Cases

*732The petitioners are the president of the Suffolk County Court Employees Association, Inc., four New York State Court Officers (hereinafter NYS Court Officers) assigned to Suffolk County courts, and a New York State Court Officer Sergeant (hereinafter NYS Court Officer Sergeant) also assigned to a Suffolk County Court, respectively. The NYS Court Officer Sergeant is not involved in this appeal.<

*732The petitioners are the president of the Suffolk County Court Employees Association, Inc., four New York State Court Officers (hereinafter NYS Court Officers) assigned to Suffolk County courts, and a New York State Court Officer Sergeant (hereinafter NYS Court Officer Sergeant) also assigned to a Suffolk County Court, respectively. The NYS Court Officer Sergeant is not involved in this appeal.<

OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative. In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, petitioners challenge certain administrative orders of the Chief Administrative Judge of the State of New York (CAJ) dated January 8, 2004 (AO/072/04) and December 22, 2004 (AO/534/04),

OPINION OF THE COURT Thomas F. Whelan, J. It is ordered that the second amended petition in this special proceeding is granted in part and denied in part; and it is further ordered and adjudged that the second amended petition in this special proceeding (No. 001) by petitioners is granted to the extent that the matter is remanded to the respondent, Chief Administrative Judge, for further consideration consis

102 P.3d 21 (2004) 2004 MT 328 324 Mont. 124 CITY OF MISSOULA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Patrick O'NEILL, Defendant and Appellant. No. 04-193. Supreme Court of Montana. Submitted on Briefs September 14, 2004. Decided November 23, 2004. *22 For Appellant: Anne Ham

ORDER STADTMUELLER, Chief Judge. If wishes were Harleys, defendants, members of the Outlaws motorcycle gang, might ride into the sunset; leaving this case behind ... but wishes are not Har-leys, nor do most of defendants’ latest objections, which amount to little more than wishes, entitle them to relief. Defendants raise a host of challenges to Magistrate Judge William E. Callahan, Jr.’s November 23, 1

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

27 F.Supp.2d 1121 (1998) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Kevin P. O'NEILL, et al., Defendants. No. 97-CR-98. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. October 19, 1998. *1122 *1123 *1124 *1125 William O. Marq

207 F.Supp.2d 779 (2002) GLOBAL RELIEF FOUNDATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. Paul H. O'NEILL, Colin L. Powell, John Ashcroft, R. Richard Newcomb, and Robert S. Mueller, III, Defendants. No. 02 C 674. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. June 11, 2002. *780 *781

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHRISTINE I. O’NEILL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 21-1288 (JEB) MERRICK B. GARLAND, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION In 2015, Congress established the United States Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund, which draws largely from sanction

O'Neill v Buffalo Southwestern, LLC (2023 NY Slip Op 02439) O'Neill v Buffalo Southwestern, LLC 2023 NY Slip Op 02439 Decided on May 5, 2023 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to

GRISBAUM, Judge. This appeal concerns the granting of a motion for summary judgment. We .set aside and remand. ISSUE We are called upon to determine whether there exist issues of fact which would give rise to a cause of action under the “public duty doctrine.” FACTS This matter commenced as a claim in redhibition by the plaintiffs against their a

846 S.W.2d 590 (1993) IMC FERTILIZER, INC., Relator, v. The Honorable Eileen O'NEILL, Judge 190th Judicial District, Harris County, Respondent. No. C14-92-00909-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). January 28, 1993. *591 David E. Keltner, Lynne Liberto, Jeff Nobles, Ann Ryan Robertson, Houston, for relator.

OPINION Opinion by Justice FITZGERALD. When appellant Stephanie A. Novick and appellee Andrew A. Shervin got divorced, the trial judge found that Stephanie was “presently disabled” and ordered Andrew to pay her $2,000 per month for twenty-four months as spousal maintenance. As that period drew to an end, Stephanie filed a motion seek

OPINION AND ORDER GUSTAVO A. GELPI, District Judge. The present case arises from the damages Laura Rodriguez Situ (the “dece*38dent”) suffered and her ensuing death, allegedly caused by her turning on a light switch to the bathroom of an apartment she rented, which caused an explosion and resulted in second degree bums covering seventy perce

#30969-r-MES 2026 S.D. 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA **** IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JUDITH ANN O’NEILL, Deceased. **** APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant Patrick O'Neill appeals the lower court's grant of summary judgment to defendant Hugh O'Neill (trustee) and denial of his motion for partial summary judgment in his claim for breach of fiduciary duty regarding trust assets of which he was a beneficiary. After reviewing the facts of the case and the law, we affirm. I {¶ 2} Appellant is a principal beneficiary of th

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-21-00214-CV ___________________________ SHEA O’NEILL, Appellant V. CITY OF FORT WORTH, Appellee On Appeal from the 48th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 048-323683-21 Before Sudderth, C.J.; Bassel and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Bassel

Matter of Hutchinson v O'Neill-Levy (2020 NY Slip Op 04013) Matter of Hutchinson v O'Neill-Levy 2020 NY Slip Op 04013 Decided on July 16, 2020 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporti

203 P.3d 68 (2009) Simon J. O'NEILL, Appellant, v. James R. DUNHAM and Evelyn L. Dunham, Appellees. No. 99,529. Court of Appeals of Kansas. March 20, 2009. *70 William J. Pauzauskie, of Pauzauskie Law Office, of Topeka, for appellant. J. Steven Pigg and Vincent M. Cox, of Fisher, Patterson, Sayler & Smith, L.L.P., of T