Cases

Alice Robie Resnick, J., dissenting. “Prejudice” is defined as “an opinion or leaning adverse to anything without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1986) 1788. Today, the majority opines that no reasonable accommodations can be made which would enable a blind student to complete the medical school program. In so doing, the majority literally divests itself of knowledge to t

786 F.Supp.2d 887 (2011) Ryan McFADYEN, Matthew Wilson and Breck Archer, Plaintiffs, v. DUKE UNIVERSITY, et al., Defendants. No. 1:07CV953. United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina. March 31, 2011. *898 Robert C. Ekstrand, Ekstrand & Ekstrand, LLP, Durham, NC, for Plaintiffs. Jamie S. Gorelick, Jennifer M. O'C

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2018-CA-00658-COA GARTH BISSETTE, PH.D. APPELLANT v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI MEDICAL APPELLEES CENTER, WILLIAM WOOLVERTON, PH.D., CRAIG STOCKMEIER, PH.D., JEFFERSON PARKER, PH.D., GRAYSON NORQUIST, PH.D. AND JAMES KEETON, M.D. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/02/2018 TRIAL JUDGE:

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 530 DISCUSSION............................................................... 531 I. THE COURT FINDS THAT THE PETITIONERS ARE ENTITLED TO INTERVENTION OF RIGHT UNDER RULE 24(A) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.................................... 531 A. TIMELINESS.........................

ACCEPTED 04-14-00829-cv 04-14-00829-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXA

JUSTICE GOLDENHERSH delivered the opinion of the court: Plaintiff, James L. Hartman, filed this action against numerous defendants involved in mining, manufacturing, processing, selling, and/or distributing asbestos products. The complaint, filed in the circuit court of Madison County on August 10, 1988, contained counts of negli

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 76 Ohio St.3d 168.] OHIO CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY, APPELLEE. [Cite as Ohio Civ. Rights Comm. v. Case W. Res. Univ., 1996-Ohio-53.] Civil Rights Commission—Elements of prima facie case of discrimination in education under R.C. 4112.022(A)—“Otherwise qualified” handicapped person, defined. 1. A prima facie case of discrimination in

1-00-1512 FOURTH DIVISION NOVEMBER 21, 2002 RLI INSURANCE COMPANY, ) Appeal from the ) Circuit Court of Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, ) Cook County. ) v. ) ) ILLINOIS NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ) Honorable ) Albert Green,

JUSTICE HARTMAN delivered the opinion of the court: Plaintiff and defendant cross-appeal from a jury verdict and judgment finding defendant guilty of negligence when one of its commuter trains struck and killed plaintiff’s decedent while she was crossing defendant’s tracks at its Ravenswood station. They raise as issues whether: (1) the circuit court erred in evi

413 S.W.2d 550 (1967) The WESTERN CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, a Corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, a Corp., and John J. Steel, Defendants-Appellants. No. 32286. St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri. February 21, 1967. Motion for Rehearing or for Transfer Denied March 17, 1967. Application to Transfer Denied May 8, 1967.

Bryan, J. The question which we are called upon to decide cannot be clearly understood without some statement of the previous proceedings in this case. On the second day of October, eighteen hundred and ninety, the Circuit Court for Washington County, sitting in equity, passed a decree for the sale of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. It was decreed that the sale should embrace all the rights, title and interest of

IREDELL, Circuit Justice (charging jury).1 Gentlemen of the Grand Jury; The importance of the duties you are now called upon to fulfil, naturally increases with the increasing difficulties of our country. But however great those difficulties may be,' I am persuaded you will meet them with a firm and intrepid step, resolved, so far as you are concerned, that no dishonor or calamity (if any should awa

Jordan, C. J. This case has been transferred by the Appellate to the Supreme Court in order that the latter may pass upon appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, in opposing, which motion, appellant raises the constitutional validity of §6 of an act of the legislature “concerning appeals”, approved March 12, 1901, which was in full force *602from and aft

982 F.2d 73 138 P.U.R.4th 620, Util. L. Rep. P 13,937,23 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,446 J. Gary DiLAURA, individually, and as president ofWaterfront Homeowners Association of Western New York, etal.; James Lewis, individually, and as vice president ofWaterfront Homeowners Association of Western NY; BarbaraCustodi, individually, and as secretary of WaterfrontHomeowners Association of Western NY; Richard

MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, should be affirmed, with costs. A computer-generated image may constitute a "portrait" within the meaning of Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51 *397**788(see Lohan v. Take-Two Inter

FAHEY, J. *391**782The primary questions on this appeal are whether an avatar (that is, a graphical representation of a person, in a video game or like media) may constitute a "portrait" within the meaning of Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51 and, if so, whe

163 F.3d 188 Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 90,343SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONv.John Gardner BLACK; Devon Capital Management, Inc.;Financial Management Sciences, Inc., South Butler CountySchool District; Daniel Boone Area School District; TyroneArea School District; Blacklick Valley School District;Harmony Area School District; Penn Cambria School District;Penns Manor School District; Northern Lebanon SchoolDist

709 F.Supp.2d 605 (2008) Mark MILLER, et al., Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CINCINNATI, et al., Defendants. Case No. 1:08cv550. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. November 19, 2008. *611 Named Expert: Mark Weaver. Christopher Paul Finney, Finney, Stagnaro, Saba & Klusmeier, Co., LPA, for Plaintiffs.

684 F.Supp.2d 964 (2010) FAIR HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES OF NORTHWEST OHIO, etc., et al., Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendant. Case No. 3:06 CV 1329. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division. February 12, 2010. *965 John T. Murray, Michael J. Stewart, Murray & Murray, Sandusky

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 20a0356p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ MICHAEL FLOWERS, │ Plaintiff-Appel