Cases

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas JUDGMENT No. 04-20-00138-CV John S. ROBISON and Gov Whiz, Inc., Appellants v. Mark E. WATSON, Jr., Appellee

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00138-CV John S. ROBISON and Gov Whiz, Inc., Appellants v. Mark E. WATSON, Jr.,

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 6, 2020 No. 04-20-00138-CV John S. ROBISON and Govwhiz, Inc., Appellants v. Mark E. WATSON, Jr., Appellee

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas March 25, 2020 No. 04-20-00138-CV John S. ROBISON and Govwhiz, Inc., Appellants v. Mark E. WATSON, Jr., Appellee From the 438th

Reversed by published opinion. Judge HARRIS wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge WYNN joined. Chief Judge TRAXLER wrote a dissenting opinion. PAMELA HARRIS, Circuit Judge: Following his arrest for firing a handgun at a Coast Guard helicopter, appellant John Watson, Jr. (“Watson”), who suffers from Delusional Disorder, Persecutory Type, was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to the custod

COLLOTON, Circuit Judge. John Watson sued his former employer, Air Methods Corporation, in Missouri state court, alleging a common-law claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Watson alleged that he was a “whistleblower” who disclosed safety violations at the company, and that Air Methods. retaliated against him by terminating his employment. Air Methods remov

PER CURIAM. John Watson sued his former employer, Air Methods Corporation, in Missouri state court for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Air Methods removed the case to federal court and then moved to dismiss based on the pre-emption provision of the Airline Deregulation Act (“ADA”), 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(1). The district court,

Karen King Mitchell, Presiding Judge Intervenors, Todd S. Jones and Returning Government to the People (collectively “Jones”), appeal the judgment of the Circuit Court of Cole County, which held that Initiative Petition 2016-007 (“the Initiative”) violated the Missouri Constitution and ordered that it not appear on the ballot. Because the claims were not ripe for review by the t

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

OPINION BY JUSTICE WILLIAM C. MIMS In this appeal, we consider whether a felon has standing to move to vacate the sentences of other felons as void ab initio. I. BACKGROUND AND MATERIAL PROCEEDINGS BELOW In 2007, Audrel Jack Watson, Jr. was convicted on Alford pleas to several offenses, including four counts of using a fire

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of February 2016 by Defendant for Temporary Stay: "Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016." Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 9th of February 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of February 2016 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of February 2016."

OPINION BY JUSTICE WILLIAM C. MIMS *779 In this appeal, we consider whether the imposition of a sentence below the statutory minimum renders the judgment void ab initio or merely voidable. I. BACKGROUND AND MATERIAL PROCEEDINGS BELOW In 2007, Audre

MEMORANDUM OPINION Judge Edward Ellington, United States Bankruptcy Judge THIS MATTER came before the Court on the Defendant/Creditor Mississippi Department of Revenue’s Second Amended Motion to Dismiss Adversary Complaint, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (Adv. Dkt. #42) and the Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Second Amended Motion to Dismiss Adversary Complaint, or, in

ORDER CLAY D. LAND, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE We are all familiar with the English common-law maxim that “a man’s home is his castle.” And few of us would disagree with Justice Louis Brandeis’s observation that the right to be left alone is “the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.”1 In this case, law enforcement officials

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Case Reported Without Published OpinionAffirmed.

FEW, C.J., concurring in part, and dissenting in part. I concur in the majority’s decision to affirm partial summary judgment to Underwood on the only two issues raised in her motion: (1) Did Watson grant Underwood power of attorney; and (2) Did Underwood have authority under that power of attorney to create an irrevocable trust. Because Underwood’s motion raised no other issue

16-655(L) Watson v. United States UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2016 (Argued: April 6, 2017 Decided: July 31, 2017) Docket Nos. 16-655 (L), 16-1357 (XAP) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x DAVINO WATSON, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee,

TARANTO, Circuit Judge. Sanofi owns U.S. Patent Nos. 8,318,800 and 8,410,167, which describe and claim compositions and uses of the cardiovascular (specifically, antiarrhythmic) drug dro-nedarone. The ’800 patent, which expires in 2019, claims pharmaceutical compositions containing dronedarone. The ’167 patent, which expires in 2029, claims methods of reduc