Cases

MEMORANDUM & ORDER JOHN E. JONES III, District Judge. Presently pending before the Court are the motion for summary judgment of *741Plaintiffs Amir A. Isbell, Bergina Brick-house Isbell, and their minor children J.B. and A.I. (doc. 53) and the motion for summary judgment of Defendants Craig Patterson, Rachel Wade, Julie Spencer, and

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Friedman, Frucci and Senior Judge Humphreys PUBLISHED Argued at Fredericksburg, Virginia SAMUEL ROLOFSON v. Record No. 0535-23-4 BRITTANY FRASER OPINION BY JUDGE STEVEN C. FRUCCI BRITTANY FRASER

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Friedman, Frucci and Senior Judge Humphreys PUBLISHED Argued at Fredericksburg, Virginia SAMUEL ROLOFSON v. Record No. 0535-23-4 BRITTANY FRASER OPINION BY JUDGE STEVEN C. FRUCCI BRITTANY FRASER

STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge: The popular song Whoomp! (There It Is) 1 was released in 1993. For more than half of the song’s existence — since 2002— the parties to this action have been litigating the question of who owns the composition copyright to the song. After an eleven-day trial, the district court ruled

284 So.2d 841 (1973) Jimmie F. ISBELL v. Allen G. PANKRATZ, Individually and d/b/a Kentucky Fried Chicken and Pann's of New Orleans, Inc. No. 5592. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit. November 2, 1973. *842 Robert E. Peyton, Christovich & Kearney, New Orleans, for defendants-appellants. Edward M. Gordon, III,

658 S.W.2d 600 (1983) Samuel Kenneth SWOAPE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 63212. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc. October 26, 1983. Allen C. Isbell, Houston, for appellant. John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty., Michael C. Kuhn and R.P. Cornelius, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

728 A.2d 625 (1999) In re Abraham D. SOFAER, Respondent. No. 97-BG-1096. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued April 29, 1998. Decided April 22, 1999. *626 Samuel Dash, with whom David B. Isbell, Washington, DC, Robert J. Sisk, New York City and M. Kathleen O'Connor, Washington, DC, were on the brief, for respond

539 F.2d 574 PREFERRED RISK MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Samuel A. POOLE et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 76-1926 Summary Calendar.* United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. Sept. 23, 1976. Wade H. Lagrone, Tupelo,

Glen H. Davidson, SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE The Court today considers multiple motions to dismiss and transfer [10,12,16] filed by Defendants James Donohue and Dryshod, LLC. In this copyright and trademark infringement action, Haas alleges that Defendants James Donohue, on behalf of Dryshod began negotiations to license Haas' popular Mossy Oak Break-Up camouflage pattern for apparel produced by Dryshod. Donohue abruptly ended the n

656 F.3d 948 (2011) Gerald E. SAMUELS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOLLAND AMERICAN LINE-USA INC.; Hal Nederland NV Corp.; Holland American Line NV; Holland America Line Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 10-35933. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 15, 2011. Filed September 2, 2011. *949<

244 F.Supp.2d 672 (2003) William AGNEW, et al Plaintiffs v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL FINANCE GROUP, LLC Defendants No. 1:01-CV-206-M-D. United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Eastern Division. January 30, 2003. *674 Brian Henry Neely, Brian H. Neely, Attorney, Tupelo, for William Agnew, Alice Anderson, Minnie Anderson, Daniel B

432 F.2d 98 Robert THAW, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al.,Defendants-Appellees. No. 29488 Summary Calendar.**Rule 18, 5th Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Incv.Citizens Casualty Co. of New York, et al., 5th Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

JAN P. PATTERSON, Justice, dissenting. Reversing course on rehearing, a majority of this panel now concludes that the *540consent requirement in subsection 21.307(a)(2) of the Texas Education Code is a jurisdictional statutory prerequisite within the meaning of section 311.034 of the Texas Government Code that requires Presidio to obtain the Commissione

90 F.Supp.2d 742 (2000) Antoinette PFEIL, Plaintiff, v. INTECOM TELECOMMUNICATIONS, et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 3:97-CV-1440L. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. March 20, 2000. *743 *744 William C. Isbell, Law Office of William C. Isbell, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff.<

432 F.2d 98 Robert THAW, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 29488 Summary Calendar.* United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. September 22, 1970. Rehearing Denied and Rehearing En Banc Denied October 26, 1970.

ISBELL-PORTER CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.Isbell-Porter Co. v. CommissionerDocket No. 7305.United States Board of Tax Appeals

584 F.2d 104 21 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 337, 18 Empl. Prac.Dec. P 8682Samuel W. JONES, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,v.The TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD, the United States of America,et al.,Defendants-Appellees. No. 78-1316 Summary Calendar.* United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Ci

502 F.2d 1042 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Jose Rafael ROJAS, Defendant-Appellant.No. 74-1641 Summary Calendar.**Rule 18, 5 Cir., Isbell Enterprises, Inc.v.Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir. 1970, 431F.2d 409, Part I. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Oct. 17, 1974. Robert H.

493 F.2d 173 Beatrice TOOTEN, Petitioner-Appellant,v.Robert L. SHEVIN, Attorney General, State of Florida, andReubin O'D. Askew, Governor, and the State ofFlorida, Respondents-Appellees.No. 73-3816 Summary Calendar*.*Rule 18, 5th Cir. see Isbell Enterprises, Inc.v.Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5th Cir. 1970, 431F.2d 409, Part I. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.</

489 F.2d 727 Sheldon Louis POLAKOFF, Petitioner-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.No. 73-1483 Summary Calendar.**Rule 18, 5 Cir.; Isbell Enterprises, Inc.v.Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970,431 F.2d 409, PartI. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Feb. 14, 1974, Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied March 12, 1974