796 F.Supp.2d 928 (2011) Rick L. HOLLAND, Plaintiff v. Pat RICHTER, Richard Carlson, and City of Rock Island, Illinois, Defendants. Case No. 09-4001. United States District Court, C.D. Illinois. June 17, 2011. *929 Elizabeth J. Cervantes, Bozeman Neighbour Patton & Noe, Stephen T. Fieweger, Katz Huntoon & Fieweger PC, Mol

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered June 17, 2016, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the motion as to the first cause of action (actual fraud), and otherwise affirmed, without costs. The court properly dismissed the second cause of action (constructive fraud) as tim

KRUGER, J. A large law firm agreed to represent a manufacturing company in a federal qui tam action brought on behalf of a number of public entities. During the same time period, the law firm represented one of these public entities in matters unrelated to the qui tam suit. Both clients had executed engagement agreements that purported to waive all such conflicts of interest, current

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Barnett Banks Trust Company v. Herr, 546 So.2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Sarasota Bank & Trust Co. v. Rietz, 297 So.2d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).

570 A.2d 1148 (1990) Martha P. LANKFORD, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Sterling H. RICHTER, Agnes E. Gawronski, and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Defendants Below, Appellees. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: January 16, 1990. Decided: February 6, 1990. Rehearing Denied February 28, 1990. Bayard J. Snyder (argued) of Phillips

OPINION Opinion by Justice RICHTER. This appeal arises from a boundary dispute between adjoining landowners. William B. Blaylock and Elaine C. Blaylock appeal the trial court’s judgment awarding title to a strip of property originally part of the Blaylocks’ lot to Thomas P. Holland and Kimberly Holland by adverse possession. The disp

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

TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge. Jason Holland and his brother were accused of robbing a driver of her purse on a rural Oklahoma highway, and then unlawfully entering a home after their getaway car had a flat tire. At a joint trial, the state court allowed, as relevant here, two pieces of evidence to be introduced: (1) one of the victims’ statements that she saw Holland had Nazi tattoo

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SUSAN ILLSTON, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Jonathan Micah Gardner filed this pro se action for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court issued an order to show cause why the writ should not be granted. Respondent has filed an answer and Gardner has filed a traverse. For the reasons below, the pe

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE HON. OTIS D. WRIGHT II, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court reviewed the petition, the records on file, .and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Petitioner did not file any written objections to the report. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of t

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge 1. INTRODUCTION Presently before the court is petitioner Kenneth L. Holland’s (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.1.2) Petitioner is incarcerated at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Institution in Smyrna, Delaware. For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.

Affirmed; Opinion Filed December 13, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-01419-CR CLARENCE WYATT HOLLAND, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DAVID M. LAWSON, District Judge. Michigan prisoner James Holland, Jr., through counsel, has filed six habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging multiple convictions for crimes against women, including one for first-degree murder. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.316(l)(a). This cascade of convictions started with the cold case

625 N.W.2d 490 (2001) In re the Marriage of Barbara A. RICHTER, Petitioner, Respondent, v. Kevin J. RICHTER, Appellant. No. C4-00-1656. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. May 1, 2001. *491 Michael L. Gjesdahl, Gjesdahl & Deitz, PLLP, Fargo, ND, (for respondent). John Remington Graham, Quebec Canada, (for appellant).

ORDER ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PATRICIA A. SEITZ, District Judge. THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Petitioner, Albert Holland’s (“Mr. Holland”) Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody, *1237filed on April 4, 2011. [D.E. 117]. Mr. Holland is currently on death row at the Union Correction

OPINION BEA, Circuit Judge: We must decide whether, in the context of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 110 Stat. 1214, a mid-trial conversation between a court bailiff and a criminal defendant constituted an interrogation that must be preceded by a Miranda warning. We decide that the state court’s deter

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NELSON HERNANDEZ, No. 11-55337 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:07-cv-07036-DSF-AGR KIM HOLLAND, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

OPINION ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Defendant James Holland, Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his petitions for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that his confession — which served as critical state’s evidence at his trials — had been given involuntarily and had been obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right to counsel.

781 F.Supp.2d 511 (2011) RSM RICHTER, INC., as trustee for Aleris Aluminum Canada, L.P., Plaintiff, v. BEHR AMERICA, INC., Defendant. No. 09-CV-10734-DT. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. February 18, 2011. *512 John D. Parker, Baker & Hostetler, Cleveland, OH, Sarah C. Lindsey, William R. Jansen

REVERSE and RE’IAND; Opinion issued January 29, 2013 in The (!mtrt nf iprat, .?fiftIi Jitrict uf ixa at 1a1Ia No. 05-l0-01592-CV VICTOR ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellant V.