Cases

PER curiam: I Ricardo Corretjer Ruiz fue admitido al ejercicio de la abogacía el 7 de junio de 1967 y de la notaría el 12 de julio de 1967. El 28 de junio de 2001 el Juez Administrador de la Región Judicial de Aibonito remitió ante nuestra consideración una copia certificada del expediente de un caso criminal en el que Corretjer Ruiz había hecho una alegación preacordada y se había declara

Opinión disidente emitida por el Juez Asociado Señor Fus-ter Berlingeri. Con el propósito de ubicar en su propia perspectiva la controversia del caso de autos, conviene comenzar resal-tando sus hechos medulares. Al acusado se le imputa haber agredido con los puños a otra persona con quien sostenía una relación homosexual. La conducta del acusado alegadamente fue también viola-toria de una

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

2020 IL App (1st) 163145 No. 1-16-3145 Opinion filed May 26, 2020 First Division ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

SELYA, Circuit Judge. In this case, there was evidence that plaintiff-appellee Marta Ruiz Romero (Ruiz), a thirty-six year old female in her thirty-seventh week of pregnancy, was beaten by Generoso Gonzalez Caraballo (Gonzalez), a police officer, on a public street in San Juan. Gonzalez’s fellow officer, Samuel Fontanez Berberena (Fonta-nez), stood by and, when requested, handcu

654 A.2d 1283 (1995) Kirk ROACHE, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Appellees. No. 94-CV-77. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Submitted January 25, 1995. Decided February 23, 1995. Eric Steele was on the brief, for appellant. Vanessa Ruiz, Corp. Counsel at the time the brief was filed, Charles L. Reischel, Deputy Corp. Counsel

This is a summary judgment case. Individually and on behalf of her now deceased minor son, appellant Debra Lucadou sued the appellee, Time Insurance Company ["Time" or "the company"], another insurance company, and Raul G. Melchor ["Melchor"], who formerly worked as an agent for both companies. Premising the companies' liability on agency principles, appellant claimed the defendants' misrepresentations concerning her health insurance coverage violated TEX.BUS. COM. CODE ANN. Sec.

FARRELL, Associate Judge: We ordered this appeal expedited and directed the Corporation Counsel to respond to appellant’s motion for summary reversal of the denial of his motion to reconsider a juvenile pretrial detention order. Before considering the merits, we first explain why at the same time we ordered the appeal expedited, we denied appellant’s motion to treat the appeal under the interlocutory appeal procedures of D.C.C

DAVID C. GUADERRAMA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This case presents disputes over insurance coverage. Plaintiff Sentry Select Insurance Company ("Sentry") filed this declaratory judgment action against Defendants Rudolph Automotive, LLC d/b/a Rudolph Mazda ("Rudolph Mazda"), Rudolph Chevrolet, LLC ("Rudolph Chevrolet") (collectively, the "Rudolph Entities"), Christian Ulises Ruiz ("Ruiz"), Marcelo Flores ("Flores"), and Lynn Craw

674 A.2d 498 (1995) N.O.L., Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee. No. 94-CV-199. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued December 14, 1995. Decided December 20, 1995. As Amended April 18, 1996.[*] Edward L. Norwind, Washington, DC, with whom Caitlin S. Palacios, Arlington, VA, was on the brief, for appellant

691 A.2d 57 (1997) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellant v. Joseph E. TINKER, Appellee. No. 93-CV-1020. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued January 18, 1995. Decided March 13, 1997. *58 James C. McKay, Jr., Assistant Corporation Counsel, with whom Vanessa Ruiz, Corporation Counsel at the time the brief was fi

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge RANDOLPH. *329 RANDOLPH, Circuit Judge: Eighty-four present and former prisoners at Lorton Correctional Institution sued the Mayor of the District of Columbia and the Director of the city’s Department of Corrections under 42 U.S.C. § 19

650 A.2d 651 (1994) Richard Allen BETHARD, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee. No. 92-CO-998. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued September 16, 1994. Decided November 10, 1994. Boniface K. Cobbina, appointed by the court, Washington, DC, for appellant. Phillip A. Lattimore, III, Asst. Corp. Counsel, with whom Vanessa Ruiz,

667 A.2d 811 (1995) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellant, v. Shirley COLEMAN, Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Ramseur, Appellee. No. 93-CV-753. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued March 7, 1995. Decided October 26, 1995. *814 Donna M. Murasky, Assistant Corporation Counsel, with whom Vanessa

652 A.2d 634 (1995) James DAVIS, Appellant, v. John S. HENDERSON, et al., Appellees. No. 93-SP-954. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued November 29, 1994. Decided January 12, 1995. George E. Rickman, for appellant. Mary L. Wilson, Asst. Corp. Counsel, with whom Vanessa Ruiz, Acting Corp. Counsel at the time the brief was filed, and

655 A.2d 1226 (1995) Hamid CHEMALALI, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee. No. 94-CO-504. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued February 14, 1995. Decided March 20, 1995. David Tillotson, Washington, DC, for appellant. Sidney Bixler, Asst. Corp. Counsel, with whom Vanessa Ruiz, Corp. Counsel at the time the brief was filed, R

722 A.2d 332 (1998) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellant, v. WASHINGTON HOSPITAL CENTER, Appellee. No. 94-CV-319. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Reargued En Banc June 10, 1997. Decided December 30, 1998. *334 Edward E. Schwab, Assistant Corporation Counsel, with whom Vanessa Ruiz, Corporation Counsel at the ti

KING, Associate Judge: In this appeal, the District of Columbia (“District”) challenges the trial court’s reduction in the assessed value of appellees’ (“the Beatleys”) real property for tax year 1992. The Beatleys appear to concede that the property should have been assessed for commercial use, and therefore, agree that the trial court’s order should be reversed; however, they contend that the District’s assessor failed to pr

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge RANDOLPH. *1225 RANDOLPH, Circuit Judge: The District of Columbia’s motion for summary affirmance poses issues with respect to Rules 6(e) and 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure we have not previously decided.

653 A.2d 849 (1995) Alejandro S. McALLISTER, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee. No. 93-CV-892. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued November 22, 1994. Decided January 26, 1995. *850 Patrick T. Hand, with whom M. Azhar Khan was on the brief, for appellant. James C. McKay, Jr., Asst. Corp