Cases

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. The Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) was enacted in order to increase home ownership. In service of this goal, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), which is statutorily tasked with implementing the FHA, offers insurance to certain mortgage lenders in order to decrease the risk borne by private industry and thus encou

OPINION OF THE COURT WOLD, Senior Judge: Appellant was convicted of unlawful sale of hashish in a contested trial before members. The Government’s case consisted primarily of the testimony of three witnesses: a drug suppression agent; a Special Agent Herndon; and a drug suppression agent; a Special Agent Herndon; and a confidential informant. The agent and the informant, testified that they met appellant

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court William M. Luce, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated natural persons, Plaintiff, v. Lexington County Health Services District, Inc., Brian D. Smith, in both his official and individual capacities; and Lynn Coggins, in both her official and individual capacities, Defendants. Appellate Case No. 2024-001240 CERTIFIED QUESTION ON CERTIFICATION FROM THE

523 F.Supp.2d 922 (2007) Roy P. LUCE, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. No. 3:06-cv-00120-JAJ. United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Davenport Division. October 30, 2007. *923 *924 Michael Depree, Bowman & Depree, Davenport, IA, for Plaintiff.<

119 F.Supp.2d 779 (2000) Janice C. LUCE, Plaintiff, v. David L. LUCE, Jr., et al., Defendants. United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Janice C. Luce, et al., Defendants. Nos. C-2-99-295, C-2-99-1389. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. October 27, 2000. *780 Christopher John Minnillo, McCorkle

NORDBYE, District Judge. On this motion the following facts seem pertinent. It is the claim of the Government in its complaint that one Earl D. Luce during his lifetime was an employee of the Office for Emergency Management, Office *242of Civilian Defense, an agency of the United States, from August, 1942, to January, 1943; that he became indebted to the United States

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION Orange Unit Case No. 24-CV-00731 5 Court Street Chelsea VT 05038 802-685-4610 www.vermontjudiciary.org Christopher Luce et al v. Matthew Pierson et al ENTRY REGARDING MOTION Title: Document(s) Filed Objection to Entry Order Regarding Motion (Motion: ) Filer:

C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari granted. Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION Orange Unit Case No. 24-CV-00731 5 Court Street Chelsea VT 05038 802-685-4610 www.vermontjudiciary.org Christopher Luce et al v. Matthew Pierson et al ENTRY REGARDING MOTION Title: Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Motion: 4) Filer:

C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 466 U. S. 903.] Motion of the Solicitor General to permit Bruce N. Kuhlik, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice granted. Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION Windsor Unit Case No. 539-11-16 Wrcv 12 The Green Woodstock VT 05091 802-457-2121 www.vermontjudiciary.org Robert Greenfield and Robin Imbrogno Greenfield Plaintiffs v. Kimberlee Luce, Matthew Wood, Michael Wood, Nancy Scott, Robert Scott, Bondville Real Estate, Inc., Paul Emmanuel, Dakin & Benelli, P.C., William Dakin,

OPINION * PHILIP R. MILLER, Judge: This is a suit for refund of gift taxes paid with respect to gifts of stock of the Blue Bird Body Company, made in 1976 by the three Luce brothers, Albert L., Jr., George E. and Joseph P., who are the controlling stockholders of that company. On September 30, 1976, Albert gave 19,000 shares to a trust for his daughter. Thereafter, on October

469 U.S. 38 (1984) LUCE v. UNITED STATES No. 83-912. Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 3, 1984. Decided December 10, 1984. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT *39 James I. Marcus argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner. Bruce N. Kuhlik

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WARREN, District Judge. On July 29, 1981, plaintiff David Luce instituted this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) alleging that agents of the defendant United States of America (the Government) committed medical malpractice and injured him during surgical circumcision procedures. Plaintiff, who was a United States Navy serviceman at the time of the circumcision, was opera

FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge. Luce appeals his conviction on a two count indictment charging him with possessing (count I) and transferring (count II) an unregistered firearm — a .22 caliber silencer — in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) and (e) of the National Firearms Act. Luce claims the trial judge erred in instructing

[Cite as State v. Luce, 2018-Ohio-4409.] COURT OF APPEALS ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO JUDGES: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. Plaintiff – Appellee Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Hon. Patricia A. Delaney,

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

Opinion issued April 19, 2022 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-21-00689-CR ——————————— EX PARTE WILLIAM CANE LUCE, APPLICANT On Appeal from the 149th District Court

444 F.Supp. 347 (1977) Dorell C. LUCE et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. No. 75CV327-S. United States District Court, W. D. Missouri, S. D. December 19, 1977. *348 John R. Lewis, Meredith B. Turner, Springfield, Mo., for plaintiffs. David Jones, Asst. U. S. Atty., Springfield, Mo., for defendant.</