Cases

BY THE PANEL: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255(h) and 2244(b)(3)(A), Sheldon Watt has filed an application seeking an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive motion to vacate, set aside, *1289 or correct his federal sentence, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Such authorization may b

*CJP Supp. 47Opinion BONNER, Chairperson. This disciplinary matter concerns Judge Christopher J. Sheldon, a judge of the Riverside County Superior Court. The commission issues this public admonishment based on its conclusion that Judge Sheldon committed conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into dis

Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge: The plaintiffs, both Palestinian nationals and Palestinian Americans, claim the defendants, pro-Israeli American individuals and entities, are conspiring to expel all non-Jews from territory whose sovereignty is in dispute. 1 They sued in federal district court, pressi

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA ________________________________ Case No. 5D2023-1668 LT Case No. 2022-CT-003363 ________________________________ STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant, v. CHRISTOPHER JOHN SHELDON, JR., Appellee. _______________________________ On appeal from the County Court for Hernando County. Kurt E. Hitzemann, Judge.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 410 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 411 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT

[PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-14675-J ________________________ IN RE: SHELDON DEAN CHRISTOPHER WATT,

PHILIP H. BRANDT, Bankruptcy Judge. BancBoston Mortgage Corporation objects to confirmation2 on the ground that the Debtors’ plan does not include “anti-Peters ” language. The reference is to In re Peters, 184 B.R. 799 (9th Cir. BAP 1995), a Chapter 13 (of the Bankruptcy Code: 11 U.S.C.3) ease in which the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel hel

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 75 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 76 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DI

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JEFFERY J. SHELDON and ANDRAS ) KONYA, M.D., PH.D., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2017-0838-MTZ ) PINTO TECHNOLOGY VENTURES, L.P., ) PINTO TV ANNEX FUND, L.P., PTV ) SCIENCES II, L.P., RIVERVEST VENTURE ) FUND

Tracy Christopher, Justice, dissenting. When deciding whether claims fall within the scope of a forum-selection clause, a reviewing court should engage in a “common-sense examination of the substance of the claims.” See In re Int’l Profit Assocs., Inc., 274 S.W.3d 672, 677 (Tex.2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). The majority misapplies this standard by looking primarily at the label of the claims, r

OPINION OF THE COURT GARTH, Circuit Judge: Henry J. Faragalli, Jr. (“Faragalli”) appeals from an order of the district court which granted the petition of appellees PaineWebber Incorporated, Sheldon Chaiken, Lee H. Lovejoy, Anthony Presogna and Kevin Collins (collectively, “PaineWebber”) to compel arbitration. The principal questions on appeal are two

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 819 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 820 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT

People v Sheldon O. (2019 NY Slip Op 01430) People v Sheldon O. 2019 NY Slip Op 01430 Decided on February 27, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judic

*677 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION WILLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS, District Judge. THIS IS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification [DE 48] filed on September 24, 2008. The Court has carefully considered the Motion, the Defendant’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2020-KA-01059-COA CHRISTOPHER A. GROVES A/K/A APPELLANT CHRISTOPHER GROVES v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/25/2020 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARK SHELDON DUNCAN COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LEAKE COUNTY CIRCUI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JEFFERY J. SHELDON and ANDRAS § KONYA, M.D., PH.D., § § Plaintiffs-Below, § No. 81, 2019 Appellants, § § v. § Court Below: Court of Chancery § of the State of Delaware PINTO TECHNOLOGY VENTURES, § L.P., PINTO TV ANNEX FUND, L.P

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2020-KA-00150-COA CHRISTOPHER LOWELL JONES A/K/A APPELLANT CHRISTOPHER JONES A/K/A CHRISTOPHER L. JONES v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/10/2020 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARK SHELDON DUNCAN COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2022-CA-00410-COA CHRISTA STAPLES CANNON APPELLANT v. CHRISTOPHER CANNON APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/15/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. RHEA HUDSON SHELDON COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LAMAR COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATT

PER CURIAM: Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Michael B. Mukasey, Judge) dismissing his complaint against an officer of plaintiffs former tenant, PPI Enterprises (U.S.), Inc. (“PPIE”), and three administrators in insolvency (appointed by a British court) of Polly Peek International Pie (“Polly Peck”), a Bri

Justice Guzman delivered the opinion of the Court. Subject to public-policy constraints, forum-selection clauses are generally enforceable in Texas.1 Though enforceability is not the concern it once was,2 courts are frequently confronted with disagreements about the specific claims encompassed and the extent to which nonsignatories may resist or enforce