Cases

15 F.3d 1314 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, in its CorporateCapacity, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant,v.Gus S. MIJALIS, et al., Defendants,andGus S. Mijalis, et al., Defendants-Appellants, Cross-Appellees. No. 92-5123. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. March 10, 1994.Order Denying Rehearing May 2, 1994.

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Rosalyn Musker v. Suuchi, Inc. (A-8-24) (089665) Argued February 3, 2025 -- Decided March 17, 2025 FASCIALE, J., writing for a unanimous Court. The Court considers whether “commissions” ar

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. D.T. v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia (A-35-23) (088966) Argued October 7, 2024 -- Decided February 4, 2025 PATTERSON, J., writing for a unanimous Court. In this appeal, the Court considers

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. D.T. v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia (A-35-23) (088966) Argued October 7, 2024 -- Decided February 4, 2025 PATTERSON, J., writing for a unanimous Court. In this appeal, the Court considers

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Jersey City United Against the New Ward Map v. Jersey City Ward Commission (A-10/11-24) (089292) Argued January 6, 2025 -- Decided June 18, 2025 PATTERSON, J., writing for the Court

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. G.C. v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services (A-35/36/37-20) (084417) Argued September 14, 2021 -- Decided November 18, 2021 LaVECCHIA, J., writing for a unanimous

Justice PATTERSON delivered the opinion of the Court. This construction dispute requires the Court to consider two issues: 1) when a building can be considered substantially complete for purposes of calculating the ten-year period of the statute of repose, N.J.S.A. 2A: 14-1.1(a), and 2) whether the Comparative Negligence Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-5.2, and the Joint Tortfeasors Contribution Law,

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. Shelley Pritchett v. State (A-5-20) (084451) Argued March 1, 2021 -- Decided August 12, 2021 LaVECCHIA, J., writing for a unanimous Court. In this a

PAUL A. BONIN, Judge. 11 There are ten lots of equal width, The most westerly one, Lot 26, is owned by Patsy and James Hooper, the plaintiffs. The other nine, Lots 27 through 35, are owned by Hero Lands Company, one of the defendants. According to the titles, the width of each lot is one arpent or 192 feet, which would mean that the total distance should be 1920 feet from the western boundary of Lot 26 to the eastern bound

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Facebook, Inc. v. State (A-61-21; A-7-22) (087054) Argued March 13, 2023 -- Decided June 29, 2023 RABNER, C.J., writing for a unanimous Court. The Court considers whether Facebook can be

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. State v. Wilbert Hannah (A-74/75-19) (084052) January 4, 2021 -- Reargued March 31, 2021 -- Decided August 18, 2021 ALBIN, J., writing for the Court.

MEMORANDUM ORDER JED S. RAKOFF, District Judge. This case involves a scheme by which a division of the Countrywide Defendants,1 headed by defendant Mairone, sold mortgage loans to government-sponsored entities2 by representing they were investment quality when, in fact, as a result of an initiative called the High Speed Swim Lane (or “HSSL”),

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Christa Robey v. SPARC Group LLC (A-50-22) (087981) Argued November 6, 2023 -- Decided March 25, 2024 SOLOMON, J., writing for the Court. The core issue in this appeal is whether plaintiff

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Kevin Malanga v. Township of West Orange (A-45-21) (086087) Argued October 24, 2022 -- Decided March 13, 2023 RABNER, C.J., writing for a unanimous Court. In this appeal, the Court considers wheth

*416 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SARIS, District Judge. I.INTRODUCTION Defendants Joseph Zolot, a physician, and Lisa Pliner, a nurse practitioner, are charged with illegal distribution of methadone, oxycodone, and fentanyl under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”), 21 U.S.C. § 841. They are also charged with conspiracy. The i

OPINION & ORDER LOUIS L. STANTON, District Judge. TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND. 270 A. BMIConsent Decree . 271 B. The Online Music Industry....272 C. Pandora.,.273 1. The Music Genome Project..'.273 2. Pandora’s Business and Revenue.273 D. BMI’s Licensing History of

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 98-2351 _____________ Shrink Missouri Government PAC, a * political action committee; Zev David * Fredman, * * Appellants, * *

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 14-388L (Filed: December 14, 2018) ************************************* WILLIAM C. HARDY & BERTIE ANN * HARDY et al., * * Rails-to-Trails; Valuation Trial; Yellow Plaintiffs, *

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1 JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Defendants’ Opposed Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights, filed August 16, 2013 (Doe. 26) (“MTD”); and (n) the Plaintiffs Opposed Motion to Amend Complaint and Memorandum Brief in Support Thereof, filed May 30, 2014 (Doc

Certiorari dismissed, July 22, 2011 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, ex rel.  Roy Cooper, Attorney General, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, Defendant-Appellant, STATE OF ALABAMA, Intervenor, COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY; STATE OF LOUISIANA; STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA; STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA; ST