Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION AMY BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge In this case, an insurance carrier seeks a declaratory judgment holding that it is not bound to cover the costs of a legal malpractice action brought against a District of Columbia law firm and two of its attorneys. Invoking this Court’s diversity jurisdiction, plaintiff Chicago

991 S.W.2d 907 (1999) Paul David PAULSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 14-96-01492-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). April 22, 1999. *908 Joseph Salhab, Houston, for appellant. David Bosserman, Angleton, for appellees. Panel consists of Chief Justice MURPHY and Justices HUDSON a

AFFIRM; Opinion issued December 21, 2012. In The øitrtøf ififtli 1iitritt uf ixa at aita No. 05-11-01442-CR ANTHONY PEACE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Gerard E. Lynch, Circuit Judge: *70 The Taxi and Limousine Commission of New York City (the "TLC") has the authority to issue, revoke, and suspend taxi drivers' licenses. These tandem cases require us to examine the TLC's suspension procedures under the Due Process Clause to determine whether

Opinion WALLIN, J. Petitioners W. Scott Biddle and Edward D. Lohrbach seek a writ of mandate compelling the trial court to set aside its order expunging the lis pendens recorded against the Paulson’s real property. The question presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion by expunging a lis pendens for a technical defect in service, although the property owners had actual notice and had failed to

Crothers, Justice. [¶ 1] Statoil Oil & Gas LP appeals from judgments dismissing without prejudice its actions against numerous defendants, seeking a determination of the proper distribution of oil and gas revenues from Williams and McKenzie County wells on land adjacent to the Missouri River and under Lake Sakakawea. We affirm, concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the actions because Stato

626 F.3d 1019 (2010) William Jay GOLLEHON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael MAHONEY, Respondent-Appellee. No. 09-99011. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted August 3, 2010. Filed November 22, 2010. *1021 Michael Donahoe, Senior Litigator, Federal Defenders of Montana, Helena, MT, ar

857 N.E.2d 805 (2006) SIERON & ASSOCIATES, INC., E.J. Sieron, E. John Sieron, Arrow Realty, Inc., Tujay, Inc., Golden Properties, Inc., OFS, Ltd., Hawk Properties, Inc., Falcon, Ltd., JMW, Inc., Theresa Sieron, and Scott Sieron, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, Anthony Clark, Director of Insurance, the Illinois Fair Plan Association, and Douglas A. Jensen, General Manager of the Illinois FAIR Plan Association, Defendants

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA CLAUDETTE D. VOGEL, TRUSTEE OF No. 81123 THE VOGEL FAMILY TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT DATED OCTOBER 25, 2016, Appellant, vs. FILED THE MARLA BAY PROTECTIVE , ASSOCIATION; 610 LAKESHORE LLC, DEC 1 7 2021 A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA CLAUDETTE D. VOGEL, TRUSTEE OF No. 81123 THE VOGEL FAMILY TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT DATED OCTOBER 25, 2016, Appellant, vs. FILED THE MARLA BAY PROTECTIVE , ASSOCIATION; 610 LAKESHORE LLC, DEC 1 7 2021 A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY

986 P.2d 918 (1999) MUNICIPAL SUBDISTRICT, NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, Objector-Appellant, v. CHEVRON SHALE OIL COMPANY, Applicant-Appellee, Orlyn G. Bell, Division Engineer, Water Division 5, Appellee pursuant to C.A.R. 1(e). No. 98SA377. Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc. September 13, 1999. *919 Trout &a;

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-329 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 4:22-cr-00208- JST-1 v. CENIOUS BREWSTER, OPINION Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-329 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 4:22-cr-00208- JST-1 v. CENIOUS BREWSTER, OPINION Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. In this diversity ease, two groups of landowners appeal from a summary judgment denying their claims for real and personal property loss caused by a flood, which they claimed resulted from the negligence of the Arkansas Power & Light Company and En-tergy Services, Inc. The district court1 entered summary judgment for AP & L because the plaintiff landowners hel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELOISE K. SIMMONS, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 18-2169 (RDM) LANGSTON LANE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Eloise K. Simmons brings this suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“

DURHAM, J., dissenting. The question that these cases pose is straightforward: Did the police officers conduct unreasonable searches in violation of Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, when they (1) searched defendant Rodgers’s car, (2) conducted a patdown search of defendant Kirkeby, and (3) opened a metal container discovered in Kirkeby’s pocket dur

[Cite as Art's Rental Equip., Inc. v. Bear Creek Constr., L.L.C., 2012-Ohio-5371.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO ART’S RENTAL EQUIPMENT, INC., et : APPEAL NOS. C-1105441 al., C-110555 :

OPINION AND ORDER JED S. RAKOFF, District Judge. On October 19, 2011, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “S.E.C.”) filed this lawsuit, accusing defendant Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (“Citigroup”) of a substantial securities fraud. According to the S.E.C.’s Complaint, after Citigroup realized in early 2007 that the market for mortgage-backed securities was beginning to weaken, Ci

*263 OPINION OF THE COURT SLOVITER, Circuit Judge. Table of Contents I.A. . The Rise and Fall of Suprema DO B. The Secondary Offerings. CO C. Procedural History. DO II.A. Section 11 and Section 12(a)(2) Clai

OPINION & ORDER Honorable PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge. Plaintiff Michael Brautigam (“Brauti-gam”) brings this shareholder derivative action on behalf of The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (“Goldman”) to redress injuries *397as a result of alleged breaches of fiduciary-duty by the seven individual defendants, Lloyd Blankfein, Gary D. Coh