Cases

894 F.2d 1342 U.S.v.Filmore (Thomas R.) NO. 89-2601 United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. DEC 28, 1989 1 Appeal From: W.D.Mo. 2 DISMISSED.

172 F.3d 41 U.S.v.Filmore Vaughn Forde; U.S. v. Julio Felix NOS. 97-7469, 97-7470 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. November 06, 1998 1 Appeal From: D.V.I. 2 Affir

WALLACE, Judge. John Filmore appeals the revocation of his community control following an affidavit of violation alleging an unauthorized absence from his approved residence and failure to comply with the instructions of his community control officer (the CCO). Because the trial court abused its discretion in determining that Mr. Filmore’s violations of the conditions of his community control were substantial, we reverse a

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Appellate Court Fillmore v. Walker, 2013 IL App (4th) 120533 Appellate Court AARON P. FILLMORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROGER E. WALKER, Caption JR., DAVID W. MITCHELL, KENNETH L. HAMILTON, APRIL MOORE, KEN BARTLEY, and LINDA ELLIS, Defendants-Appellees. District & No. Fourth District

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Judge Terri F. Love 11 This appeal arises from a petition to recover, ad valorem taxes paid under protest. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment contending that plaintiff was not entitled to a refund of taxes paid under protest because plaintiffs property *623was not exempt from ad valorem taxation. Plaintiff then filed a cross-motion for su

813 A.2d 1112 (2003) Keith C. FILMORE, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. No. 566, 2001. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: November 13, 2002. Decided: January 6, 2003. Paul S. Swierzbinski (argued), Office of the Public Defender, Dover, for appellant. John Williams (argued), Department of Justice,

Lau, J. ¶1 This appeal involves a dispute between the Unit Owners Association of Centre Pointe Condominium (Centre Pointe or Association) and Filmore LLLP over the percentage of unit owner voter approval needed to pass de*332claration amendments restricting the leasing of units.1 The parties disagree on the meaning of the word “use” in both the

González, J. ¶1 — We are asked whether amending a particular condominium declaration to provide that only a certain percentage of condominium units may be leased is an amendment that changes “the uses to which any unit is restricted,” which requires special supermajority approval under RCW 64.34.264(4) and the declaration. We find that the amendment does change “the uses to which any unit is restricted” under this particular dec

This opinion was filed for record IN CLERKS OFFICE at s·-oc?'eml\ on S2pt;;.,3 ,:;rols SUPReME COURT, STATE OF WASHINGTON DATE SEP 0 3 20151 --nra.~ {!' .. CHIEF JUST/ Ronald R. Carpenter ~eme Court Clerk r'

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FILMORE LLLP, a Washington limited NO. 70013-8-1 liability limited partnership, DIVISION ONE Respondent, v. UNIT OWNERS ASSOCIATION OF PUBLISHED OPINION CENTRE POINTE CONDOMINIUM, a Washington nonprofit miscellaneous FILED: September 2, 2014 corporation, Appellant. Lau, J

107 F.3d 20 97 CJ C.A.R. 248 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

FILMORE PARC * NO. 2024-CA-0475 APARTMENTS II * COURT OF APPEAL VERSUS * FOURTH CIRCUIT NORMAN WHITE, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND * STATE OF LOUISIANA DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, CITY OF NEW ORLEANS; * ERROLL WILLIAMS, ASSESSOR, ORLEANS

FILMORE PARC * NO. 2024-CA-0475 APARTMENTS II * VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL * NORMAN WHITE, CHIEF FOURTH CIRCUIT FINANCIAL OFFICER AND * DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, STATE OF LOUISIANA CITY OF NEW ORLEANS; ******* ERROLL WILLIAMS, ASSESSOR, ORLEANS PARISH; AND

643 F.3d 537 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fredrick MAYS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-5374. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. June 29, 2011. *538 ON BRIEF: Needum L. Germany, Office of the Federal Public Defender, *539 Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellant. R

BERZON, Circuit Judge, concurring: I disagree with the majority as to the question whether Agent Hernandez spoke Spanish well enough that he could reasonably be viewed in his role as out-of-court translator as a “conduit” for Romo-Cha-vez, thereby precluding application of the hearsay rule with regard to the statements he made to Agent Simboli. In the context of the rest of the record in this case, however,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS JOHN R. TUNHEIM, Chief Judge United States District Court Julie Scharber, Kirsten Hahn, Barbara Shoemaker, and Melissa Farr (collectively “relators”) brought this qui tam action pursuant to the Federal False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., and the Minnesota False Claims Act (“MFCA”), Minn. Stat. § 15C.01 et seq,,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 23-1328 v. Judge Beryl A. Howell U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINI

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Moreno and Jose Salazar appeal their convictions for narcotics trafficking. They conditionally pled guilty to conspiring to possess cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We affirm. I The district court d