Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER BUCKLO, District Judge. Plaintiff, Ezra Vineyard, applied in April, 1984 for Disability Insurance Benefits for a period from March 6, 1975 to December 31, 1980. After his claim was denied both initially and upon reconsideration, he sought no further review.1 Tr. at 422-431. In 1992, Mr. Vineyard re-opened his claim, which again was denied.<

Marshall, J. On joint motion of the parties, a single justice of this court reserved and reported without decision the petition of Bankers Life and Casualty Company (Bankers Life) for judicial review of the decision of the Commissioner of Insurance (commissioner) disapproving its request for rate increases for two of its Medicare supplement insurance plans. Bankers Life argues that the commissioner exceeded her authority under G

Chabot, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in Federal estate tax against petitioner in the amount of $56,738.33. The issue presented is whether under section 20361 the decedent’s gross estate includes a lot, the deed to which conveyed life interests to decedent and his wife and remainder interests to his two sons.2

Lenk, J. Prior to 2006, G. L. c. 94C, § 27, provided criminal penalties for the possession, delivery, sale, or exchange of hypodermic needles without a prescription. In 2006, the Legislature amended the statute to regulate only the sale of such needles, thereby decriminalizing, inter alia, the possession of hypodermic needles. See St. 2006, c. 172, §§ 2, 3 (2006 act). <

Filed 6/26/25 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION * IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL B330610 DIVERSITY et al., (Los Angeles County Plaintiffs and Appellants, Super. Ct. No. 19STCP02100) v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES et al., Defendants and Respondents; CENTENNIAL FOU

Lynch, J. Appeal from an order of the Surrogate’s Court of Saratoga County (Kupferman, S.), entered January 30, 2015, which, in a proceeding pursuant to SCPA article 18, denied petitioner’s motion for summary judgment declaring the Saratoga County Department of Social Services to be a preferred creditor pursuant to Social Services Law § 104. In 1978, Penny

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON STATE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS STEARNS, District Judge. This Complaint is the latest chapter in a long-running saga involving the siting of a wind farm in Nantucket Sound. The dispute pits the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the diversified energy policy espoused by Governor Deval Patrick against an obdurate band of aggrieved residents of Cape Cod and the Islands. Both sides

Liacos, J. This is an appeal from an order of a single justice dismissing the plaintiffs’ complaint under G. L. c. 231A seeking to challenge the validity of Regulation 3-74, entitled “Rules and Regulations Regarding Insurance Issued Pursuant to a Group Marketing Plan,” issued on October 31,1974, by the Commissioner of Insurance (commissioner) . The regulation in question, purporting to implement the provisions of G. L. c. 175, §

467 F.Supp.2d 823 (2006) Michael MARCAVAGE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants. No. 06 C 3858. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. December 14, 2006. *824 *825 Andy Robert Norman, Mauck & Baker, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff. Andrew W.

804 F.Supp.2d 697 (2011) IRSHAD LEARNING CENTER, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF DuPAGE, and Robert J. Schillerstrom, Robert J. Kartholl, Jr., John Hakim, Barry Ketter, Tom Laz, Michael Loftus, Jim McNamara, Jack L. Murphy, John Curran, Dirk Enger, Paul Fichtner, Rita Gonzalez, J.R. McBride, Michael McMahon, Debra Olson, Patrick O'Shea, Donald Puchalski, Jim Zay, in their individual capacities, Defendants. No. 10 C 2168.

TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge: Starship Enterprises of Atlanta, Inc. (“Starship”), a purveyor of various novelty items including sexually explicit materials, appeals the judgment of the District Court dismissing under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) its federal constitutional claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 1 ag

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STAND UP FOR CALIFORNIA!, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 12-2039 (BAH) v. Consolidated with: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STAND UP FOR CALIFORNIA!, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 12-2039 (BAH) v. Consolidated with: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

Opinion KING, J. I. INTRODUCTION Defendant City of Beaumont (the City) approved a specific plan, the Sunny-Cal Specific Plan (the SCSP or project), to build 560 residential units on a 200-acre site long used for agricultural purposes and located in an unincorporated area north of the City known as Cherry Valley. In August 2007, the City certified an environmental impact report (EIR) and adop

SELYA, Circuit Judge. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court decided Kolstad v. American Dental Ass’n, — U.S. —, 119 S.Ct. 2118, 144 L.Ed.2d 494 (1999), affording a fresh perspective on the circumstances under which juries may award punitive damages in federal civil rights cases. These cross-appeals require us to revisit the punitive damages threshold in light of

Opinion RUVOLO, P. J. I. INTRODUCTION In this petition for writ of mandate, appellant Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island (CSTI) contends that respondents City and County of San Francisco (City) 1 and respondent and real party in interest Trea

USCA1 Opinion

4 F.Supp.2d 961 (1998) Thomas Daniel RICOTTA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Defendant. No. 97CV1667-J (CGA). United States District Court, S.D. California. April 15, 1998. *962 *963 *964 *965

502 S.E.2d 161 (1998) 28 Va. App. 100 CITY OF HOPEWELL and Virginia Municipal Group Self-Insurance Association v. Michael W. TIRPAK. Record No. 1369-97-2. Court of Appeals of Virginia, Richmond. July 28, 1998. *164 S. Vernon Priddy, III (Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, on briefs), Richmond, for appell

Everett G. Maley, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, RespondentMaley v. CommissionerDocket No. 25852United States Tax Court