Cases

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-24-00443-CV Johnette Raye McConnell Early, Individually and as Independent Executrix of the Estate of John Posey McConnell, Jr., Deceased, and as Trustee of the Testamentary Trust Created by the Last Will and Testament of John Posey McConnell, Jr.; and Patsy Raye McConnell, Appellants v. James Turner

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ERIC F. MELGREN, District Judge. Pro se Plaintiff Robert M. Brown brings suit against sixteen Defendants, including the University of Kansas. He alleges under 42' U.S.C. § 1983 a deprivation of due process of law regarding a property and liberty interest. He also asserts state claims of wanton and gross negligence, tortious interference with prospective business advantage, and civil c

DATE: 08/05/2014 PENNSYLVANIA CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PAGE: 1 TIME: 14:36:36 NON-COMPLIANT LAWYERS USER ID: jilgenfr ACTIVE REPORT: ctrk_crt SORT BY : COUNTY CODE, LAWYER LAST NAME CRITERIA: COMPLIANCE YEAR END DATE = 12312013 GROUP 3, REINST FEE ASSESSED ______________________________________________________

RIDGELY, Justice: Robert Burns was convicted by a Superior Court jury of several counts of varying degrees of sexual assault against children. We have affirmed Burns’ conviction on direct appeal.1 Now, Burns seeks post-conviction relief and argues that he received inadequate assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Burns claims his trial counsel

DATE: 07/17/2018 PENNSYLVANIA CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PAGE: 1 TIME: 14:31:12 NON-COMPLIANT LAWYERS USER ID: jilgenfr ACTIVE REPORT: ctrk_crt SORT BY : COUNTY CODE, LAWYER LAST NAME CRITERIA: COMPLIANCE YEAR END DATE = 12312017 GROUP 3, REINST FEE ASSESSED _______________________________________________________

OPINION In this post-divorce action for partition of federal civil service retirement benefits, the ex-husband-appellant, Walter E. Naydan, appeals from a judgment in favor of the ex-wife-appellee, Connie Jo Naydan. The trial court determined that Connie had a twenty-four percent interest in the benefits, rendered a money judgment against Walter for the sum of $13,586.31 as Connie's share of benefits paid to Walter prior to judgment, ordered Walter to deposit future b

PELLEGRINI, Judge. The Pennsylvania Society of Internal Medicine and Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. (Opponents) petition for review of the November 26, 1996 decision and order of Linda S. Kaiser (Commissioner), Commissioner of the Insurance Department of The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Department). That decision and order approved the change in control of six subsidiaries of Blue Cross of Western Pennsylvania (Western Blue Cross

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, United States District Judge Plaintiffs are nineteen African-American current and former employees of the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department (“DCFEMS”), Along with twenty-five of their colleagues, the current plaintiffs sought to initiate a class action • against DCFEMS on behalf of themselves and all African-American firefighters a

TERRENCE L. MICHAEL, CHIEF JUDGE "..., but at the length truth will out. "1 It is an oft-stated maxim that attorneys are "officers of the court." What exactly does it mean to be an "officer of the court?" Is it enough for an attorney to obtain a desired result for his or her client, even if they mislead, fail to fully inform, or violate rules of the Court in the process? Is a

19-2155 In Re: Mirena IUS Levonorgestrel-Related Products Liability Litigation (No. II) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2020 (Argued: December 2, 2020 Decided: December 8,2020) Docket No. 19-2155 IN RE: MIRENA IUS LEVONORGESTREL-RELATED PRODUCTS LIABILITY

360 F.Supp.2d 1352 (2005) In Re VIOXX PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. No. 1657. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. February 16, 2005. Before WM. TERRELL HODGES, Chairman, JOHN F. KEENAN, D. LOWELL JENSEN, J. FREDERICK MOTZ,[*] ROBERT L. MILLER, Jr., KATHRYN H. VRATIL and DAVID R. HANSEN, Judges of the Panel.

GRANT, Justice. InterFirst Bank Dallas, N.A., appeals an adverse judgment in a suit brought against it as trustee by the beneficiaries of two trusts. (We shall refer to InterFirst Bank as InterFirst or as the trustee and to the appellees as the beneficiaries.) Dr. Joe Risser, Sr., a resident of Bon-ham, died in 1974. In his will, he set up two trusts named after his son and daughter — the Marien Louise Po

Affirmed on the authority of § 35-2-51, Code 1975; Turner v.Massee, 250 Ala. 134, 33 So.2d 258 (1947); Stack v. TennesseeLand Company, 209 Ala. 449, 96 So. 355 (1923), and EastBirmingham Realty Co. v. Birmingham Machine Foundry Company,160 Ala

LEAVY, Circuit Judge: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brought this action against Gerald L. Rogers, president of the defendant Euro-bond Exchange, Ltd. (“Eurobond”), for violations of anti-fraud and registration provisions of the federal securities laws. The complaint charged Rogers with violating the registration provisions of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securi

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RICHARD H. KYLE, District Judge. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Adrian Calleros, a shareholder in Defendant FSI International, Inc. (“FSI”), alleges in this action that FSI and certain of its officers and directors have violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78a et seq., and breached their fiduciary duties by mak

Matter of Attorneys Inviolation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (2024 NY Slip Op 04648) Matter of Attorneys Inviolation of Judiciary Law § 468-a 2024 NY Slip Op 04648 Decided on September 26, 2024 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by

333 B.R. 30 (2005) In re WESTPOINT STEVENS, INC., et al., Debtors. Contrarian Funds, LLC, et al., Appellants, v. Westpoint Stevens, Inc., et al., Appellees. No. 05 CIV. 06860(LTS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. November 16, 2005. *32 Hennigan, Bennett & Dorman LLP, By Bruce Bennett, Esq., Sidney P. Levinson

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court are motions to dismiss, quash, and for protective orders filed by 119 putative defendants. 1 These *31 individuals have yet to be

In the United States Court of Federal Claims Nos. 14-397L, 15-194L (Filed: November 20, 2017) ***************************** * Partial Summary Judgment; GLORIA J. JACKSON, et al., * Class Action; Fifth Amendment *

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE GGP, INC. STOCKHOLDER § LITIGATION § § No. 202, 2021 § § Court Below–Court of Chancery § of the State of Delaware § § C.A. No. 2018-0267 Submitted: March 9, 2022