Cases

Verenice Ruiz, a minor, filed this appeal from a March 3, 1994 decision of the common pleas court which granted summary judgment in favor of Andres and Carmen Velez on her complaint for negligent construction of a fence. The matter has been thoroughly briefed, and, in addition, the appellees have moved to dismiss this appeal, alleging, in the alternative, untimely filing or lack of a final appealable order. Based upon the procedural history of this case, we are compelled to dismiss this appea

Lawrence E. Kahn, U.S. District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Gerald Bornschein commenced this civil rights action against defendants Andrew Herman and Daniel Walsh on March 22, 2017, alleging violations of Plaintiff's rights under the Fourth Amendment, as enforced through 42 U.S.C. § 1983

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ Nos. 19-3679 & 19-3774 ___________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STAMATIOS KOUSISIS, a/k/a Tom Kousisis, Appellant in No. 19-3679 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 18-3390 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDWIN PAWLOWSKI, Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal Action No. 5-17-cr-00390-001) District Judge: Honorable Juan R. Sanche

ORDER WILLIAM H. STEELE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 28). The parties have filed briefs and evidentiary materials in support of their respective positions, (Docs. 29, 30, 36, 38, 39, 45), and the motion is ripe for resolution. After careful consideration, the Court concludes tha

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ Nos. 19-3679 & 19-3774 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. STAMATIOS KOUSISIS, a/k/a Tom Kousisis, Appellant in No. 19-3679 UNIT

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 13–2340 JOSÉ LUIS DÍAZ-COLÓN, on his own behalf and on behalf of his minor son J.L.D.R.; LINDA DELGADO, on behalf of her minor daughter D.M.D.D.; ZORAIDA COLÓN-CARTAGENA; PEDRO DÍAZ; PEDRO LUIS DÍAZ-COLÓN; YAHAIRA ENID DÍAZ-COLÓN; LOURDES DE JESÚS- VELÁZQUEZ, on her own and on behalf of her minor children J.L.S.D.; J.L.L.S.D., on their own and as legal heirs of Leopoldo Sanabri

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 19-SS-1024 FACEBOOK, INC., APPELLANT, V. JAMES PE

Gillerman, J. The Commonwealth has appealed from an interlocutory order of the Superior Court1 suppressing two written, signed statements of the defendant regarding his involvement in the murder of Jorge Perez-Caraballo on May 25, 1999. See G. L. c. 278, § 28E. At issue are the consequences of the *506failure of the police to conform to the re

NEWSOM, Circuit Judge: Faced with a defendant's motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff asserting an intentional-discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Protection Clause, or 42 U.S.C. § 1981 must make a sufficient

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge. INDEX INDEX... 5 INTRODUCTION.. .6 I. BACKGROUND... 6 II. HOBBS ACT OVERVIEW... 7 A. The Hobbs Act and Labor Law.. .7 B. ‘Wrongful”... 8 C. “Property”... 9 III. EXTORTIO

SMITH, Chief Judge. *126 Table of Contents I. Introduction...127 II. Background...127 A. The Fattah for Mayor Scheme...127 1. The Lord Loan and Its Repayment...127

KAYATTA, Circuit Judge. This lawsuit arises 'out of two sets of wrongful murder convictions in Puerto Rico’s courts. In each murder trial, jurors convicted a group of individuals based in large part on the testimony of a single witness, Zoé Díaz-Colón (“Díaz”). After one of the convicted individuals killed himself in prison, Diaz came forward to recant her testimony, claiming that law enforcement personnel had coerced and brib

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. New Jersey Transit Corporation v. Sandra Sanchez (A-68-18) (082292) Argued September 24, 2019 -- Decided May 12, 2020 PER CURIAM New Jersey Transit Corporation (Ne

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice Bowman, J.), entered on or about August 21, 2001, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendants-respondents’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and dismissed the complaints against them for failure to comply with Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (c) (2), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendants-respondents’ motion denied, the verd

OPINION OF THE COURT FUENTES, Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellant Asida Washington was ensnared by a “stash house reverse sting” operation — one which hit many of the by-now-familiar beats.1 Acting on what appeared to be insider information from a drug courier, Washington and his three co-conspirators planned to rob a Philadelphia property where they thought 10 kilograms of cqc

734 N.E.2d 63 (2000) 315 Ill. App.3d 387 248 Ill.Dec. 355 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Santos FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1-98-2036. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Sixth Division. July 14, 2000. *64 Office of the State Appellate Defe

SIXTH DIVISION July 14, 2000 No. 1-98-2036 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SANTOS FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. ) <

CLARK, Senior Circuit Judge: In this case, plaintiff-appellant William D. Lockard alleged that he was denied credit *1262 because of outstanding debts on his credit report that he did not owe. He brought this suit in state court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681, and st

131 N.J. 176 (1993) 619 A.2d 1208 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JOHN MARTINI, SR., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. The Supreme Court of New Jersey. Argued May 5, 1992. Decided February 9, 1993. *190 Mark H. Friedman and William B. Smith, Assistant Deputy Public Defenders, argued the caus