Cases

*488DAVIS, Justice. Several Marshall County Citizen Taxpayers appeal an order dismissing their legal action seeking a declaratory judgment and writ of mandamus. In dismissing the case, the Circuit Court of Marshall County concluded that county boards of education have the authority to hire legal counsel under W. Va.Code § 18-5-18(1). The Marshall County Citizen

456 Mass. 337 (2010) COMMONWEALTH v. TINA BOE.[1] SJC-10443. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. January 5, 2010. March 25, 2010. Present: MARSHALL, C.J., IRELAND, SPINA, COWIN, CORDY, BOTSFORD, & GANTS, JJ. James J. Arguin, Assistant Attorney General, for the Commonwealth. Jonathan P. Harwell

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ROBERT W. GETTLEMAN, District Judge. On November 6, 2012, plaintiffs filed a three-count complaint against defendants The Boeing Company (“Boeing”) and Mach II Maintenance Corporation (“Mach II”) in the Circuit Court of Cook Count, Illinois, alleging that they suffered personal injuries while traveling as passengers aboard an aircraft from Newark, New Jersey, to Warsaw,

856 F.Supp. 604 (1994) Mary ANDERSON, Boeing Company Employee Retirement Plan and Gregg N. Wicks, Plaintiffs, v. Clifford Warren MARSHALL, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 93-1258-MLB. United States District Court, D. Kansas. June 2, 1994. Stephen M. Kerwick, Foulston & Siefkin, Wichita, KS, for plaintiffs. John B. Gilliam, Klenda, Mitchell, Austerman & Zuerche

578 P.2d 1247 (1978) 282 Or. 387 STATE of Oregon ex rel. Jason Boe, Victor Atiyeh, Lenn L. Hannon, Fred W. Heard, Kenneth Jernstedt, Anthony Meeker, E.D. Potts, John Powell and Blaine Whipple, Plaintiffs-Relators, v. Robert W. STRAUB, Governor of the State of Oregon, Defendant. Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc. Decided May 23, 1978. Argued and Submitted

REVISED, August 1, 1997 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 96-31228 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, VERSUS JOHN BOE Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States D

DUHÉ, Circuit Judge: John Boe appeals the district court’s denial of his post-conviction motion for reduction of sentence. For reasons that follow, we vacate and remand for resentencing. BACKGROUND Appellant John Boe pleaded guilty to manufacturing marijuana within 1,000 feet of a school, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and

550 F.3d 1251 (2008) In re Bryan K. MARSHALL and Julie M. Marshall, Debtors. Linda S. Parks, Trustee, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FIA Card Services, N.A., Successor in interest to MBNA Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 08-3080. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. December 30, 2008. *1253 Gaye B. Tibbets (with Jennif

SAUNDERS, Judge. |,This case is before us on appeal from three separate judgments against Finley Hilliard (hereafter “Appellant”) relative to his status as co-trustee of the Eleanor Pierce (Marshall) Stevens Living Trust (hereafter “the Trust”) and an application for supervisory writ relative to a denial of Appellant’s motion for new trial. For the following reasons, we dismiss the appeals in part, affirm the 2013 judgment,

SUMMARY ORDER Appellant Valorie Marshall, pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing her claims against the New York City Board of Elections (“BOE”) of race, sex, and religious discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review. We review a

SUMMARY ORDER Appellant Valorie Marshall, pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing her claims against the New York City Board of Elections (“BOE”) of race, sex, and religious discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review. We review a

388 P.2d 372 (1963) The STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Vernon BOE, Defendant and Appellant. No. 10576. Supreme Court of Montana. Submitted October 9, 1963. Decided December 20, 1963. *373 Jess L. Angstman (argued), Havre, for appellant. Dola N. Wilson, Jr. (argued), Fort Benton, Forrest H.

839 F.2d 933 MARSHALL, Douglas W., Appellee,v.LANSING, Douglas T., Superintendent, Allenwood Prison Camp,Montgomery, Pa., United States Parole Commission, Webb,William H. Jr., Chief Probation Officer, District ofColumbia, Kramer, Lon, U.S. Probation Officer, District ofColumbia, Appellants. No. 86-5737. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit.

OPINION OF THE COURT BECKER, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal by the United States Parole Commission from a grant of a writ *936of habeas corpus to a federal prisoner whose parole release guidelines were found by the district court to have been improperly determined.1 The district court granted the writ after two succes

62 Wn. App. 251 (1991) 813 P.2d 1269 SUZETTE MARSHALL, ET AL, Appellants, v. WESTERN AIR LINES, INC., ET AL, Respondents. No. 25829-0-I. The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One. August 5, 1991. As amended by order September 16, 1991. *252 Howard M. Goodfriend, for appellant

56 Wn. App. 437 (1989) 783 P.2d 1124 PHILIP HERZOG, ET AL, Respondents, v. FOSTER & MARSHALL, INC., ET AL, Appellants. No. 24127-3-I. The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One. December 27, 1989. Daniel J. Riviera, Peter S. Ehrlichman, Stellman Keehnel, and Foster, Pepper & Shefelman, for appellants.

77 N.W.2d 1 (1956) Henry A. BOE, Plaintiff, v. Joe FOSS, Governor of the State of South Dakota; Morris G. Hallock, Secretary of Finance of the State of South Dakota; The Board of Regents of Education of the State of South Dakota; Frank Gellerman, Byron Helgerson, Laurence W. Robinson, Eric Heidepreim, Lem Overpeck, Lucille H. Dory, and Harry J. Eggen, all being members of and constituting the Board of Education of the State of South Dakota, Defen

OPINION OF THE COURT ADAMS, Circuit Judge. This appeal requires us to decide whether the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has properly authorized its compliance officers to seek ex parte inspection warrants in order to inspect industrial establishments for alleged health and safety violations. The problem is sharpened by the fact that Supreme Court dictum noting that such auth

486 F.Supp. 1168 (1980) Ruth PANTER et al., Richard Weiss, Alan Markovitz, Paul Kriendler, David H. Greenstein, Ronald Egnor, William Saltiel et al., Michael DeBartolo, Joseph Berke, Plaintiffs, v. MARSHALL FIELD & COMPANY et al., Defendants. Nos. 78 C 537, 78 C 620, 78 C 1179, 78 C 1141, 78 C 1700, 78 C 2556, 78 C 2067, 78 C 2373 and 78 C 2480. United States District Court, N. D. Illinois, E. D.</

Opinion for the court** filed by Chief Judge J. SKELLY WRIGHT. *73Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge MacKINNON. J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Chief Judge: In November 1978 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), exercising its authority and responsibility under Section 6 of the Occupational Safe