Cases

OSCN Found Document:FUGATE v. STITT Previous Case Top Of Index This Point in Index Citationize Next Case Print Only

PER CURIAM. Appellee NYT Management Services, Inc. (the “Herald-Tribune”) seeks the disclosure of Florida teachers’ social security numbers through public records requests. We agree with appellants Florida Department of Education and its Commissioner that the trial court erred by requiring the disclosure. I. Background In June 2003, the Herald-Tribune first requested data

OPINION AND ORDER JOAN HUMPHREY LEFKOW, United States District Judge Velma Cooksey filed a two-count complaint against the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (“CPS”) alleging age discrimination and retaliation while employed as principal of Wadsworth School (“Wadsworth”), in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“the ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621

OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge. This case involves a challenge to the widening from two lanes to four lanes of a road in Eufaula, Alabama’s historic district. The plaintiffs are the City of Eufaula and three historic preservation groups,1 and the defendants are the Alabama Department of Transportation and its director, as well as the Federal

ORDER CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, District Judge. This case is before the Court on the Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief (Doc. No. 1) filed by Richard E. Lynch. Pursuant to the instructions of the Court, Respondents filed a Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No. 18). Thereafter, Petitioner filed a Reply to the Response (Doc. No. 23). As discussed hereinafter, the habeas petiti

*782ORDER LOUISE W. FLANAGAN, District Judge. This matter comes before the court on defendants’ motion to dismiss (DE 25).1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. entered a memorandum and recommendation (“M & R”) wherein it is rec

791 F.2d 736 1 Indiv.Empl.Rts.Cas. 603 Clifford D. FUGATE and Robert Dennis Barnhart, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.PHOENIX CIVIL SERVICE BOARD; Carolyn Carr Smith, JaneClark, Harold Klaiber, and Snead Parker, members,individually and in official capacities; Lawrence Wetzel,Chief of Police for the City of Phoenix Police Department;and City of Phoenix, a municipal corporation, Defendants-Appellees.</

WALLACE, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur generally in the majority opinion. I agree that the officers’ extramarital relationships with the two prostitutes are not protected by the constitutional right of privacy. I further agree that the officers have failed to meet their legal burden under Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 96 S.Ct. 1440, 47 L.Ed.2d 708 (1976), of showing the absence of a rationa

654 F.Supp.2d 61 (2009) Rosezola SELLERS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE and Robert M. Gates, Secretary of the Department of Defense, Defendants. C.A. No. 05-381 S. United States District Court, D. Rhode Island. July 16, 2009. *65 Louise A. Herman, Patricia E. Andrews, Providence, RI, for Plaintiff. Ly T

MEMORANDUM OPINION ELLEN LIPTON HOLLANDER, District Judge. Ivory C. Weathersbee, plaintiff,1 a firefighter in Baltimore City, has sued the Baltimore City Fire Department (“BCFD”); its Chief, James S. Clack; and the Mayor & City Council of Baltimore (“City”), defendants, asserting four claims: employment discrimination on the basis of race, in violation of Title VII of the Ci

OPINION BREWSTER, District Judge. This suit is brought by Francis and Roberta Fugate, husband and wife, for refund of income taxes for the year 1961 in the sum of $1,044.49, with statutory interest. The question presented is whether the expenditure for a European trip taken by taxpayers in 1961 was properly deductible as expense for education under the 1954 Code and Treasury Regulation

VINSON, District Judge, dissenting: I respectfully dissent. My disagreement with the majority exists on three levels. First, factually, I do not agree with the majority that Schuster’s statement to Hart that “honesty wouldn’t hurt” constitutes a nullification of Hart’s Miranda warning and waiver, considering, as we must, the totality of the circumstances. Second, as a matter of law, there is not clearl

151 F.Supp.2d 661 (2001) NORTH CAROLINA ALLIANCE FOR TRANSPORTATION REFORM, INC.; and Friends of Forsyth County, an unincorporated association; Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; Rodney E. Slater, Secretary of United States Department of Transportation; Federal Highway Administration; Kenneth R. Wykle, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration; Nicholas L. Graf, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration; N

597 N.E.2d 1327 (1992) BETHLEHEM STEEL Corporation, Petitioner, v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF STATE REVENUE, Respondent. No. 49T05-8912-TA-00070. Tax Court of Indiana. August 19, 1992. *1328 Michael J. Rusnak, Glenn M. Sermersheim, Locke Reynolds Boyd & Weisell, Indianapolis, for petitioner. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., J

692 F.2d 557 Antonio A. ANDRADE, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.CITY OF PHOENIX and Lawrence Wetzel, Defendants-Appellees.Clifford D. FUGATE and Robert Dennis Barnhart, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.PHOENIX CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 80-5426, 81-5150. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 12, 1981.De

34 P.3d 673 (2001) 177 Or. App. 555 In the Matter of Ray Martin Deford, a Minor Child. STATE ex rel JUVENILE DEPARTMENT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, Respondent, v. Ray Martin DEFORD, Appellant. J96-0379; A99706 Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted March 8, 2000. Decided October 31, 2001.

MEMORANDUM OPINION GORDON, Chief Judge. This is an action brought by plaintiff for judicial review of the dismissal by the defendant of his claim for benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). As hereinafter explained, the plaintiff’s current application for social security benefits was dismissed on the grounds of res judicata. Therefore, defendant co

Opinion filed September 19, 2024 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-23-00011-CR __________ CIRINO COSME, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pint

GARWOOD, Circuit Judge: This is yet another chapter in the ongoing battle between the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) and Mr. W Fireworks, Inc. (Mr. W) over the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. (FLSA), to the operators of Mr. W’s roadside fireworks stands. The facts and earlier proceedings are set forth in detail in our opini

ORDER FREDERICK J. KAPALA, District Judge. Defendants’ motion to dismiss [38] is granted in part and denied in part. The official capacity claims are all dismissed. Counts I and II are dismissed against the individual defendants. Counts I and II are dismissed against NIU as to the hostile work environment claims. Count III is dismissed against defendants Hart, Cliffe, and Cunningham. Counts IV-