Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
10 opinions for “Nevitt v. Fitch”
Nevitt v. Fitchpublic domain
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Nevitt v. Fitchpublic domain
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
541 U.S. 957 NEVITTv.FITCH, JUDGE, DISTRICT COURT OF NEW MEXICO, CATRON COUNTY. No. 03-7665. Supreme Court of United States. March 22, 2004. 1 540 U. S. 1135. Petitions for rehearing denied.
Bausch & Lomb Inc. v. Nevitt Sales Corp.public domain
810 F.Supp. 466 (1993) BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. NEVITT SALES CORPORATION d/b/a Solar-Mates Sunglasses, Defendant. No. 92-CV-6517L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. January 25, 1993. *467 *468 William D. Eggers, Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle, Rochester, NY
Zidell v. United Statespublic domain
540 U. S. 824; 540 U. S. 880; 540 U. S. 950; 540 U. S. 1149; 540 U. S. 1111; 540 U. S. 1163; 540 U. S. 1118; 540 U. S. 1135; 540 U. S. 1165. Petitions for rehearing denied.
Zidell v. United Statespublic domain
540 U. S. 824; 540 U. S. 880; 540 U. S. 950; 540 U. S. 1149; 540 U. S. 1111; 540 U. S. 1163; 540 U. S. 1118; 540 U. S. 1135; 540 U. S. 1165. Petitions for rehearing denied.
Antonyuk Hardaway Christian Spencer v. Chiumentopublic domain
22-2908 (L); 22-2933; 22-2987; 22-3237 Antonyuk; Hardaway; Christian; Spencer v. Chiumento UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ____________________ August Term, 2022 Argued: March 20, 2023 Decided: December 8, 2023 Docket Nos. 22-2908 (L), 22-2972 (Con); 22-2933; 22-2987; 22-3237 ______________
United State v. Figueroapublic domain
CYR, Circuit Judge. Appellants Angel Luis Figueroa, Tomas Figueroa, Isabel Rivera-Serrano (“Rivera”) and Carmen Milagros-Vasquez (“Milagros”), and three codefendants, were arrested in January, 1990, as a result of a “reverse sting” operation conducted by the United States Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”). The grand jury indicted each of the four appellants for conspiring, and attempting, to possess, with intent to distribut
976 F.2d 1446 36 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 671 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Angel Luis FIGUEROA, Defendant, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Tomas FIGUEROA, Defendant, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Isabel RIVERA-SERRANO, Defendant, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Carmen MILAGROS-VASQUEZ, Defendant, Appellant.
Fox v. Foxpublic domain
Mr. Chief Justice Carter delivered the opinion of the court: This is a bill filed by appellees in the circuit court of Clay county, to the September term, 1909, asking for an accounting from the appellant Mary A. Fox, trustee, for the setting aside of a certain deed, and that the lands in the name of the trustee be vested in the owners and partitioned or sold. After the tak