Cases

Petition for rehearing denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

DOUGLAS E. MILLER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE In this consolidated employment discrimination action filed by Firefighter Jupiter Dennell Wilson, the City of Chesapeake moved for summary judgment (ECF No. 52). The City argues the evidence is insufficient to permit a reasonable juror to conclude Wilson was subject to an adverse employment action as a result of his age or race, or in retaliation for prior complaints of discriminatio

Affirmed as modified by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jupiter Wilson, Sr., appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss his action alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2012 & Supp.2015), and the Age D

By Judge Randall D. Smith This matter is before the Court pursuant to Va. Code § 16.1-131.1, regarding the ruling of the Chesapeake General District Court that Va. Code § 46.2-1054 (incorporated into the Chesapeake Code of Ordinances by Chesapeake Code § 74-4) is unconstitutionally vague. Both parties have filed written briefs, and the Court heard oral arguments of counsel on September 9, 2015. For the reasons that follow, t

LARRY JOPLIN, Chief Judge. T1 Plaintiffs/Appellants Cyanostar Energy, Inc., Oxley Resources L.L.C., Tom Hoe-fling, Lowry Exploration, Inc., Richard Gar-maker and John Wilson (individually, by name, or collectively, Plaintiffs) seek review of the trial court's order granting the motion for summary judgment of Defendant/Appel-lee Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. (Defendant) on Plain

OPINION AND ORDER MARK S. DAVIS, District Judge. This matter is currently before the Court on several motions to dismiss: (1) Defendants Greenhorne & O’Mara, Inc. (“Greenhorne”), Thomas Copeland (“Copeland”), Evelyn Jones, and Daniel Jones’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and Local Rule 7 (Docket No. 7); (2) Defendant City of Chesapeake, Virg

628 S.E.2d 539 (2006) 271 Va. 574 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE v. STATES SELF-INSURERS RISK RETENTION GROUP, INC. Record No. 051986. Supreme Court of Virginia. April 21, 2006. William F. Devine (Jonathan S. Miles, Williams Mullen Hofheimer Nusbaum, on briefs), Norfolk, for plaintiff. James E. Brydges, Jr., (Christopher J. Wiemken, Taylor & W

MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM D. QUARLES, JR., District Judge. Lucia Gott sued the Town of Chesapeake Beach, Maryland (“Chesapeake”) for violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 as amended (“ADEA”)1 and Maryland State Government Code Ann. § 20-606(a). Pending is Chesapeake’s motion for summary judgment. No hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (

ORDER STEPHEN P. FRIOT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the court are the following motions: (1) Defendant Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint (doc. no. 59); (2) Defendant New Dominion, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunc-tive Relief (doc. no. 61); and

ORDER RICHARD W. STORY, District Judge. This case comes before the Court on Defendant Insurance Office of America’s *1247Motion to Dismiss [28], Defendant Bruce Eades’s Motion to Dismiss [29], and Defendants Jim Conner and Horner Services, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss [31]. After reviewing the record, the Court enters the following Order.

254 A.2d 611 (1969) SYNOD OF the CHESAPEAKE, INC., a religious corporation of the State of Maryland, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEWARK, a municipal corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendant. Court of Chancery of Delaware, New Castle. June 3, 1969. *612 Ernest S. Wilson, Jr., Wilmington, for plaintiff. Clyde M. England, Jr., of Killoran &a;

704 F.Supp. 551 (1989) CHESAPEAKE UTILITIES CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 86-501-JLL. United States District Court, D. Delaware. January 9, 1989. *552 William A. Denman and Douglas B. Catts of Schmittinger & Rodriguez, P.A., Dover, Del., for plaintiff Chesapeake Ut

PER CURIAM: The court, having carefully considered the petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc filed on behalf of sexually oriented businesses and entertainers in this case, GRANTS them IN PART and DENIES IN PART as follows: 1. We agree with the argument of FTU appellees that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enter an order of reconsideration in August 1998, partially reversing the injunctive r

O’Donnell, J. {¶ 1} The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, submitted two certified questions of Ohio law in accordance with S.Ct.Prac.R. 9.01: 1. Does the 2006 version or the 1989 version of the [Dormant Mineral Act] apply to claims asserted after 2006 alleging that the rights to oil, gas, and other minerals automatically vested in the surface land h

*314 PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: In July 2008 Chesapeake Exploration, LLC entered into an agreement to purchase deep rights held by Peak Energy Corporation in certain oil and gas leases in the Haynesville Shale formation, for the hefty sum of $15,000 per acre. When the price of natural gas plu

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RAYMOND A. JACKSON, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 12(b)(6)”). Having carefully considered the parties’ pleadings, this matter is now ripe for disposition. For the reasons set out below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. I. FACT

OPINION AND ORDER MARK S. DAVIS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendant Logan’s Roadhouse, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. After examining the briefs and record, the Court finds that oral argument is unnecessary because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented, and oral argument would no

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge: These appeals and cross-appeals by the City of Houston and regulated entities arise out of an action brought by 105 individuals and 88 adult entertainment establishments challenging the City of Houston’s 1997 amendments to its ordinances governing sexually oriented businesses (SOBs). We overrule the district court’s determination that certain provi

GRAEFF, J. This appeal arises from an action brought by the Maryland Department of the Environment (“MDE”), appellee, against Keith N. Wilson, appellant, based on Mr. Wilson’s ownership of two properties in Baltimore City that are subject to laws aimed at protecting tenants from lead paint exposure. Specifically, after MDE determine