Cases

SCHALL, Circuit Judge. This case comes to us from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“Board”). Lee’s Ford Dock, Inc. (“LFD”) appeals the decision of the Board granting summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of the Army and denying LFD’s claims for contract reformation and breach of contract. Lee’s Ford Dock, Inc., ASBCA No. 59041, 16-1 BCA ¶ 36

141 S.W.3d 719 (2004) Robert E. LEE, Appellant, v. MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS SOUTHWEST, LTD., Appellee. No. 04-02-00611-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. June 23, 2004. Shawn K. Fitzpatrick, Fitzpatrick & Kosanovich, P.C., San Antonio, for appellant. Daniel W. Lanfear, Sean B. McNelis, Matthews and Branscomb, P.C., San Antonio, for appellee.

GILMAN, J., delivered the opinion of the court. DAVID A. NELSON, J. (pp. 1022-23), delivered a separate opinion concurring in the judgment. COLE, J. (pp. 1023-25), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. OPINION GILMAN, Circuit Judge. In May of 1995, Fabien Eldridge brought this action for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the following defendants:

ALDERMAN, Chief Justice. We review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, in Fitzpatrick v. State,- So.2d --(Fla. 4th DCA 1982), which was a companion case to the Fourth District’s case of King v. State, 425 So.2d 1379 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). In both of these cases, the Fourth District certified the question of whether a juvenile can be indicted for an offense not punishable by death or

PER CURIAM. The State of Florida seeks review of an order entered in the circuit court on Michael Peter Fitzpatrick’s postconviction motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. In its order, the circuit court vacated Fitzpatrick’s conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of death and granted Fitzpatrick a new trial. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. We affirm the circuit court’s orde

OPINION Per Curiam: Instead of filing a brief respondent’s counsel of record filed a “response to appellant’s opening brief” wherein he informed this court that respondent did not wish to retain him to pursue the appeal. Counsel then asked us to decide the matter on the record below, as well as the brief filed with the district court. Respondent’s desire not to pursue this appea

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2022-KA-00530-SCT JUSTIN LEE ANDERSON v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/12/2022 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ANTHONY ALAN MOZINGO TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: SCOTT JOSEPH SCHWARTZ JEREMY LAWRENCE NECAISE TYLER HOWARD ALEXANDER

450 B.R. 231 (2011) In re Hannah Hyun LEE and Leo Richard Lussier, Debtors. FIA Card Services NA f/k/a MBNA America Bank NA, Plaintiff, v. Hannah Hyun Lee, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. G09-21406-REB. Adversary No. 09-2080. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia, Gainesville Division. January 31, 2011. *232 Elizabeth H. Par

LAVINE, J. In this legal malpractice action, the plaintiffs, Straw Pond Associates, LLC, Straw Pond Real Estate, LLC, Straw Pond Holdings, LLC, and CUDA Associates, LLC, appeal from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants, Fitzpatrick, Mariano & Santos, P.C. (firm), and Edward G. Fitzpatrick, an attorney in the firm. On appeal, the plaintiffs c

261 Pa. Superior Ct. 48 (1978) 395 A.2d 935 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Robert LEE, Appellant. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted March 21, 1977. Decided December 14, 1978. *49 *50 Warren R. Hamilton, Philadelphia, for appellant. F. Emmett Fitzpatrick,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DOLINGER, United States Magistrate Judge: Defendants have moved to compel further responses by plaintiffs to defendants’ second set of interrogatories, which were served in December 1991. Specifically, they seek more detailed answers to interrogatories 8-13, 16, 17, and 19. They also seek to compel responses to their Third Set of Interrogatories, which were served on May 1, 1992.

478 Pa. 70 (1978) 385 A.2d 1317 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. James E. LEE, Appellant (two cases). Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted November 14, 1977. Decided April 28, 1978. *71 Mary Alice Duffy, Philadelphia, for appellant. F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Dist. Atty., Steven H. Goldblatt, Dep. Di

475 Pa. 314 (1977) 380 A.2d 371 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Thomas LEE, Appellant (two cases). Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued October 21, 1977. Decided December 1, 1977. Neil E. Jokelson, Philadelphia, for appellant. *315 F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Dist. Atty., Steven H. Goldblatt, Dep. Dist.

470 Pa. 401 (1977) 368 A.2d 690 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Frank LEE, Appellant (two cases). Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued April 2, 1976. Decided January 28, 1977. *402 Edward K. Nichols, Jr., Philadelphia, for appellant. F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Dist. Atty., Steven H. Goldblatt, Asst. Di

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROBERT BRISEÑO; CHRISTI TOOMER; No. 19-56297 KELLY MCFADDEN; JANETH RUIZ; BRENDA KREIN; ALEXIS JUSTAK; D.C. No. LEONORA ULITSKY; ANNE COWAN; 2:11-cv-05379- JULIE PALMER; PATTY BOYER; CJC-AGR NECLA MUSAT; PAULINE MICHAEL; RONA JOHNSTON; CHERI SHAFSTALL; JILL CROUCH; ERIKA HEINS; OPINION MAUREEN TOWEY; MICHELE ANDRADE; AN

DOLINGER, United States Magistrate Judge: Defendants have moved to compel the production by plaintiffs of two categories of documents. First, defendants seek documents now in plaintiffs’ possession that reflect communications between various foreign patent agents and an Italian corporation known as Istituto Guido Donegani S.p.A. (“IGD”), which is the licensee and sub-licensor of the patent at issue in this case. Plaintiffs r

PARIENTE, J., concurring. If “death is different,” as this Court and the United States Supreme Court have repeatedly pronounced,23 then requiring unanimity in the jury’s final recommendation of life or death is an essential prerequisite to the. continued constitutionality of the death penalty in this State. I fully concur with the majority in requiring that, before a sentence of

*1294ORDER LEIGH MARTIN MAY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [49]. After due consideration, the Court enters the following Order: I. BACKGROUND1 Defendant MegaMart hired Plaintiff Jung Chan Lee as its IT Man

ISHEE, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. In 2012, the Pearl River County Chancery Court issued a final judgment regarding the custody of Jeremy .P. Jenkins’s and Heidi Wilkinson-Braddy’s minor child, Isaiah Jenkins. The chancery court awarded primary physical custody of Isaiah to Jeremy, with the parties sharing joint legal custody. Heidi was granted visitation rights. Heidi now appeals, arguing: (1) the chancellor

460 Pa. 324 (1975) 333 A.2d 749 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Carl LEE, Appellant. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted November 11, 1974. Decided March 18, 1975. *325 *326 Steven J. Hartz, Philadelphia, for appellant. F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Jr., Dist. Atty