⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Armstrong v. Commerce”

District Court, District of Columbia · 2026-03-27 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JOSEPH ARMSTRONG, Plaintiff, Case No. 24-cv-3185 (JMC) v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Defendant. ORDER For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss, ECF 24, is GRANTED, and this cas
District Court, District of Columbia · 2026-03-27 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JOSEPH ARMSTRONG, Plaintiff, Case No. 24-cv-3185 (JMC) v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court for review of Plaintiff Joseph Armstrong’s pro se complaint for emplo
Supreme Court of the United States · 1970-10-12 · Published · cited 0× · 400 U.S. 833; 91 S. Ct. 67
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
District Court, S.D. New York · 1969-07-11 · Published · cited 5× · 311 F. Supp. 1236; 1969 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13840
OPINION AND ORDER LEVET, District Judge. This is a motion for judgment N.O.V. for defendants after a Special Verdict holding defendants liable to plaintiff for negligence in a seaman’s action for personal injuries. A copy of the Special Verdict is hereto appended. Under Rule 42(b), liability was tried first. Also, at the conclusion of the trial on damages in the above-entitled acti
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018-06-12 · Published · cited 0× · 193 A.3d 1067
Affirmed.
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018-07-30 · Published · cited 0× · 194 A.3d 719
Affirmed
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018-05-31 · Published · cited 0× · 192 A.3d 287
Affirmed.
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-05-17 · Published · cited 0× · 170 A.3d 1227
CP-51-CR-0003229-2010 (Philadelphia) Affirmed
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018-11-29 · Published · cited 0× · 201 A.3d 889
Affirmed - Application to Withdraw as Counsel Granted.
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-05-17 · Published · cited 0× · 170 A.3d 1227
CP-51-CR-0003229-2010 (Philadelphia) Affirmed
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-05-17 · Published · cited 0× · 170 A.3d 1227
CP-51-CR-0003229-2010 (Philadelphia) Affirmed
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-05-17 · Published · cited 0× · 170 A.3d 1227
CP-51-CR-0003229-2010 (Philadelphia) Affirmed
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018-05-14 · Published · cited 0× · 192 A.3d 243
Affirmed.
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016-06-01 · Published · cited 0× · 153 A.3d 1096
Affirmed CP-23-CR-0006618-2011 (Delaware)
Com. v. Armstrongpublic domain
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-02-14 · Published · cited 0× · 161 A.3d 378
Affirmed Application to Withdraw as Counsel Granted CP-36-CR-0002999-2015 (Lancaster)
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970-03-20 · Published · cited 67× · 423 F.2d 957; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 10207
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff, Ernest A. Armstrong, newly signed on as a seaman aboard defendant’s vessel, SS Thalia, went off duty at 0800 April 20, 1967, while the ship was anchored in Singapore harbor. On invitation he went to the quarters of a shipmate, named Darcy, and sat on a bunk to the right of the open door. In the quarters at the time were
State v. Armstrongpublic domain
Supreme Court of Kansas · 2003-12-12 · Published · cited 6× · 80 P.3d 378; 276 Kan. 819; 2003 Kan. LEXIS 701
276 Kan. 819 (2003) 80 P.3d 378 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellant, v. MICHAEL J. ARMSTRONG, Appellee. Nos. 88,692, 88,835, 89,595, 88,899. Supreme Court of Kansas. Opinion filed December 12, 2003. *820 Steven J. Obermeier, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and Paul J. Morrison, district
District Court, D. Idaho · 2014-03-24 · Published · cited 1× · 298 F.R.D. 479; 2014 WL 1247771
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER B. LYNN WINMILL, Chief Judge. INTRODUCTION Before the Court are motions filed by Plaintiffs to (1) certify a class, (2) extend the existing preliminary injunction to the class members, and (3) file a consolidated class action complaint. The defendants (collectively referred to as Idaho Department of Health and Welfare or IDHW) have filed a second motion to
District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2007-03-30 · Published · cited 0× · 506 F. Supp. 2d 851; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24512; 2007 WL 1072212
506 F.Supp.2d 851 (2007) Patricia J. CLARKE and Deborah R. Wolfard, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF COMMERCE, Defendant. No. 06-CV-0232-CVE-SAJ. United States District Court, N.D. Oklahoma. March 30, 2007. *852 *853 *854 David Ray Blades, Armstrong & Lowe PA, Tu
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991-07-18 · Published · cited 27× · 935 F.2d 728; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 15298
PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: The state of Texas sued the Interstate Commerce Commission under the Freedom of Information Act to force the ICC to disclose certain documents. The district court ruled that, of the eleven documents withheld by the ICC, six had to be disclosed. We affirmed that ruling. Texas then moved for attorneys fees under 5 U.S. C.A. § 552(a)(4)(E) (W