Cases

ORDER K.J. MUELLER, District Judge. A motion for remedies filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against defendant Lawrence “Lee” Loomis (Loomis) is currently pending before the court. The motion was submitted without argument and the court now GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES it in part. I. BACKGROUND On February 23, 2010, the SEC filed a co

ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge. This case was on the court’s June 28, 2013 calendar for the motion for summary judgment brought by plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on its claims against defendant Lawrence “Lee” Loomis. Jeremy Pendrey and John Yun appeared for the SEC, and Douglas Beevers appeared for Loomis. For the reasons stated below, the court GRANTS th

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AMOS L. MAZZANT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court is Warren K. Paxton, Jr.’s Motion to Dismiss Under *573Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b) (Dkt. #44). Having considered the relevant pleadings, the Court finds that the motion should be granted. I. BACKGROUND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RICHARD CARL MUELLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-01229 (CJN) SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Kayla Mueller, an American humanitarian aid worker, was kidnapped, tortured, and executed by ISIS. Plaintiffs here are

557 F.Supp. 1304 (1983) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. Larry D. BLAVIN, Individually and d/b/a Providence Investment Advisory, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 81-74281. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, S.D. March 1, 1983. *1305 *1306 *1307

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge WILLIAMS. STEPHEN F. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: In 1984 General Motors announced a plan to issue a second class of common stock with one-half vote per share. The proposal collided with a longstanding rule of the New York Stock Exchange that required listed companies to provide one vote per share of common stock.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND [Dkt. No. 10.] HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL, United States District Judge ' Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil' Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 10.) An opposition as well as a reply were filed. (Dkt. Nos. 12,13.) Based on the reasoning below, the Court GRANTS Defendant

452 F.Supp. 824 (1978) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. JOS. SCHLITZ BREWING COMPANY, Defendant. No. 77-C-497. United States District Court, E. D. Wisconsin. June 7, 1978. As Amended June 16, 1978. *825 *826 *827 Robert M.

TIMMONS-GOODSON, Justice. This case arises from proceedings before the North Carolina Industrial Commission (“Commission”) and raises the two issues of (1) whether a party may be equitably estopped, in the absence of bad faith, from raising the two year filing requirement in N.C.G.S § 97-24 as an affirmative defense, and (2) whether the Commission’s Opinion and Award is supported by competent evidence. We granted discretiona

FILED Feb 04, 2022 02:12 PM(ET) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS AT CHATTANOOGA Meagan Mueller-Rice, ) Docket No.: 2017-01-0750 Employee, ) Vv. ) State File No.: 82287-2017 MEDATAG,, Inc. d/b/a Poblanos ) Mexican Cuisine, ) Judge Audrey Headrick Uninsured Employer. ) COMPENSATION ORDER The Court held a Compensation Hearing on Ms. Mueller-Rice’s claim to determine whether she is enti

Filed: June 29, 1999 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-31 (CA-97-258-2) Everett Lee Mueller, Petitioner - Appellant, versus Ronald J. Angelone, etc., Respondent - Appellee.

SUNDBY, J. (dissenting). Each defendant is subject to fines of $90,000 and imprisonment for ninety years. Such severe sanctions may not be imposed on innocent but negligent defendants. See State v. Collova, 79 Wis. 2d 473, 486, 255 N.W.2d 581, 587-88 (1977). I dissent. Defendants were convicted of racketeering for issuing promissory notes through misrepresentation and fraud, in violation of § 5

452 F.Supp.2d 821 (2006) AMERICAN COPPER & BRASS, INC., and The Bankrupt Estate of Smith and Wofford Plumbing and Industrial Supply, Inc., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. MUELLER EUROPE, LTD., et al., Defendants. No. 04-2771 DV. United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division. September 13, 2006.

2021 WI 32 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2019AP2397 & 2020AP112 COMPLETE TITLE: State of Wisconsin ex rel. Timothy Zignego, David W. Opitz and Frederick G. Luehrs, III, Plaintiffs-Respondents-Petitioners, v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, Marge

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION NOTICE DATED AND FILED This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. July 23, 2025 A party may file with the Supreme Court a Samuel A. Christe

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY RESEARCH, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 22-3420 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION

FRYE, District Judge: The matter before the court is the motion of plaintiff, Keith A. Mueller, to compel discovery (#40) from defendants, Richard Walker, Chief of Police for the City of Portland, and Portland Police Officers Mark Stevens, Thomas Trevarthon, Ed May, Stephen J. Smith, Rod Lucich, and Steven Larsen. The documents at issue are: 1) internal investigation files of the Internal Investigations Division of the Portlan

MEMORANDUM OPINION Millett, Circuit Judge: Independence Institute, a Colorado-based non-profit organization, filed suit against the Federal Election Commission seeking a declaratory judgment that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act’s disclosure provision, 52 U.S.C § 30104(f), is unconstitutional as applied to a radio advertisement that it desired to run during

ACCEPTED 15-25-00012-cv FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 3:13 PM No. 15-25-00012-CV

13 F.3d 408 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. Dav