Cases

*600MEMORANDUM * Carl- Chester was convicted of three counts of possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance (cocaine base) in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(A)(iii). The district court sentenced him to twenty-two years imprisonment. Chester now appeals his conviction and sentence.

*600MEMORANDUM * Carl- Chester was convicted of three counts of possession with intent to distribute and distribution of a controlled substance (cocaine base) in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(l)(A)(iii). The district court sentenced him to twenty-two years imprisonment. Chester now appeals his conviction and sentence.

842 F.Supp. 147 (1994) John I. SMITH, Patricia N. Smith, Co-Administrators of the Estate of Patricia Marie Smith, Deceased and, as Parents and Natural Guardians of Johnathon Smith, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF CHESTER, Chester-Upland School District, Chester-Upland Board of School Directors, City of Chester Police Department, Defendants. No. 93-CV-5891. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOYNER, District Judge. Before the Court is the motion of plaintiffs for default judgment against defendants City of Chester and City of Chester Police Department pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs request that the Court enter default judgment against defendants because they failed to answer the complaint within twenty days after service as

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOYNER, District Judge. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59, plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s previous decision entered January 5,1994, granting defendants’ Chester-Upland School District and Chester-Upland Board of School Directors motion to dismiss, 842 F.Supp. 147. Because plaintiffs have done nothing more than disagree with t

OPINION BY PELLEGRINI, J.: The Appellants, Stacey Smith, Drew J. Baum, Ginamarie Ellis, Theresa Agostinelli, Steve Cocozza, Ellen Luongo, Steven Luongo, Maryann D. Furlong, Richard B. Kerns, William Pascale, the Republican Committee of Chester Heights, and the Committee for the Future of Chester Heights, seek review of the orders entered on June 15, 2018, in the Court of Common Pleas

2017 WI 22 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2015AP207 COMPLETE TITLE: Scott Smith, Plaintiff-Respondent-Cross-Appellant, Alpha Cargo Technology, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Greg Kleynerman, Defendant-Appellant-Cross

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. Chester Boyce, a prisoner incarcerated at the Cook County Department of Corrections (“CCDOC”), filed a pro se complaint against Lieutenants Jeffrey Malek and Leroy Moore, as well as the Executive Director of CCDOC (“Executive Director”) and other individuals. Proceeding under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Mr. Boyce alleged that the defendants violated his Eighth Amend

677 S.E.2d 128 (2009) CHESTER et al. v. SMITH. No. S09A0176. Supreme Court of Georgia. May 18, 2009. *129 Bryant & Oakes, Craig S. Oakes, Suwanee, for appellants. Caudell & Hotard, T. Gabriel Hotard, Jr., Cornelia, for appellee. MELTON, Justice. Phil and Mary Chester (hereinafter collectively "Chester

OPINION BY SENIOR JUDGE COLINS Bernard Zalman and Sandra Zalman, who are the designated Appellants (collectively Appellants), and the City of Chester 1 , cross-appeal from an order issued on November 9, 2015 by the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County (Trial Court) quieting title to a portion of Y

813 A.2d 20 (2002) VILLAGE CHARTER SCHOOL, Petitioner, v. CHESTER UPLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT; Board of Control, Chester Upland School District; and Charles B. Zogby, Secretary of the Department of Education, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Respondents. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued September 11, 2002. Decided December 16, 2002. Reconsideration/Reargument

OPINION BY STABILE, J.: *775 Appellant, Barry M. Rothman, Esquire, appeals from an order of the Chester County Court of Common Pleas directing him to distribute $19,277.76 held in Appellant's escrow account to Evergreen Management Group, Inc. ("Evergreen"). Appellant, who represented Evergr

OPINION AND ORDER KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge: In this multi-defendant case, the Government seeks a protective order governing the discovery materials it has produced and will be producing. Three of six Defendants oppose the Government’s Application. For the reasons discussed herein, the Government’s Application is granted, though with some modifications. I. Backgr

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2019-CA-01509-COA CONSOLIDATED WITH NO. 2016-CA-00672-COA TIFFANY SMITH GOSSETT APPELLANT v. CHESTER L. GOSSETT IV APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/28/2019 TRIAL JUDGE:

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT J. DANIEL BREEN, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff, James E. Smith, brought this action against Defendant, the Chester County Board of Education (“CCBOE”),1 on July 15, 2015, alleging a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (D.E. 1.) Plaintiff claims that

751 F.Supp. 1052 (1990) Lisa M. FREY, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Charles M. Frey, Deceased, Plaintiff, v. CHESTER E. SMITH & SONS, INC., Defendant. CHESTER E. SMITH & SONS, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, v. FAHS-ROLSTON PAVING CORP., Third-Party Defendant. No. 88-CV-498. United States District Court, N.D. New York. November 28, 1990.</

GROSS, J. The primary question presented in this case is as follows: After a judgment debt- or files a Chapter 727 assignment for the benefit of creditors, may a judgment creditor separately pursue a Chapter 726 claim that the judgment debtor fraudulently transferred assets to a third party before making the Chapter 727 assignment? In *1050these circumstances, we h

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in refusing to award plaintiff a distributive share of defendant’s enhanced earning capacity, resulting from the bachelor’s degree in the Technology Computer Science Program at Rochester Institute of Technology defendant earned during the marriage (see, DiCaprio v DiCaprio, 162 AD2d 944, lv denied

PAUL M. SPINDEN, Judge. When the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission refused to pay Chester Bross Construction Company and C.B. Equipment, Inc.,1 for pavement edge treatment that Bross constructed on a highway project, Bross sued the commission for breach of contract. The circuit court granted summary judgment for the commission, and Bross appeals. We affirm the circuit court’s summary

[Cite as State v. Chester, 2021-Ohio-918.] COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES: : : Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. John W.