Cases

Voto particular disidente emitido por la Juez Asociada Señora Rodríguez Rodríguez. Cuando lo que importa es el poder por el poder mismo, eventualmente se tendrá que recurrir a la coacción para conservarlo. Y la coacción cruda a la larga genera mayor erosión de la legitimidad. Ello conduce inevitablemente a una gran sole-dad. La soledad del poder a secas.(1) La cont

PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s decision denying appellant’s claim for interest on the medical expenses portion of her personal injury claim. We have previously held that interest is not compensable on the elements of dam*868age recoverable in personal injury actions. United Services Auto. Ass’n v. Strasser, 530 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 4t

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-10385 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:14-cr-01466- JJT-1 DENISE ROBERTSON, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Distr

614 So.2d 498 (1993) Denise ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. Martin M. RICE, et al., Respondents. No. 79635. Supreme Court of Florida. March 4, 1993. *499 Mark R. McCollem of Chidnese & McCollem, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner. Michael D. Gelety of the Law Offices of DeCresare & Salerno, Fort Lauderdale, for respondents.<

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS <

KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge, concurring in the result: Because the evidence in this case justified a wilful blindness instruction, and the instruction’s form (to which no objection was made below) was not plainly erroneous, I would affirm Heredia’s conviction. But the majority errs in concluding that motivation to avoid criminal responsibility need not be an element of a wilful blindness instruction.<

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge, dissenting: If ever there was a case where a Jewell instruction was proper, this is surely it. This is a much stronger case than Jewell itself, or any of our other deliberate ignorance cases, because we have here what *831we almost never get — defendant’s admission that her suspicions were aroused and eventuall

481 F.3d 1188 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Carmen Denise HEREDIA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 03-10585. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted December 12, 2006. Filed April 2, 2007. Wanda K. Day, Tucson, AZ; Jeffrey T. Green, Eric A. Shumsky, Eam

AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed May 4, 2022 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00215-CV MARSHA DENISE DILLON, BENEFICIARY, ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF BASKIN J. CULPEPPER AND MARSHA DILLON, INDIVIDUALLY, Appellant V. KIMBERLY KING, Appellee On Appeal from the

Diana Krell v. Petrina Denise Smith, Temporary Administrator of the Estate of Chad Smith, Deceased COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-02-417-CV DIA

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Marco Antonio Ramirez-Lopez rais*413es arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Govern

EDWARD S. SMITH, Senior Circuit Judge: Arcángel Alvarado (“Alvarado”) filed a discrimination claim against the President and the Board of Trustees of Montgomery Community College (“the College”). Alvarado alleges that the College discriminated against him when they failed to promote him to a full-time staff position. Instead, the College promoted another man and Alvarado was subsequently terminated. He brought suit under Title

EN EL TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE PUERTO RICO María del C. Alvarado Pacheco y otros Peticionarios v. Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico y otros Recurridos ___________________________ Monsita Denise Otero Ruiz y otros CERTIFICACIÓN Peticionarios 2013 TSPR 64 v. 188 DPR ____ Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico y otros Recurridos __________

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL VII Certiorari EVA A. MELÉNDEZ procedente del ALVARADO, JOSÉCARLOS Tribunal de ORTIZ GARCÍA, JOE Primera Instancia, PÉREZ AYALA Y OTROS Sala Superior de

People v Davis (2024 NY Slip Op 04984) People v Davis 2024 NY Slip Op 04984 Decided on October 9, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. <

928 F.2d 118 55 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 591,56 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40,657, 66 Ed. Law Rep. 554 Arcangel ALVARADO, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MONTGOMERY COMMUNITY COLLEGE; RaulParilla, Defendants-Appellants.Arcangel ALVARADO, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MONTGOMERY COMMUNITY COLLEGE; RaulParilla, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 89-3314, 89-33

Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 1, 2022. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00652-CV UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant V. RUBY LEE ABBOTT; HESTER ADAMS; CLARENCE ALLEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF EDNA LEE BASS (DECEASED); LINDA ALLEN; LARRY ALLEN; MARSHA ALLEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATI

GMAT Legal Title Trust 2014-1 v Kator (2023 NY Slip Op 00990) GMAT Legal Title Trust 2014-1 v Kator 2023 NY Slip Op 00990 Decided on February 22, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pu

Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Stewart (2023 NY Slip Op 02487) Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Stewart 2023 NY Slip Op 02487 Decided on May 10, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary L

OPINION VIGIL, Chief Judge. {1} The question presented in this case is whether an emergency medical technician (EMT) is authorized to draw blood for the purpose of determining its alcohol or drug content under the Implied Consent Act, NMSA 1978, Sections 66-8-105 to -112, (1978, as amended through 2015). We conclude no