Cases

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTFernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge *1050Having reviewed and considered all the briefing filed with respect to the Motion for Summary Judgment [ ] (Dkt. 193, "Motion") filed by plaintiffs Jerry Thomas ("Thomas"), Sean Benison ("Benison"), and Juan Palomares ("Palomares") (co

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-21-00312-CR __________________ KELLI DIEDRE SARTIN, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal f

553 F.3d 869 (2008) UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Schumann RAFIZADEH, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, v. CONTINENTAL COMMON, INC.; Basic Property Management; Regis Property Management; Transcontinental Realty, Inc., Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants. No. 06-30702. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. December 19, 2008.

STROUD, Judge. The SeaScape at Holden Plantation Property Owners Association, Inc. appeals from an order entered 24 January 2013 denying its motion to intervene. We reverse and remand. *5I. Background This action concerns a planned community in Brunswick County called SeaScape at Holden Plantation (“SeaScape Community”). The SeaScape Co

201 F.Supp.2d 700 (2002) ADAMS, Harry, Agney, Robert N., Aker, Brenda A., Aker, John R., Akers, Allen, Akers, Geneva, Albert, Jane, Albert, Larry K., Albert, Ryoks B., Alderman, Mitchell, Alexander, Claborne, Alger, Gloria, Alley, Randsom D., Allison, Harold, Altizer, Clinton, Amos, Sparrell, Anders, Richard, Andrews, Gene F., Austin, John, Bane, Lewis, Beasley, Ellen M., Bell, Benjamin H., Bell, William A., Bishop, Billy M., Blake, Robert C., Boland, Fe

INMAN, Judge. *196Plaintiffs are 262 property owners in SeaScape at Holden Plantation ("SeaScape"), a residential subdivision near Holden Beach, North Carolina. They appeal from the trial court's orders: (1) dismissing plaintiffs' derivative claims brought on behalf of SeaScape at Holden Plantation Property Owners Association, Inc. ("the POA"

NO. COA13-799 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 21 January 2014 JOHN WILTON ANDERSON, SR., Trustee for the JOHN WILTON ANDERSON, SR. REVOCABLE TRUST Dated May 1990; ROBERT D. ANDERSON and wife, PATRICIA A. ANDERSON; AL ARTALE and wife, DEBBIE ARTALE; BALD EAGLE VENTURES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; ROBERT W. BARBOUR and wife, KATHERINE G. BARBOUR; DOUGLAS R. BARR and wife, KAREN W. BARR

GUIDRY, J., dissenting. [jAt issue in this appeal is not whether the Dillons were granted a jury trial, but whether they were entitled to a new jury. The opinion asserts that a party is entitled to a jury that continues to be qualified under the criteria required by law. As a preliminary matter, it is observed that on appeal, the appellants simply argued that they were prejudiced by the use of the same ju

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER PETER C. ECONOMUS, District Judge. Presently pending before the Court are the Parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (Docs. 212 & 230) and the Defendants’ Motion to Strike Certain Government Summary Judgment Exhibits (Doc. 236). For the reasons that follow, the Court will DISMISS without deciding the motion to strike, and GRANT in PART and DENY in PART the cross motio

Beier, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part: I agree with the majority’s resolution of the nonconstitutional issues in this case. I also agree with the majority’s determination that the statutoiy cap on noneconomic damages does not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. I would, however, reverse and remand to the district court because K.S.A. 60-19a02, as applied to plaintiff Amy

LANIER, Judge, concurring. I concur in the result reached. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class. I do not agree that the manifest error rule can be used to review the discretionary ruling of the trial court to certify the class. Ellis v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation, 550 So.2d at 1325-1326.

586 N.E.2d 847 (1992) Douglas REAVES, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee. No. 15S00-8806-CR-533. Supreme Court of Indiana. February 17, 1992. *850 Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender of Indiana and M.E. Tuke, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellant. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana and Gary Damon

598 So.2d 1177 (1992) LIVINGSTON PARISH POLICE JURY v. ACADIANA SHIPYARDS, INC., et al. Glynn McCRORY, et al. v. Earl G. DUBOSE, et al. Joe C. DEAN, et al. v. Earl G. DUBOSE, et al. Ernest BOONE, et al. v. Earl G. DUBOSE, et al. Susan CAMPO, et al. v. Earl G. DUBOSE, et al. Earl S. ADAMSON, et al. v. ACADIANA SHIPYARD, et al. Edward E. RICHARDSON, III v. ACADIANA SHIPYARD, et

530 Pa. 44 (1992) 607 A.2d 204 Robert J. MELLOW, Senator, 22nd District, J. William Lincoln, Senator 32nd District, Leonard J. Bodack, Senator, 38th District, Michael A. O'Pake, Senator, 11th District, Patrick J. Stapleton, Senator, 41st District, Jeanette F. Reibman, Senator, 18th District, Vincent J. Fumo, Senator, 1st District, and H. Craig Lewis, Senator, 6th District, Individually and in their official capacities, Appellants,

861 F.Supp. 408 (1994) Ruth O. SHAW, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Governor James B. HUNT, Jr., et al., Defendants. No. 92-202-CIV-5-BR. United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Raleigh Division. August 22, 1994. *409 *410 *411

ACCEPTED 03-15-00085-CV 5176028 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ACCEPTED 15-25-00013-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 12:26 PM No. 15-25-00013-CV

223 Cal.App.3d 606 (1990) 273 Cal. Rptr. 757 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RICKY LYNN PITTS et al., Defendants and Appellants. Docket No. F006225. Court of Appeals of California, Fifth District. September 5, 1990. *634 COUNSEL Michael Snedeker, Richard Phillips, Richard Power, Kyle Gee, C

OPINION OF THE COURT Per Curiam. Section 468-a of the Judiciary Law requires every resident and nonresident attorney admitted to practice in the State of New York to file a biennial registration statement with the administrative office of the courts. A biennial registration fee must be paid at the time the statement is filed. This registration statement, which is mailed every two years by the Office of Co

785 F.Supp.2d 883 (2011) In re TOYOTA MOTOR CORP. Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation. This Document Relates To: All Foreign Plaintiffs' Economic Loss Cases. Case No. 8:10ML 02151 JVS (FMOx). United States District Court, C.D. California. April 8, 2011. *888 Andrea Bierstein, Clinton