Cases

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for libel and conspiracy, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from (1) so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated October 24, 1994, as granted those branches of the motion of the defendant Vance Publishing Corp. which were to dismiss the first and second causes of action in the amended complaint insofar as asserted against it for failure to state a cause of a

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ASPEN, Chief Judge. Plaintiff Natalie Fisher (“Fisher”), on behalf of the estate of her deceased son, has sued the Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Mead Johnson Laboratories, and a number of their subsidiaries and affiliates (collectively, “the defendants”). She alleges that the defendants manufactured and distributed a harmful drug called Stadol, and she seeks recover

CALABRESI, Circuit Judge: The case before us concerns Plaintiff Julia Johnson’s appeal from the district court’s grant of qualified immunity to Defendant Police Officer Patterson. The district court dismissed Johnson’s claim against him by reason of his having seized *628her for psychiatric evaluation based on her supposed dangerousness to her son DJM.

OPINION OF THE COURT VANASKIE, Circuit Judge. Appellant Thomas Wisniewski, appeals from an order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissing his amended complaint for failure to state a claim. For the reasons set forth below, we will reverse in part the District Court’s order and will remand for further proceedi

OPINION BY BENDER, J. Beverly Fisher, individually and as executrix of the estate of Sidney Fisher (“Fisher”), appeals the trial court’s award of summary judgment in favor of defendants J.A. Sexauer, Kentile, and Pécora Corporation. The trial court concluded that Fisher, whose action sought to recover for the death of her husband from asbestos-related illness, failed to adduce sufficient evidence to raise a q

15 A.3d 688 (2011) Regina J. MYERS, Appellant v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 08-CM-1560. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Submitted December 15, 2009. Decided February 24, 2011. Brigitte L. Adams, appointed by the court, was on the brief, for appellant. Channing D. Phillips, United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed, and R

OPINION OF THE COURT Fisher, J. On December 21, 2000, 59-year-old Roy Myers was dining with his wife at a restaurant in Manhattan when a piece of prime rib steak became lodged in his throat. He and his wife left the restaurant and returned to their hotel room where Myers passed a difficult night, gagging and coughing, and experiencing difficulty breathing. He tried to drink water and eat an apple but was

942 So.2d 217 (2006) Peggy Hudson FISHER, Appellant v. William DEER, Gannett MS Corp. and Gannett River States Publishing Corp. d/b/a The Hattiesburg American, Appellees. No. 2004-CA-01391-COA. Court of Appeals of Mississippi. May 2, 2006. Rehearing Denied August 15, 2006. *218 Tadd Parsons, Wiggins, Jack Parsons

PARRISH, Judge. This appeal is from the modification of a dissolution of marriage judgment. Maintenance was terminated and the amount of child support appellant was paying was reduced.1 Appellant contends the trial court erred by not granting further reduction in the amount of child support he was ordered to pay. He also contends the trial court erred in not making the termination of maintenance

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge, dissenting: In vacating our previous opinion, Fisher v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin, 631 F.3d 213 (5th Cir.2011), the Supreme Court clarified the strict scrutiny standard as it applies to cases involving racial classifications in higher education admissions: Now, reviewing courts cannot defer to a state actor’s argument that its consideration of race is narrowly tailored to

MEMORANDUM** Oregon state prisoner Peter Franks appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, challenging his conviction for burglary in the first degree and robbery in the third degree. Reviewing de novo the district court’s decision to deny Franks’ habeas petition, Himes v. Thompson, 336 F.3d 848, 852 (9th Cir.2003), and applying standards set forth by the Antite

226 F.Supp.2d 575 (2002) Robert MARIANA, Michael J. McFadden, Karen M. Moran, and Edward M. Nankervis, Plaintiffs v. D. Michael FISHER, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Larry P. Williams, in his official capacity as Secretary of Revenue of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Defendants No. CIV. 1:CV-01-2070. United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvan

644 F.3d 301 (2011) Abigail Noel FISHER; Rachel Multer Michalewicz, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN; David B. Pryor, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs in His Official Capacity; Barry D. Burgdorf, Vice Chancellor and General Counsel in His Official Capacity; William Powers, Jr., President of the University of Texas at Austin in His Official Capacity; Board of Regents of the University of Texas System; R. Steven

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA18-1210 Filed: 7 January 2020 Mecklenburg County, No. 15 CVD 20688 James B. Myers, Jr., Plaintiff, v. Charlotte K. Myers, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from order entered 4 April 2018 by Judge Jena P. Culler in District Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 22 May 2019. James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A., by Christo

KING, Circuit Judge, specially concurring: I concur in the judgment and in the analysis and application of Grutter in Judge Higginbotham’s opinion. No party challenged, in the district court or in this court, the validity or the wisdom of the Top Ten Percent Law. We have no briefing on those subjects, and the district court did not consider them. Accordingly, I decline to join Judge Higginbotham’s op

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA18-1210 Filed: 7 January 2020 Mecklenburg County, No. 15 CVD 20688 James B. Myers, Jr., Plaintiff, v. Charlotte K. Myers, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from order entered 4 April 2018 by Judge Jena P. Culler in District Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 22 May 2019. James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A., by Christo

554 Pa. 569 (1998) 722 A.2d 649 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Deborah Ann MYERS, Appellant. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued October 22, 1997. Decided December 23, 1998. *571 William C. Costopoulos, Lemoyne, for Deborah Ann Myers. *572 D. Michae

7 So.3d 968 (2009) Carl Andrew FISHER, Appellant, v. LAUDERDALE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, Appellee. No. 2008-CA-00359-COA. Court of Appeals of Mississippi. March 31, 2009. *969 Thomas W. Powell, attorney for appellant. J. Richard Barry, Robert T. Bailey, Meridian, attorneys for appellee. Before MYERS, P.J., GRIFF

The opinion of the court was delivered by Lockett, J.: The Board of County Commissioners for Jackson County (Board) appeals the Court of Appeals’ decision holing that Myers substantially complied with the notice provisions of K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 12-105b by sending a claim letter and proposed petition to the county counselor. The sole issue is whether Myers complied with the notice requirements of K.S.A. 2004 S

99 F.3d 1149 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. Ka