Cases

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, United States District Judge THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Verified Petition for the Return of Minor Child Pursuant to International Treaty and Federal Statute and Request for Issuance of Show Cause Order (Doc. 1; Verified Pétition), filed on October 26, 2016. Petitioner filed the Verified Petition pursuant to The Convention on the Civil Aspects of International

MEMORANDUM OPINION (May 27, 2005) This matter came before the Court for a suppression hearing on January 4, 2005. The People of the Virgin Islands appeared through the Office of the Virgin Islands Department of Justice, Karen McDowell, Esq., Assistant Attorney General. The Defendant, Jahfari Samuel, appeared and was represented by The Office of the Territorial Public Defender, Debra S. Watlington, Esq.

SOBELOFF, Circuit Judge: This is the third mandamus proceeding generated in this court by a patent dis*88pute pending in the District Court between Firestone Tire and Rubber Company and McCreary Tire and Rubber Company, plaintiffs, against the General Tire and Rubber Company, defendant. It is a petition for a writ of mandamus to disqualify Judge R. Dorsey Watkins under

Fecteau, Francis R., J. INTRODUCTION The plaintiffs, Audrey S. Serrano, individually and as next friend of Jessica Paskell-Serrano, have brought this action against the defendants, Massachusetts Department of Social Services (“DSS”), DSS employees Deborah Chapman, Susan Billings, Priscilla Hayes, and Kathleen Hazelton (the “DSS defendants”), Hillcrest Educational Centers, Inc. (“Hillcrest”), and H

BY THE COURT: On April 13, 1961, the petitioner, General Tire and Rubber Company, filed a motion to transfer Civil Action No. 12,-932, Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. General Tire & Rubber Co., now pending in the District of Maryland, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. On July 6, 1961, the district court denied the motion without prejudice to renew upon subsequent ch

Cordy, J. There appearing to be no controlling precedent in the decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court, a judge of the *111United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts certified the following question for our consideration:1 “Under the facts and circumstances described in the District Court’s Octo

523 F.Supp. 333 (1981) Helen BROWN, Plaintiff, v. JOINER INTERNATIONAL, INC., and International Harvester Company, Defendants. Civ. A. No. CV680-44. United States District Court, S. D. Georgia, Augusta Division. September 26, 1981. *334 *335 Susan E. Warren, Allen, Brown, Wright & Edenfiel

533 F.Supp. 1211 (1982) Paul F. GIBSON, Plaintiff, v. HOME FOLKS MOBILE HOME PLAZA, INC., Defendant. Civ. A. No. CV181-002. United States District Court, S. D. Georgia, Augusta Division. March 10, 1982. *1212 *1213 Douglas D. Batchelor, Jr., Augusta, Ga., for plaintiff. C. B. Thurmond,

363 F.2d 87 The GENERAL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Petitioner,v.The Honorable R. Dorsey WATKINS, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, Respondent.The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company and McCreary Tire & Rubber Company, Intervenors. No. 10429. United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit. Argued February 7, 1966.

373 F.2d 361 The GENERAL TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Petitioner,v.The Honorable R. Dorsey WATKINS, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, Respondent.The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company, Intervenor. No. 10993. United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit. Argued December 5, 1966. Decided January 11, 1967.

CRAVEN, Circuit Judge (dissenting): William T. Adkins, Donald D. Brown, and Vernie Lee Harris will, I think, be surprised to learn that they are not longshoremen, and astonished to discover that they are not engaged in maritime employment of any kind. If they are not, as my brothers hold, then the Congress has labored prodigiously only to have accomplished nothing at all in its effort to simplify the problems of

253 Minn. 28 (1958) 91 N.W. (2d) 166 CHARLES C. BRANNAN v. GREAT LAKES DREDGE & DOCK COMPANY. No. 37,404. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 20, 1958. *29 William H. DeParcq, Robert E. Anderson, and Robert N. Stone, for appellant. Meagher, Geer, Markham & Anderson and O

Appellant was convicted of libel, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100; hence this appeal. Appellant made a motion to quash the indictment on the ground that it failed to charge an offense, which was overruled; and he assigns this action of the court as error. The charging part of the indictment is as follows: "Scandal is a vulture that dips in dirty pools, by reason of which Joseph Cotulla, Poland's distinguished son, or at times not improperly denominated 'La Salle's Squaw B

Eberly, J. This was, as evidenced by plaintiff’s amended petition, a. proceeding in equity against seventy-eight persons named therein, alleged to be stockholders in the Dunbar Grain Company, a bankrupt corporation, commenced by E. J. Dempster, receiver (E. H. Luikart substituted receiver) of the Dunbar State Bank to recover for the bank and the other creditors of the grain company similarly situated the liability imposed by

529 F.2d 1080 I.T.O. CORPORATION OF BALTIMORE, Employer, and LibertyMutual Insurance Company, Carrier, Petitioners,v.BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent,William T. Adkins, Respondent,International Longshoreman's Association, Amicus Curiae.MARITIME TERMINALS, INC., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.,Petitioners,v.SECRETARY OF LABOR, and Donald D. Brown, Respondents.MARITIME TERMINALS, IN

July 18, 1868, appellants sued the appellees in trespass to try title. September 3, 1888, the appellants amended their petition, upon which the case was tried. The amended petition described the land sued for as "One suerte of land in the city of San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas, known as the Maria Gertrudes de Torres suerte, bounded on the north by Thomas Martinez suerte, west by the Acequia Madre, south by the Fuentes suerte, and east by what was known at the time of the original gra

This case comes to us upon a certificate of dissent from the Court of Civil Appeals for the First District. We take the following statement of the facts of the case from the opinion of the court: "Appellant (Johnson) was the owner of certain lots in the city of Houston, which property was, at that time and at the time of the trial of this cause in the court below, worth about $3000 and was incumbered with a lien to secure an indebtedness of $2000. * * * The appellee, C.A. Elmen,

SANDERSON, J. Counsel for appellant seem to have misapprehended the status of the ease in this court. It stands before us on motion of the respondent to dismiss the appeal upon sundry grounds specified by him in. writing and duly filed under the thirteenth rule of this court, among which is that the transcript shows no service on him of the notice of appeal, and that the appeal Avas not taken in time. The ease has never been sub

By the Court Warner, J. delivering the opinion. This was an action of trespass on the case, for backing the water in the Tussehaw Creek, by means of a dam erected by the defendants, whereby the plaintiff’s mill shoal was overflowed. The plaintiff and the defendants are riparian proprietors, the plaintiff owning the land on one side of the Creek, and the de

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 8 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 9 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT D