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 “BROWN v. SOLOMON”
Brown v. Solomonpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ___________________________________ : ERIN BROWN, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action No. 11-1846 (HHK) : ALAN S. SOLOMON, :
Brown v. Solomon & Solomon, P. C.public domain
OPINION OF THE COURT Leslie E. Stein, J. Plaintiff commenced the instant action seeking recovery in the amount of $1,000, representing statutory damages resulting from defendant’s alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 USC § 1692f [1] [hereinafter FDCPA]). Plaintiff also seeks recovery of reasonable attorneys’ fees. Defendant now moves to dismiss the complaint un
Alfieri v. Solomonpublic domain
*385 BALMER, C. J. The issue presented in this case is one of first impression: to what extent do the confidentiality provisions of Oregon’s mediation statutes, ORS 36.100 to 36.238, prevent a client from offering evidence of communications made by his attorney and others in a subsequent malpractice actio
Solomon v. Dawsonpublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Alfieri v. Solomonpublic domain
EGAN, J. In this legal malpractice action arising out of the mediation of an underlying civil lawsuit, plaintiff appeals from a general judgment dismissing his claims against his former attorney, asserting that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s ORCP 21 E motion to strike and in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss with prejudice under ORCP 21 A(8) for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff contends that the trial co
Solomon v. Kess-Lewispublic domain
Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperisdenied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Solomon v. Kess-Lweispublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Solomon v. Kess-Lewispublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Solomon v. Brownpublic domain
MANKIN, Judge: Bruce W. Solomon (appellant) appeals a September 4, 1992, decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) denying service connection for a postoperative duodenal ulcer, denying reopening of a claim for service connection for a low-back disorder, and denying an increased rating for residuals of a small bowel resection, currently rated as ten percent disabling. The appellant claims the Board erred in d
Solomon v. Statepublic domain
948 N.E.2d 877 (2011) SOLOMON v. STATE. No. 27A02-1005-CR-534. Court of Appeals of Indiana. May 27, 2011. BROWN, J. Disposition of Case by Unpublished Memorandum Decision Affirmed. ROBB, C.J., concurs. RILEY, J., concurs.
People v. Solomonpublic domain
49 Cal.4th 792 (2010) THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MORRIS SOLOMON, JR., Defendant and Appellant. No. S029011. Supreme Court of California. July 15, 2010. *797 Bruce Eric Cohen, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant. Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R
John L. Solomon v. State of Indianapublic domain
Brown, Judge. [1] John Solomon appeals his conviction for possession of marijuana as a class B misdemeanor. Solomon raises one issue *174 which we revise and restate as whether his conviction violates his right to liberty and pursuit of happiness under Article 1, Section 1, of the Indian
Solomon v. Solomonpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CARGYLE BROWN SOLOMON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-0024 (UNA) ) JAMES ELLISON SOLOMON, et al., )
State v. Solomonpublic domain
BROWN, C.J. 11 After being convicted of simple burglary, defendant, Otis Bernard Solomon, was sentenced as a third felony offender to 12 years at hard labor without benefit. Defendant has appealed his conviction and sentence. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. Discussion Sufficiency of the Evidence On May 19, 2004, Corporal Gregor
Solomon v. Dickisonpublic domain
916 So.2d 943 (2005) Samantha Brooke SOLOMON, a minor, individually; and John Solomon and Penny Solomon, individually and as natural parents and guardians on behalf of their minor child, Samantha Brooke Solomon, Petitioners, v. Anne E. DICKISON, M.D., Candace Giddings Koney-Laryea, M.D., Jeffrey W. Skimming, M.D., Arun Chandran, M.D., David W. Kays, M.D., Shands Teaching Hospital and Clinics, Inc., a/k/a Shands Children's Hospital at the Universi
Pacifica Marine, Inc. v. Solomon Gold, Inc.public domain
OPINION FABE, Chief Justice. I. INTRODUCTION A bidder for mineral leases failed to turn in a required form that would have demonstrated that he was a citizen older than 18 and thus qualified to bid. The Director of the Department of Natural Resources' Division of Mining, Land & Water later allowed the bidder to remedy the omission,
State v. Solomonpublic domain
Brown, C. J. A jury convicted Mario Solomon of one count of unlawful imprisonment and acquitted him of one count of third degree assault. On appeal, Mr. Solomon contends the trial court erred in admitting certain of his statements. Mr. Solomon also argues the trial court erred in admitting alleged hearsay. We reexamine our review standard for determining when a suspect is in “custody” for Miranda1 p
Solomon v. Office of Compliancepublic domain
Judgment PER CURIAM. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
Solomon v. University of Southern Californiapublic domain
JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34®. It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s orders filed July 15, 2008, and February 20, 2009, be affirmed. The district court properly held t
Solomon v. Office of Compliancepublic domain
Judgment PER CURIAM. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.