Cases

6 B.R. 705 (1980) In the Matter of Elaine EICHELBERGER. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Elaine EICHELBERGER, Defendant. In the Matter of Thad L. LINDSEY and Linda D. Lindsey. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Thad L. LINDSEY, Defendant, and UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Linda D. LINDSEY, Defendant. Bankruptcy Nos. 8000912JC, 8001123JC, Adv. Nos. 800133JC, 800135JC a

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS OR THE PACIFIC REPORTER Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX 19-MAY-2025 08:24 AM Dkt. 47 SO

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. Certiorari denied.

100 B.R. 861 (1989) In re P.T. EICHELBERGER, Jr., M.D. Debtor. Jane Bailey HAYTON, Plaintiff, v. P.T. EICHELBERGER, Jr., M.D. Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 87-03998-H5-7, Adv. No. 87-0831. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. June 8, 1989. Candice S. Schiffman (Fulbright & Jaworski, of counsel), Houston, Tex., for plaintiff. Reba

510 U.S. 991 Eichelberger et al.v.Balette et al. No. 93-421. Supreme Court of United States. November 29, 1993. 1 Appeal from the Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. 2 Certiorari denied. Rep

510 U.S. 1081 Eichelberger et al.v.Balette et al., ante, p. 991. No. 93-421. Supreme Court of United States. January 18, 1994. 1 Petition for rehearing denied.

OPINION VAIDIK, Judge. Case Summary Jason Eichelberger appeals the post-conviction court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Specifically, he contends that the post-conviction court erred in concluding that his trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to ensure that the jury was properly instructed as to the State's burden of proof for both murder and voluntary manslaugh

Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.

661 F.3d 194 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Troy SPENCE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 10-4184. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued: September 20, 2011. Decided: November 21, 2011. *196 ARGUED: Allen Bethea Burnside, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Car

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Travis Leon Davidson appeals the district court’s *278orders denying Davidson’s motion for the district court judge to recuse himself, and denying Davidson’s motion to compel the

PER CURIAM: Martin F. Salazar appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for modification or termination of supervised release. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in Salazar’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Salazar’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Salazar has forfeited appellate review. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with or

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dennis Michael Gallipeau seeks to appeal the district court’s order in a habeas proceeding denying his motion for a protective order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Travis Leon Davidson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A cer

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Martin F. Salazar appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed.R.Crim.P. 33 motion for a new trial based on new evidence. His motion was based upon alleged new evidence regarding his attorney’s suspension for actions in another case. On appeal, Salazar does not

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Martin F. Salazar appeals the district court’s order denying his repetitive motion for a new trial. The district court had previously denied several motions by Salazar for a new trial, including two motions raising essentially the identical “new evidence” raised in Salazar’