Cases

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOEL EMPLEO SILVA, Nos. 16-70130 Petitioner, 17-73272 v. Agency No. A045-476-155 MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. ORDER AND

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas February 21, 2024 No. 04-23-00334-CR IN RE CERVANTES, et al. Original Proceeding 1 ORDER 1 This proceeding arises out of eighty-five civil bond fo

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-23-00334-CR IN RE CERVANTES, et al. Original Proceeding 1 1 This proceeding arises out of eighty-five civil bond forfeiture cases involving the State of Texas and the following defend

NUMBER 13-18-00529-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN RE MCALLEN HOSPITALS, L.P. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. ORDER Before Justices Rodriguez, Contreras, and Benavides Per Curiam Order Relator McAllen Hospitals,

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1739 JANET VAZQUEZ-VELAZQUEZ; RAMON A. DEL VALLE-LOPEZ; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP DEL VALLE-VAZQUEZ; CARLOS R. CESPEDES-GOMEZ; JOCELYN CALO-BIRRIEL; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP CESPEDES-CALO; SAUL O. ALMEDA-CRUZ; JUDITH NIEVES-RIVERA; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP ALMEDA- NIEVES; FRANCISCO M. ALVARADO-BARRIOS; MARILYN ALVAREZ-RIVERA; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP ALVARADO-ALVAREZ; JUAN C. ARROYO-RAMIREZ; DAMARIS VELEZ-RIOS;

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1079 IN RE: THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1080 IN RE: THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1119 IN RE: THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT

825 F.Supp. 19 (1993) UNITED STATES of America v. Martha CONCEPCION, a/k/a Martha Martinez, a/k/a Martha Morales, a/k/a Julianna Sanchez, a/k/a Sonia Serrano, a/k/a Gladys Torres, Defendant. UNITED STATES of America v. Ana MORILLO, a/k/a Rossi Colon, a/k/a Marta Fernandez, a/k/a Luz Lopez, a/k/a Gloria Velez, a/k/a Jeanette Ruiz, Defendant. UNITED STATES of America v. Jane ARENDELL, a/k/a Maria Gonzalez, a/k/a Annette Rive

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1092 IN RE: THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1120 IN RE: THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUERTO RICO SALES TAX FINANCING CORPORATION, a/k/a Cofina; THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. Defendants-appellants Tyson Foods, Inc. and Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc. (collectively, “Tyson”) appeal from the district court’s interlocutory order denying their motion for partial summary judgment. We ordered the parties to submit briefs addressing whether this appeal should be dismissed on the ground that the order appealed from was not final. Tyson argues that we have jurisdiction over the appeal under

Chief Justice JEFFERSON, joined by Justice GREEN, concurring in part and dissenting in part. The Board imposed a civil penalty against Tyndale for illegally issuing thirty-*662four degrees. Tyndale chose not to appeal that administrative penalty or the Board’s findings. Instead, HEB Ministries and two unrelated entities

(2008) Jose BELTRAN, Petitioner, v. D. DEXTER, Warden, et al., Respondents. No. CV 07-6614-R(RC). United States District Court, C.D. California. July 17, 2008. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MANUEL L. REAL, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition and ot

534 F.3d 1320 (2008) Adelina GARCIA; Antonio Garcia; Jeronimo Vargas-Vera; Efrain Aguilar; Paulina Aguilar; Adelaida Aguirre; Jose R. Aguirre; Salvador Almanza; Miguel Amaya; Rogelio Andrade; Jesus Anguiano; Efigenia Arana; Jose R. Arana; Ramon Arana; Alma Armendariz; Jorge L. Banda Valadez; Delfino Barragan; Lucia Barragan; Ramon P. Barragan; Holga Benitez; Baltazar Bonilla; Maria Guadalupe Bonilla; Catalina Bustillos; Bernardo Calderon; Etelvina Calder

OPINION AND ORDER GARCIA-GREGORY, District Judge. The twenty-seven named plaintiff families in the case at bar, all residents of three public housing complexes located in Barceloneta, Puerto Rico (collectively “Plaintiffs”), bring a civil rights suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986 against Defendants asserting violations of their rights under the United States Constitution. Specifically, Plaintiffs a

El Juez Asociado Señor Estrella Martínez emitió la opinión del Tribunal. En este caso reafirmamos los postulados de estimación y valoración de daños que establecimos en Rodríguez et al. v. Hospital et al., infra. Resulta imperativo llamar la aten-ción a los foros primarios en torno a la necesidad de ape-garse a los aspectos metodológicos esenciales aplicados en esta Opinión en la difícil pero vital ges

17-2208, 18-359 Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2018 (Argued: February 13, 2019 Decided: April 1, 2020) Nos. 17-2208-cv, 18-359-cv MAXCIMO SCOTT, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, JAY FRANCIS ENSOR, CHRISTIN

Per Curiam. *1021The moving papers indicate that despite written notices sent to them by the Office of Court Administration at their last known address, respondents have failed to register and pay the required fee. Judiciary Law § 468-a (5) provides that noncompliance with the statute and rules regarding attorney registration “shall constitute conduc

Per Curiam. *1021The moving papers indicate that despite written notices sent to them by the Office of Court Administration at their last known address, respondents have failed to register and pay the required fee. Judiciary Law § 468-a (5) provides that noncompliance with the statute and rules regarding attorney registration “shall constitute conduc