⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

18 opinions for “United States v. Nicolescu”

Supreme Court of the United States · 2014-05-19 · Published · cited 0× · 134 S. Ct. 2321; 189 L. Ed. 2d 197; 82 U.S.L.W. 3673; 572 U.S. 1127; 2014 WL 1489252; 2014 U.S. LEXIS 3383
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Idaho Court of Appeals · 2014-04-18 · Published · cited 0× · 156 Idaho 287; 323 P.3d 1248; 2014 WL 1508838; 2014 Ida. App. LEXIS 36
GRATTON, Judge. Kevin Michael Nicolescu appeals from the district court’s intermediate appellate decision, reversing the magistrate’s order granting Nieolescu’s motion to suppress. We affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Nicolescu’s vehicle was struck by a driver who ran a red light. Police officers r
In re Nicolescupublic domain
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · 2004-06-03 · Published · cited 0× · 311 B.R. 27; 52 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 506; 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 824; 2004 WL 1368393
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ROBERT L. KRECHEVSKY, Bankruptcy Judge. I. Before the court is an “Application to Pay Secured Creditor” (“the application”) filed by Neal Ossen, the Chapter 7 trustee (“the trustee”). The application asserts that Anthem Blue Cross & Blue Shield (“Anthem”), the alleged secured creditor, has a “Medicaid lien” in the amount of $2,563.09 on proceeds receiv
Nicolescu v. Inspublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997-12-22 · Published · cited 0× · 134 F.3d 385; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 38240; 1997 WL 804901
134 F.3d 385 Nicolescuv.INS* NO. 96-5416 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Dec 22, 1997 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. ,No.A29977217 1 Affirmed.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023-08-21 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0189p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023-08-21 · Published · cited 4× · 78 F.4th 955
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0189p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022-04-01 · Published · cited 0×
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10447 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:14-cr-00083-JAM-4 RUSLAN KIRILYUK, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Cali
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023-11-22 · Published · cited 3× · 86 F.4th 1164
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0254p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Appellee,
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022-04-01 · Published · cited 37× · 29 F.4th 1128
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 19-10447 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:14-cr-00083-JAM-4 RUSLAN KIRILYUK, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Cali
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021-11-09 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0257p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021-10-05 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0231p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2026-05-29 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0157p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2026-03-17 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0083p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plai
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2026-02-13 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0041p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-App
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2025-10-17 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0289p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ┐ Plaintiff - Appellee, │ │
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2026-02-04 · Published · cited 0×
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0031p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Gaffin v. Haslampublic domain
Ohio Court of Appeals · 2024-05-30 · Published · cited 2× · 2024 Ohio 2117
[Cite as Gaffin v. Haslam, 2024-Ohio-2117.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ADAMS COUNTY Kevin L. Gaffin, : Case No. 23CA1180 Plaintiff-Appellant, : v. : DECISION AND Aaron R. Haslam, et al.,
District Court, C.D. California · 1998-10-02 · Published · cited 5× · 183 F.R.D. 242; 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21215; 1998 WL 758881
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SNYDER, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint and other papers along with the attached Report and Recommendation of' United States Magistrate Judge Rosalyn M. Chapman, and has made a de novo determination. IT IS ORDERED that (1) the Report and Recommendation i