Cases

People v Garner (2021 NY Slip Op 05586) People v Garner 2021 NY Slip Op 05586 Decided on October 13, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law

SOTOMAYOR, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-appellants Verena Rivera-Powell, who seeks to be a candidate for *461 judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York, and voters who support her candidacy (the “voter-plaintiffs”) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) appeal from an October 4, 2006 order of the United S

People v Permenter (2022 NY Slip Op 05102) People v Permenter 2022 NY Slip Op 05102 Decided on August 31, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

People v Lehmann (2019 NY Slip Op 02731) People v Lehmann 2019 NY Slip Op 02731 Decided on April 10, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law

People v Castro (2022 NY Slip Op 00874) People v Castro 2022 NY Slip Op 00874 Decided on February 9, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law

TV Tech Mgrs., Inc. v Cohen (2024 NY Slip Op 02553) TV Tech Mgrs., Inc. v Cohen 2024 NY Slip Op 02553 Decided on May 8, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law §

Matter of Nijuel J. (2019 NY Slip Op 00876) Matter of Nijuel J. 2019 NY Slip Op 00876 Decided on February 6, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judici

OPINION ON DEBTOR’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Edward J. Coleman, III, Judge In 2009, the plaintiffs Gray Tybee II, LLC (“Tybee IP), Gray Tybee III, LLC (“Gray Tybee III”), Pannell Properties II, LLC (“Pannell II”), and Pannell Properties III, LLC (“Pannell III”) (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) entered into a real estate transaction with the Debtor1 which included a “buy-back”

Appellate Case: 24-9004 Document: 46-1 Date Filed: 08/22/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 22, 2025

On motion of F. Aaron Negangard, Chief Deputy Attorney General of the State of Indiana, and Cathleen M. Shrader, President of the State Board of Law Examiners, both members of the Bar of this Court, each applicant named in Exhibit A is by Order of this Court now duly sworn and admitted to practice as an attorney at law, and their respective names are ordered entered upon the Roll of Attorneys of this Court in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Cou

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA September 2023 Term FILED _______________ November 8, 2023 No. 22-0234 released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK

MANION, Circuit Judge, dissenting. The railroad plaintiffs have sought a tax refund on the ground that stock options they provided to their employees aren’t taxable as “compensation” under the Rail*493road Retirement Tax Act. Compensation under the Act is defined as “any form of money remuneration paid to an individual for services rendered as a

278 F.Supp.2d 772 (2003) NEW ORLEANS ASSETS, L.L.C. v. CARL E. WOODWARD, et al. No. Civ.A. 01-2171. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. February 5, 2003. *773 Richard P. Richter, James M. Garner, Martha Y. Curtis, Emma E. Daschbach, Sher Garner Cahill Richter, Klein McAlister & Hilbert, LLC, New Orleans, LA, Christo

PER CURIAM: This case concerns whether the Railroad Retirement Tax Act (RRTA) imposes a tax on (1) a railroad's stock transfers to its employees and (2) a railroad's provision of relocation benefits to its employees. CSX Corporation (CSX) maintains that neither is taxable and, accordingly, seeks a refund of federal employment taxes paid in 2009

SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ Case No. 6D23-492 Lower Tribunal No. 20-CA-002396 _____________________________ PEOPLE’S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. PAUL GUNSSER,

TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge: I. Yellowfin Yachts, Inc. is a manufacturer of high-end fishing boats. Since 2000, Yellowfin has produced predominantly "center-consoled, open-fisherman styled boats" ranging between twenty-one and forty-two feet. According to Yellowfin, these boats all have the same "swept" sheer line, meaning a gently sloped "s"-shaped line that runs upwar

323 B.R. 21 (2005) In re Rosa M. PIERCE, Debtor. Dennis J. Pierce, Plaintiff, v. Rosa M. Pierce, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 03-32914(LMW), Adversary No. 03-3124. United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut. March 14, 2005. *22 *23 Bruce A. Chamberlain, Esq., New London, CT, for Plaintiff

KING, Circuit Judge: For the 2007 tax year, PBBM Rose Hill, Ltd., claimed a charitable contribution deduction of $15,160,000 for its donation of a conservation easement to the North American Land Trust. Subsequently, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a final partnership administrative adjustment that determined PBBM Rose Hill, Ltd., was not entitled to the deduction and asse

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: Treating the petition for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing, the petition for rehearing is GRANTED. We WITHDRAW our earlier opinion, BNSF Railway Company v. United States, 1

¶ 1. Robinson, J. This case involves a father’s obligation to pay college tuition for his daughters pursuant to a Pennsylvania child-support order. Father appeals the trial-court order requiring him to pay specified college-tuition costs for his two daughters. We affirm. ¶2. The underlying facts are not in substantial dispute. The parties, father Frank A. Scopetti, Jr., and mother Kimberley Ma