Cases

OPINION BY OLSON, J.: Appellant, Stephen Christopher Bowen, III, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered June 1, 2011, as made final by the denial of his post-sentence motions, sentencing him to an aggregate term of six and one-half to 15 years’ incarceration for convictions of fleeing and attempting to elude police, possession of a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia, and driving u

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Chant'N. Hodge and Harold H. Hodge, Jr., appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on their civil action and denying their motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the di

MEMORANDUM OPINION (Motion to Dismiss) HENRY E. HUDSON, District Judge. Brandon Raub (“Raub”) was detained for a mental health evaluation after he was arrested by Chesterfield County, Virginia, police officers, acting in concert with federal authorities and mental health professionals. Both a state-court magistrate and a special justice found probable cause for his detention, but

Case: 13-31078 Document: 00513393145 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-31078 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant v. KENNETH BOWEN; ROBERT GISEVIUS; ROBERT FAULCON; ANTHONY VALLAVASO; ARTHUR KAUFMAN, Defendants-Appellees

ORDER AND REASONS KURT D. ENGELHARDT, District Judge. Before the Court is the Motion for New Trial (Rec. Doc. 963) urged originally by defendant Arthur Kaufman, and joined in by the other defendants in this matter.1 The motion is opposed by the government (Rec. Doc. 1007). PARTI 1. Underlying Facts

GRIFFIN, J., dissenting. When I first learned that the original dissent had garnered enough votes to become the majority opinion in this case, I was concerned that the decision might do real damage to the law of beneficial ownership under Florida’s dangerous instrumentality doctrine. After some thirty-seven years of using the principles announced in 1955 by the Florida Supreme Court in Palmer v. R.S. Evans

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge: In the anarchy following Hurricane Katrina, a group of heavily armed New Orleans police officers were dispatched to the Danziger Bridge in response to an emergency call reporting shots being fired at police. There, amid chaos, they shot and killed two unarmed men, one of them developmentally disabled, and wounded four other unarmed civilians. The police then allegedly orchestrated a cover-up to

* Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.1110, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of part II of the Discussion. [EDITORS' NOTE: TEXT NOT CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION APPEARS WITH GRAY BACKGROUND BELOW.] [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 918

Opinion BLEASE, Acting P. J. Plaintiffs the Roman Catholic Bishop of . San Jose and Reverend Monsignor Francis V. Cilia appeal from a judgment denying their petition for a writ of mandate to (1) direct the Secretary of State (Secretary) to file the articles of incorporation of “Pastor of Santee Catholic Mission, a corporation sole,” (2) declare the Secretary v

BARNES, J, for the Court: ¶ 1. On December 6, 2007, Jerry Bowen underwent outpatient surgery on his right shoulder at Amory HMA LLC d/b/a Gilmore Memorial Regional Medical Center (Amory HMA). Bowen signed a “Consent for Anesthesia Services” form prior to surgery, which stated that “loss of sensation, loss of limb function, [and] paralysis” are complications

73 Cal.Rptr.3d 421 (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 1308 Viola RIPPON et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Debra BOWEN, as Secretary of State, etc., Defendants and Respondents. No. B199297. Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Eight. March 13, 2008. As Modified March 19, 2008. *423

Mikell, Judge. We granted this discretionary appeal to consider whether the trial court erred by denying a mother’s petition for modification of custody of her minor child. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. “If the record contains any reasonable evidence to support the trial court’s decision on a petition to modify custody, it will be affirmed.”1 The record shows tha

LEWIS, J. This case is before the Court for review of the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Bowen v. Taylor-Christensen, 98 So.3d 136 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). In its decision, the district court ruled upon the following question, which it certified to be of great public importance: MAY A PERSON WHO INTENTIONALLY D

This statutory action of ejectment was brought by appellants, plaintiffs below, to recover a tract of land described in the complaint. The parties were agreed at the trial that a plat, copied into the transcript, correctly represented the location and extent of the land in suit; but, if so, it is correctly described nowhere in the pleadings. Approximately 200 acres are involved. Joe Stephens died seized and possessed of this land in 1898, leaving a widow, now deceased, and three minor childre

Opinion SCOTLAND, J.* California voters have a powerful tool, the ballot initiative, to make public policy. (Cal. Const., art. É, § 8, subd. (a) [“The initiative is the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them.”], art. IV, § 1 [“The legislative power of this State is vested in the California Legislature . . . but the pe

*********** The Full Commission reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Holmes and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award except for minor modifications. Accordingly, the Full Commission af

22 F.Supp.2d 1131 (1998) Paul N. BOWEN, Petitioner, v. Joseph CRABTREE, Warden, Respondent. No. CIV. 98-126-HA. United States District Court, D. Oregon. September 1, 1998. *1132 Ellen C. Pitcher, Stephen R. Sady, Federal Public Defender, Portland, OR, for Petitioner. Kenneth C. Bauman, U.S. Attys. Office, Portland, OR, for

OPINION TERRY McCALL, Justice. This is an appeal from a $20,000 judgment entered against an automobile insurer under its uninsured motorists coverage. We reverse and render. Background Facts This case arises out of an automobile accident that occurred on July 12, 2000, in New Mexico. Bobby Bowen w

MEMORANDUM ** Caroline Bowen appeals the grant of summary judgment to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company in this diversity action regarding the scope of underinsured motorist coverage under Bowen’s insurance contract. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of the case, we do not recite them here. We hold that the district court correctly concluded that Bo

170 Cal.App.4th 447 (2009) LEGAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN et al., Petitioners, v. DEBRA BOWEN, as Secretary of State, etc., et al., Respondents. No. A120220. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two. January 22, 2009. *450 John R. Cosgrove for Petitioners. Maya L. Harris, Margaret C. Crosby,