Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION MICHAEL F. URBANSKI, District Judge. This matter is before the court on plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. Dkt. No. 15. The defendants, proceeding pm se, were notified of their opportunity to file a written response, Dkt. No. 17, but did not do so. Defendant J. Stephen Arthur appeared on behalf of both defendants at a hearing on the summary judgment motion, however

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

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

Justice SCALIAdelivered the opinion of the Court. Petitioner Robert Mitchell Jennings was sentenced to death for capital murder. He applied for federal habeas corpus relief on three theories of ineffective assistance of counsel, prevailing on two. The State appealed, and Jennings defended his writ on all three theories. We consider whether Jennings was permitted to pursue the theory t

*480 OPINION SILER, Circuit Judge. Defendant, Arthur Lee Stephens, appeals his conviction and sentence following his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana (two counts each) and possession of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime. The

*967OPINION BY WECHT, J.: Stephen W. (“Father”) appeals from the December 21, 2011 order dismissing in part and granting in part his exceptions to the August 5, 2011 hearing officer’s recommendation for child support. Suzanne D. (“Mother”) cross-appeals from the same order, which granted in part and dismissed in part her cross-exceptions. After careful

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge: James Lee Henderson appeals the district court’s denial of federal habeas relief on his claim that he is ineligible to be executed because he is intellectually disabled. We AFFIRM. I. Although this is not Henderson’s first appeal to this Court, we set out the facts and lengthy procedural history bef

200 P.3d 556 (2008) 345 Or. 526 Dave WALDNER, Michelle Kasper, Jacob Lahmann and Michelle Kasper, As Guardian Ad Litem For Joshua Bush and Hanna Waldner, Minors, Petitioners on Review, v. Stephen STEPHENS, Respondent on Review. Stephen Stephens, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Tran Co., an Oregon corporation, Third-Party Defendant. (CC 03C21165; CA A127595; SC S055351). Su

SHORT, J. I concur with the majority regarding the trial court’s exclusion of subsequent remedial acts. I also concur with the majority’s finding that Stephens failed to preserve the issues regarding the trial court’s denial of her motions for directed verdict and JNOV. However, I respectfully disagree with the majority regarding the alleged erroneous jury charges, and I would reverse and remand for a new trial.

NO. 12-23-00306-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS JOHN ARTHUR STEPHENS, JR., § APPEAL FROM THE 3RD APPELLANT V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

111 F.3d 1578 42 U.S.P.Q.2d 1538 Arthur L. SERRANO and Andrew W. Holman, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.TELULAR CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 96-1308. United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. April 25, 1997. Michael J. Emling, Long Beach, California, argued for plaintiffs-ap

110 F.3d 801 324 U.S.App.D.C. 57, 65 USLW 2692,133 Lab.Cas. P 11,790,12 IER Cases 1246 Arthur W. STIGILE and Ellen Balis, Appellees,v.William J. CLINTON, President, et al., Appellants. No. 96-5249. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued Dec. 17, 1996.Decided April 15, 1997.Rehearing Denied Aug

BOWMAN, Circuit Judge. The United States appeals an order of the District Court granting a new trial to Arthur Blumeyer and John Peckham on the basis of a juror’s misconduct. We reverse, reinstate the jury’s verdicts, and remand for sentencing. After a four-week trial ending in six days of deliberations, a jury convicted Blumeyer and Peckham of wire f

SUMMARY ORDER Madelyn Haines and Paul Zamrowski appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Griesa, J.), approving a class action settlement over their objections. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review. By summary order of October 25, 2013, we remanded this matte

MAY, Judge. [1] Karan L. Gilday and James K. Gil-day appeal the final judgment on their claims for damage to their vehicle. They raise three issues, which we reorder and , restate as: [2] 1. Whether the trial court erred in entering final judgment on the Gildays’ Motion for Summary Judgment; [3] 2. Whether the trial court should

WALLACE, Senior Circuit Judge: Gerald K. Smith, in his capacity as Plan Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Boston Chicken, Inc. and various related entities (the Trustee) filed an action alleging a variety of claims. Later, the Trustee filed motions seeking district court approval of settlements reached with certain of the *995defendants and requesting bar orders

—Mercure, J. P. Cross appeals from an order of the Supreme Court (Dawson, J.), entered April 5, 2000 in Clinton County, which, inter alia, denied the parties’ motions for summary judgment. The parties to this RPAPL article 15 action own adjoining parcels of property, each of which was encumbered by a 6V2-foot wide easement that ran east-west along their common boundary line, providing a 13-foot wide com

MATZ, District Judge. INTRODUCTION On this appeal from the District Court’s denial of a habeas corpus petition and denial of leave to amend the petition, we are presented with two issues. First, is the claim of petitioner Steven H. Caswell that the California Board of Prison Terms (“the Board”) violated the Ex Post Facto Clause when it calculated his ter

273 F.Supp.2d 955 (2003) UNITED STATES of America, Petitioner, v. Arthur ANDERSEN, L.L.P., Respondent. No. 02 C 6790. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. July 2, 2003. *956 Asst. U.S. Atty., United States Attorney's Office, Chicago, IL, John A. Lindquist, III, United States Department of Justice Tax Div

106 S.W.3d 304 (2003) Debra Faye Rashti COHEN, Donna Kaye Rashti, Denise Jaye Rashti, and Michael Rashti, Appellants, v. ARTHUR ANDERSEN, L.L.P., Bradley A. Roe, Ted E. McElroy, and D. Stephen Goddard, Appellees. No. 01-02-00151-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.). May 1, 2003. *305 Daniel J. Petroski, Vahldiek, Ca