Cases

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 20a0264p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT WILBERN WOODROW COOPER, ┐ Petitioner-Appellant, │ │

SUMMARY ORDER AFTER ARGUMENT AND UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-Appellant Richard Wilbern, pro se, appeals from a judgment entered December 13, 2002 by the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Michael A. Telesca, Judge) granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment i

ORDER DAUGHERTY, District Judge. Wilbern William Sons has filed a Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Judgment and Sentence imposed against him in Case No. 68-76 Criminal, in this Court, styled United States of America v. Wilbern William Sons, said Motion being filed pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255. Said Motion is based on three contentions as follows:

This is an appeal to reverse the judgment of the district court of Craig county. The parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants, as they appeared in the trial court. Elmira C. Webber, nee Wilbern, sued R.E. Thompson, trustee, for a certain tract of land, and for an accounting as to rents and profits. The plaintiff claimed her rights thereto by inheritance. The plaintiff pleaded that she was the mother of one Alonzo Webber, who died December 5, 1903, in infancy, but after being du

NOYES, Circuit Judge (concurring). The Supreme Court of the United States, after finding the illegality of this combination, placed the duty upon this court of hearing the parties “for the purpose of ascertaining and determining upon some plan or method of dissolving the combination and of recreating, out of the elements now composing it, a new condition which shall be honestly in harmony with and not repugnant to the law.”

221 U.S. 106 31 S.Ct. 632 55 L.Ed. 663 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appt.,v.AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY and Others. NO 118. AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY and Others, Appts., v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. NO 119. Nos. 118 and 119. Argued January 3, 4, 5, and 16, 1910. Ordered for reargument April 11, 1910.

221 U.S. 106 (1911) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY. AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Nos. 118, 119. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 3, 4, 5, 6, 1910. Restored for reargument April 11, 1910. Reargued January 9, 10, 11, 12, 1911. Decided May 29, 1911.

01/31/2025 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs January 14, 2025 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROGER BRIDGES Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 19-00723 W. Mark Ward, Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Thomas M. Durkin, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Michael Jones and Michael Anthony Wilbern (together the “individual plaintiffs”) and their respective companies, MBAJ Group, LLC and Wilbern Enterprises, LLC (together the “corporate plaintiffs”), brought this lawsuit against *1081Defendant Culver Franchising

State of New York OPINION Court of Appeals This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. No. 15 The People &c., Respondent, v. Cadman Williams, Appellant. Mark W. Zeno, for appellant. Robert C. McIver, for respondent. The Innocence Project; Office of the Appella

670 F.Supp.2d 192 (2009) David WILBURN, Plaintiff, v. EASTMAN KODAK CORPORATION, Defendant. No. 04-CV-6589L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. November 23, 2009. *193 Van Henri White, Law Office of Van White, Rochester, NY, for Plaintiff. Elizabeth A. Wolford, The Wolford Law Firm LLP, Rochester, NY, for Defenda

Harry D. Leinenweber, Judge, United States District Court Before the Court are Cross-Motions for Partial Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs Act II Jewelry, LLC, Kiam Equities Corp. ("KEC"), F-Five LLC, Victor K. Kiam, III, and Elena Kiam (collectively, "Act II") move for summary judgment on the breach of fiduciary duty claim and all remaining counterclaims. Defendants Elizabeth Ann Wooten, Adornable-U, LLC, Nicole Mead, Shannon Eckels,

220 S.W.3d 571 (2007) CITY OF LAREDO, Appellant, v. WEBB COUNTY, Appellee. No. 03-05-00168-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. April 4, 2007. *573 Jaime L. Flores, City Atty., Laredo, Bob E. Shannon, Joseph R. Knight, Susan Dillon Ayers, Baker Botts, L.L.P., Austin, for appellant. James G. Ruiz, William G. Arnot, III, E

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN ON MOTION FOR REHEARING NO. 03-05-00168-CV

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN 444444444444444444444444444 ON MOTION FOR REHEARING 444444444444444444444444444 NO. 03-05-00168-CV City of Laredo, Appellant v. Webb County, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin, United States District Judge Plaintiffs U.S. Futures Exchange, LLC ("USFE") and U.S. Exchange Holdings, Inc. ("UEH") bring this antitrust case against defendants Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, Inc. ("CBOT") and Chicago *1237Mercantile Exchange, Inc. ("CME").1 Plaintiffs allege

AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Thomas M. Durkin, United States District Judge By minute order dated September 30, 2016 . (R. 81), the Court denied the parties’ pending cross-motions for summary judgment ,(R- 49, 51), stating that a written opinion would follow. The Court now sets forth the reasons for its September 30, 2016 order. . TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKG

572 P.2d 966 (1977) Lakrisha RETHERFORD, Appellee, v. HALLIBURTON COMPANY, a foreign corporation and Wilbern Henry Hawes, Appellants. No. 48406. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. October 4, 1977. Rehearing Denied January 11, 1978. Jack B. Sellers, Sapulpa, for appellee; Joe A. Moore, Memphis, Tenn., of counsel. Robert W. Blackstock, of Blackstock, M

888 F.2d 957 RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 7350 Aaron R. SEWARD and Connie G. Seward, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Philip J. DEVINE, James Devine, Jr., Daniel Horan, John F.Keating, Jr., Kenneth R. Fitzsimmons, Estate ofFrank L. Imparato, Jr., and WilberNational Bank, Defendants-Appellees. No. 1141, Docket 88-7834. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit.

HULL, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Pernell Ford (“Ford”) is an Alabama death row inmate who has filed recurrent requests to dismiss his § 2254 habeas petition, discharge his counsel, and be executed. Ford permitted his counsel, Ms. LaJuana Davis (“Davis”), to file and litigate his habeas petition for two years. However, in 1997, Ford began his quest to dismiss his petition and be e