Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER JOAN B. GOTTSCHALL, United States District Judge The character Walter Sobchak once said, “This is bowling. There are rules.” 1 If only the same could be said regarding how the law classifies property items in a bowling alley. The issue in this case is whether various pieces of property at the Antioch Bowling Lanes qualify as fixtures or p

ORDER FINDING THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT TO BE FAIR SPIEGEL, District Judge. The matters before the Court include the following items: response by Hearl D. Scales (doc. 60), a letter in opposition to the proposed settlement from Esterina Fabbo (doc. 62), the Interim Memorandum of Completed Notice (doc. 65), a letter from Maya Bisht (doc. 70), letter from Elaine Levenson on behalf of YALV (doc. 114), the Objecti

AMENDED ORDER APPROVING AMENDMENT AND DISTRIBUTION Timothy S. Black, United States District Judge Before the Court is the Joint Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Amendment to the Settlement and the Proposed Distribution (Doc. #3136) (“Joint Motion”).1 In considering the Joint Motion, the Court also has taken into consideration the presentations at the hear

ORDER CONTINUING CASE UNTIL JULY 22, 1992 AND OTHER MATTERS SPIEGEL, District Judge. As a preliminary matter, the Court must deal with several pending motions in the case before the Court. The Pennsylvania state class objectors’ motion to remove from seal their objections (doc. 145) is granted. The motion of Public Citizen to *139appear amicus

The Supreme Court of South Carolina The State, Respondent, v. Timothy Ray Jones Jr., Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2019-001008 ORDER After careful consideration of Appellant's petition for rehearing, the Court grants the petition for rehearing on Issue I, dispenses with further briefing, and substitutes the attached opinion for the opinion previously filed in this matter. The Court denies

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court The State, Respondent, v. Timothy Ray Jones Jr., Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2019-001008 Appeal from Lexington County Eugene C. Griffith Jr., Circuit Court Judge Opinion No. 28145 Heard November 9, 2021 – Filed March 29, 2023 AFFIRME

740 F.Supp.2d 1240 (2010) Barron R. BOWLING, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Case No. 04-2320-JAR. United States District Court, D. Kansas. September 17, 2010. *1242 Cheryl A. Pilate, Patrick M. Lewis, Morgan Pilate LLC, Olathe, KS, for Plaintiff. D. Brad Bailey, Thomas G. Luedke, Office of United States

[Cite as McArthur v. Bowling Green State Univ., 2012-Ohio-4000.] Court of Claims of Ohio The Ohio Judicial Center 65 South Front Street, Third Floor Columbus, OH 43215

735 F.Supp. 226 (1989) KENTUCKY AGRICULTURAL ENERGY CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. BOWLING GREEN MUNICIPAL UTILITIES BOARD and Tennessee Valley Authority, Defendants. Civ. A. No. C-88-0003-BG(M). United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, at Bowling Green. May 23, 1989. *227 A. Richard Bailey, Elaine M. Rinaldi, Cozen and O'Connor,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-3198 RICHARD WEBBER, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Sara J. Schmidt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ARMSLIST LLC and JONATHAN GIBBON, Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from

*4 OPINION OF THE COURT Abdus-Salaam, J. Defendant was convicted of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [2]) and unlawfully dealing with a child in the first degree (Penal Law § 260.20) for serving alcohol to an underage relative (hereinafter the victim) and then sexual

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS NO. 15-3744 TIMOTHY J. URBAN, APPELLANT, V. DAVID J. SHULKIN, M.D., SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE. On Appeal from the Board of Veteran's Appeals (Argued February 7, 2017

04/08/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE November 15, 2018 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TIMOTHY LERON BROWN Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2013-A-365 Steve R. Dozier, Judge ___________________________________

138 F.Supp.2d 821 (2001) Thomas Clyde BOWLING, Jr., Petitioner, v. Phillip PARKER, Warden, Respondent. No. Civ.A. 99-236. United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Lexington. March 29, 2001. *822 *823 *824 *825

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs December 11, 2013 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TIMOTHY DAVALE MARTIN Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2011B1816 J. Randall Wyatt, Jr., Judge No. M2013-00569-CCA-R3-CD - Filed March 20, 2014 A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant-Appellant, Timothy Davale Martin, of at

WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge. David Brown, a resident of the Illinois Department of Human Services’ Sexually Violent Persons and Detention Facility (Facility) was severely beaten several times by a fellow resident. Brown alleged that Facility employees failed to protect him in violation of his due process rights by allowing that fellow resident with allegedly violent propensities to

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1589 GORDON GOINES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD; DAVID SHAW; ROBERT DEAN; D. L. WILLIAMS; JENNA RHODES; JOHN DOES 1-10, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg

OPINION PER CURIAM: Diana Bowles appeals the district court’s dismissal of the United States as a defendant in a tort action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq. Because we agree with the district court that “the inquiry necessary for the plaintiff to establish liability on the United States ... would necess

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 03-1997 DAVID BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TIMOTHY BUDZ, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ill

MEMORANDUM OPINION ELIZABETH K. DILLON, District Judge. Pending before the court are five motions to dismiss, separately filed by all defendants in this case. Taken together, they seek dismissal of plaintiff Gordon Goines’s complaint in its entirety. Goines has filed responses in opposition, and defendants have filed replies. The court heard oral argument on the motions, and they are now ripe for disposition