Cases

*1036In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Walker, J.), dated July 2, 2012, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a res

*1036In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Walker, J.), dated July 2, 2012, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a res

MEMORANDUM ** Julian Valencia-Arroyo, Virginia Corona-Valencia, Maria Delores Valencia-Corona, and Antonio Valencia-Corona, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.

PER CURIAM: I. Miguel Antonio Carmona-Arroyave, Maria Loaiza, Juana Lopez and Manuel Valencia were part of a cocaine distribution organization centered in Portland, Oregon. Carmo-na-Arroyave was the leader of the enterprise; his wife Loaiza laundered money received from the sale of cocaine and invested the profits; Lopez distributed the cocaine to the organization’s salespersons, collected the receipts fr

People v Rico-Valencia (2023 NY Slip Op 03242) People v Rico-Valencia 2023 NY Slip Op 03242 Decided on June 14, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Valencia v Glinski (2023 NY Slip Op 04152) Valencia v Glinski 2023 NY Slip Op 04152 Decided on August 2, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA M. GONZALEZ,; LUCIANO  VALENCIA; THE INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC.; ARIZONA ADVOCACY NETWORK; STEVE M. GALLARDO; LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS ARIZONA; LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARIZONA; PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY FOUNDATION; HOPI TRIBE, Plaintiffs,  and BERNIE ABEYTIA; ARIZONA HISPANIC COMMUNITY FORUM; CHICANOS POR LA

PIERCE, Circuit Judge: Valencia Gaviria (“Valencia”) and Bedoya Lopez (“Bedoya”) appeal from judgments of conviction entered on September 16, 1983, pursuant to jury verdicts in the District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Eugene H. Nickerson, Judge. Each appellant was charged in a two-count indictment with (1) conspiracy to distribute and to posse

548 F.3d 1261 (2008) Maria Leticia VALENCIA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 04-76571. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted September 12, 2008. Filed December 4, 2008. Sassoun Nalbandian, Valley Village, CA, for petitioner, Maria Leticia Valencia. Michele Y.F. Sarko, Washingt

OPINION PER CURIAM. Maria Acelina Valencia-Fragoso is a native and citizen of Mexico who entered the United States without inspection on August 26, 1989. On February 20, 1998, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) initiated removal proceedings against her. On May 11, 1998, after having postponed the removal hearing twice, the Immigration Jud

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA LETICIA VALENCIA,  Petitioner, No. 04-76571 v.  Agency No. A078-009-078 MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, OPINION Respondent.

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL ESPECIAL MARÍA ISABEL VARGAS Certiorari RODRÍGUEZ Y OTROS procedente del Tribunal de Peticionaria KLCE202400327 Primera Instancia, Sala de San Juan v.

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL ESPECIAL ADRIANA MARIA Apelación CAPARRÓS JORDÁN procedente del Tribunal de Apelada Primera Instancia, Sala de San Juan

John Robert Blakey, United States District Judge This order does not address the true facts of this case. Nor does it decide the legal merits of Plaintiffs' key claims. Instead, as with many rulings on motions to dismiss, this order merely clears away portions of the case that do not belong. As explained below, this Court grants in part, and denies in part, Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [48].

John Robert Blakey, United States District Judge *667This dispute arises out of the City of Chicago (City) and the Chicago Park District's (Park District) efforts to bring the Obama Presidential Center (OPC) to the City's South Side. Plaintiffs sue to prevent construction of the OPC on a specific site within Jackson Park. [91] ¶ 1. Following this Court's ruling on Defen

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL GENERAL DE JUSTICIA TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL X MARÍA ELENA TORRES Certiorari ALVARADO procedente del Tribunal DEMANDANTE(S)- de Primera Instancia, Sala PETICIONARIA(S) Sup

Case: 12-14898 Date Filed: 07/24/2014 Page: 1 of 21 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 12-14898 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 0:08-md-01916-KAM LILIANA MARIA CARDONA, JOHN DOE, ANGELA MARIA HENAO MONTES, et al.,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RONALD E. BUSH, United States Magistrate Judge. Currently pending before the Court are: (1) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 77); (2) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Smith (Dkt. 80); and (3) Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Dkt. 96). All parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge. Dkt. 16. The Court has carefully review

Opinion issued August 29, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-12-00100-CV ——————————— MARIA ANTONIA PULIDO, Appellant V. EVANGELINA ESTHER GUTIERREZ GONZALEZ, Appelle

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion issued August 29, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-12-00100-CV ——————————— MARIA ANTONIA PULIDO, Appellant V. EVANGELINA E