Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
13 opinions for “Gildon v. Social Security”
Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.public domain
145 P.3d 1196 (2006) Valerie GILDON and Samuel Gildon, husband and wife and the marital community composed thereof, Respondents, v. SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC., d/b/a Northgate Mall, Petitioner, and "XYZ Corporations 1-5" and "John Does" and "Jane Does Nos. 1-5," and the marital communities composed thereof, Defendants. No. 76292-9. Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc. Argu
Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.public domain
¶1 Madsen, J. Valarie Gildon filed suit against Simon Property Group, Inc., and several fictitious defendants for personal injuries based on negligence and premises liability theories. She did not expressly name the premises owner, Northgate Mall Partnership (Northgate *487Mall Partnership or Partnership), as a defendant. Based on this failure, Simon Prope
Burt v. Department of Correctionspublic domain
C. Johnson, J. ¶1 This case involves a challenge to a public records injunction proceeding under chapter 42.56 RCW, where employees moved to enjoin their employer, the Department of Corrections (DOC), from releasing documents requested under the Public Records Act (PRA). Mr. Allan Parmelee, the requester of these records, was not joined in the action. The trial court enjoined the release of the requested records. Mr. Parmelee fi
Burt v. WASH. STATE DEPT. OF CORRECTIONSpublic domain
231 P.3d 191 (2010) Eric BURT, Gary Edwards, Sherry Hartford, JoAnn Irwin, John Moore, Clifford Pease, David Snell, Harold Snively, Alan Walter, Dustin West, Paul-David Winters, Cheri Sterlin, Laura Coleman, Charles Crow, Richard "Jason" Morgan, Respondents, v. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent, Allan Parmelee, Petitioner. No. 80998-4. Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.<
Riverview Community Group v. Spencer & Livingstonpublic domain
Korsmo, C.J. ¶1 The Riverview Community Group, a collection of adjoining and neighboring property owners acting as a nonprofit corporation, sued its property’s developers for closing the golf course that had been the center of their development and sought to have the golf course reopened. The trial court directed that all of the area’s individual landowners be joined as necessary parties to the litigation under CR 19. The court a
Freestone Capital v. Mka Real Estatepublic domain
230 P.3d 625 (2010) FREESTONE CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P.; Freestone Low Volatility Partners L.P.; Freestone Capital Qualified Partners L.P.; and Freestone Low Volatility Qualified Partners L.P., Respondents, v. MKA REAL ESTATE OPPORTUNITY FUND I, LLC, a California limited liability company; MKA Capital Group Advisors, LLC, a California limited liability company, Michael A. Abraham, an individual; and Jason Sugarman, an individual, Appellants.
Cox, J. ¶1 This declaratory judgment action arises from approximately $30 million in delinquent loans made *650by a group of affiliated Seattle-based limited partnerships. They include Freestone Low Volatility Qualified Partners LP, Freestone Capital Qualified Partners LP, Freestone Low Volatility Partners LP, and Freestone Capital Partners LP (collectively Freestone). M
Custody Of A.n.d.m.public domain
NOTICE: SLIP OPINION (not the court’s final written decision) The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the written opinions that are originally filed by the court. A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential pur
Elliot Ray v. Marc Clementspublic domain
WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge. In Elliot Don Ray’s first federal habeas appeal we found that his constitutional rights were violated when the state introduced out-of-court statements made by individuals who did not testify at his murder trial. But we remanded to give the state the opportunity to assert a defense that Ray’s state post-conviction motion was untimely. Ray v. Boatwright (Ray I), 592 F.3d 793, 798-99 (7th Cir.
In the Matter of the Custody of: SA-Mpublic domain
FILED JUNE 15, 2021 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE In the Matter of the Cus
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON In the Matter of the Dependency of: No. 86090-9-I A.G.L., A.S.L., and L.E.L. DIVISION ONE ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PUBLISH Respondent, State of Washington, Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), moved for publication of the opi
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-20-00379-CV ___________________________ HARRIET NICHOLSON, Appellant V. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWMBS, INC., CWMBS REFORMING LOAN REMIC TRUS
820 F.2d 1245 261 U.S.App.D.C. 66, 8 Fed.R.Serv.3d 437 Josiah HAYNESWORTH and Fred Hancock, Appellants,v.Frank P. MILLER, Chief, Law Enforcement Section, Office ofthe Corporation Counsel, et al., Appellees. (Two Cases) Nos. 79-1244, 80-1383. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 31, 1981.De