Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION Elizabeth K. Dillon, United States District Judge Pending before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff John Doe1 seeks summary judgment in his *716favor as to liability on the sole remaining claim in his amended complaint: a claim that defendants deprived him of a property right—

MEMORANDUM OPINION Elizabeth K. Dillon, United States District Judge In August 2014, plaintiff “John Doe”1 enrolled as a freshman at James Madison University (JMU or University)-, a public institution, in Harrisonburg, Virginia; During his first week on campus, he met another freshman, “Jane Roe,”2 and the two had sex. A couple of months later, Roe

MEMORANDUM OPINION Elizabeth K. Dillon, United States District Judge Plaintiff moves for leave to proceed under the pseudonym “John Doe.” For the following reasons, the court holds that his privacy interest outweighs the presumption of openness in judicial proceedings. It will thus grant the motion and enter a protective order prohibiting the use of his real name. I. BACKGROUND

In sum, Alger has failed to carry his burden to show that his consecutive sentences unfairly exaggerate the criminality of his conduct. DECISION By contacting two protected parties in violation of the no-contact provisions of an OFP, Alger committed crimes against multiple victims. Therefore, even though the crimes were committed during a single behavioral incident,

People v Alger (2022 NY Slip Op 03545) People v Alger 2022 NY Slip Op 03545 Decided on June 2, 2022 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.<

People v Alger (2022 NY Slip Op 03545) People v Alger 2022 NY Slip Op 03545 Decided on June 2, 2022 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

McKEE, Circuit Judge. This appeal requires us to decide whether the District Court correctly refused to enjoin the defendant School District from allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that are consistent with the students' gender identities as opposed to the sex they were determined to have at birth. The plaintiffs-a group of high school students who identify

STARK, J. ¶ 1. This case requires us to determine whether Wis. Stat. § 907.02(1),1 which adopted the reliability standard for expert testimony set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), applies to Michael Alger's petitions for discharge from a Wis. Stat. ch. 980 commitment. We conclude that it does not. Section 907.02(1) applies to actions and special proc

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1058 Doc: 54 Filed: 10/26/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-1058 JOHN DOE, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JANE DOE, Defendant – Appellee.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MELVIN S. HOFFMAN, Bankruptcy Judge. Before me is the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The facts underlying this matter are largely undisputed. On February 23, 2006 James and Deborah Alger refinanced the mortgage on their *521home in Pepperell, Massachusetts with a $250,000 loa

CHIEF JUSTICE BALES, opinion of the Court: ¶ 1 We hold that a patient owes a duty of reasonable care to a caregiver allegedly injured by the patient’s actions, thereby making the patient potentially liable for negligence. We further hold that the negligence claim, which involves an in-home caregiver hired by the Arizona Department of Economic Security (“DES”

OPINION ECKERSTROM, Chief Judge: ¶ 1 Plaintiff/appellant Jeanette Sanders appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant/appellee Francis Alger. For the following reasons, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Factual a

(2008) Loretta HILFIGER, Plaintiff, v. Mark ALGER, Steuben County Executive of Steuben County Department of Social Services, et al., Defendants. No. 05-CV-6040L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. October 6, 2008. DECISION AND ORDER DAVID G. LARIMER, District Judge. This case, involving an exceptionally convoluted administrat

145 P.3d 12 (2006) STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Aaron R. ALGER, Appellant. No. 93,587. Supreme Court of Kansas. October 27, 2006. *13 Patrick H. Dunn, Kansas Appellate Defender, argued the cause, and Virginia A. Girard-Brady, of the Kansas Appellate Defender Office, was with him on the brief for appellant. Ruth A. Ritthal

Crew III, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (LaBuda, J.), rendered August 5, 2004, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree. In March 2003, defendant was arrested on an information charging him with several offenses arising out of his sexual contact with a 10-year-old female during 1998. Defendant r

590 S.E.2d 563 (2004) 267 Va. 255 Karyn Lynn ALGER v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 030848. Supreme Court of Virginia. January 16, 2004. *564 S. Jane Chittom, Appellate Defender, for appellant. Steven A. Witmer, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Jerry W. Kilgore, Atty. Gen., on brief), for appellee. P

By Judge John J. McGrath, Jr. This matter is before the Court on defendant’s Motion to Suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. The defendant is charged with possession of one or more firearms after he had been convicted of one or more felonies. The relevant facts of the case are as follows. On April 21,2004, the Page County Sheriffs Office responded to an emergency call and found Sandra Faye

578 S.E.2d 51 (2003) 40 Va. App. 89 Karen Lynn ALGER v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 0690-02-4. Court of Appeals of Virginia, Alexandria. March 18, 2003. *52 S. Jane Chittom, Appellate Defender, (Public Defender Commission, on briefs), for appellant. Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney Gene

228 S.W.3d 161 (2007) BRINSON FORD, INC., Individually and d/b/a Brinson Ford Lincoln Mercury, Petitioner, v. Connie W. ALGER, Respondent. No. 05-0722. Supreme Court of Texas. June 15, 2007. Christopher J. Pruitt, John R. Lively Jr., Brown Pruitt Peterson & Wambsganss, P.C., Fort Worth, for Petitioner. Carl D. Tillery, Tillery & Tillery, Dallas, for R

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice, dissenting. People fall down. They are injured. Who pays? The critical question in this appeal of a summary judgment is: What is it that the owner or occupier of the premises must know before the owner may be held liable for the injuries to an invitee onto the premises? This was the question that was the focus of a good portion of the oral arguments in this appeal.