Cases

OPINION HOLLIS HORTON, Justice In five issues, Starsky James Andrus appeals a jury’s verdict in which the jury found him guilty of burglarizing a habitation. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(1), (c)(2) (West, 2011). On appeal, Andrus argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in failing to- grant his motion seeking a directed verdict of ac

ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 Because plaintiffs have not met their burden of establishing that the proposed class meets the predominance and superiority requirements of that rule, plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.

649 F.Supp.2d 496 (2009) Karen WOODARD, et al. v. James ANDRUS, et al. Civil Action No. 03-2098. United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana. January 15, 2009. *499 Merrick J. Norman, Jr., Norman Business Law Center, Robert J. Boudreau, Woodley Williams et al., Mark A. Delphin, Lake Charles, LA, Eulis Simien, Jr., Simien & S

CARL E. STEWART, Circuit Judge: Karen Woodard filed suit against James Andrus, in his capacity as Clerk of Court in and for the 14th Judicial District Court in Calcasieu Parish, for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Woodard asserts that An-drus charged her, and others similarly situated, fees in excess of, or not authorized by state statute. As a result, she urges that her constitut

|, SAUNDERS, J. Appellant, Wilbert Rideau, seeks mandamus review to enforce the September 9, 2002 allotment of his recusal motion to Judge Alcide Gray. We affirm the trial court’s denial of Mr. Rideau’s mandamus request. FACTS This mandamus action arises ancillary to criminal proceedings against Mr. Rideau. On September 6, 2002, Mr. Rideau filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Patricia Minaldi i

875 So.2d 124 (2004) Sheldon ANDRUS v. L.A.D. CORPORATION, De Auduong, Acceptance Insurance Company and ABC Insurance Company. No. 03-CA-1488. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit. May 26, 2004. Rehearing Denied July 13, 2004. *125 Stephen N. Elliott, Howard B. Kaplan, Francine Giugno, Bernard, Cassisa, El

189 B.R. 413 (1995) In re Eugene M. ANDRUS and Luba Andrus, Debtors. Appeal of Stanley STANN, Creditor. No. 95 C 4629. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. November 28, 1995. *414 James T. Reilly, Law Offices of Peter F. Ferracuti, Ottawa, IL, for Stanley Stann, creditor. MEMORANDUM OPINIO

184 B.R. 311 (1995) In re Eugene M. ANDRUS and Luba Andrus, Debtors. Bankruptcy No. 92 B 10331. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. July 20, 1995. *312 Kenneth Cunniff, Chicago, IL, for plaintiff. James W. Reilley, Des Plaines, IL, for defendant. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON DEB

Per Curiam. Death-sentenced petitioner Terence Andrus was six years old when his mother began selling drugs out of the apartment where Andrus and his four siblings lived. To fund a spiraling drug addiction, Andrus' mother also turned to prostitution. By the time Andrus was 12, his mother regularly spent entire weekends, at times weeks, away from her five children to binge on drugs. When

[Cite as State v. Andrus, 2020-Ohio-6810.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ASHTABULA COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO, : OPINION Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. 2019-A-0082 - vs - : MICHAEL E. ANDRUS,

9 F.Supp.2d 1291 (1998) AUBURN MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Plaintiff, v. Terry ANDRUS, et al., Defendants. No. Civ.A. 97-D-192-E. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Eastern Division. June 12, 1998. *1292 *1293 K. Anderson Nelms, Montgomery, AL, Hugh V. Smith, Jr., Montgomery, AL, David J. L

2007 UT App 291 Elizabeth Andrus, Petitioner and Appellee, v. Daniel Andrus, Respondent and Appellant. Case No. 20060351-CA. Utah Court of Appeals. Filed September 7, 2007. Rosemond G. Blakelock, Provo, for Appellant. Brent D. Young, Provo, for Appellee. Before Judges Bench, Billings, and Davis. OPINION BENCH, Presiding Judge:</

WITHDRAWN 03-23-16 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. AP-76,936 TERENCE TREMAINE ANDRUS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. 09-DCR-051034 IN THE 240TH DISTRICT COURT FORT BEND COUNTY K EASLER, J., delivered

657 F.2d 1167 Benson J. LAMP, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Cecil ANDRUS, Secretary of the Department of the Interior,James L. Burski, Douglas E. Henriques, and Edward W.Stuebing, Administrative Judges, Interior Board of LandAppeals, and Milton Feinberg, Defendants-Appellees. No. 81-1562. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. Submitted on Briefs pursu

PER CURIAM. After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R. App.P. 34(a); Tenth Circuit R. 10(e). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Plaintiff-appellant filed a complaint in the district court for the District

WILLIAM E. DOYLE, Circuit Judge. Nature of Proceeding This is an appeal from an adverse judgment against the appellants The State of Utah and The Central Utah Water Conservancy District. The appellants claim an interest in the waters of the Colorado River which they intend to put to beneficial use through the Central Utah Water Project. The action in the district court sought a declaratory judg

430 F.Supp. 522 (1977) Raymond BOBB, Plaintiff, v. Cecil D. ANDRUS, Secretary of the Interior, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 75-0420. United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 31, 1977. *523 Philip C. Jones, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff. James J. Brown, U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for d

HOLLOWAY, Circuit Judge. This action by the plaintiffs-appellants challenges the validity of an amended Department of Interior regulation which increased annual non-competitive oil and gas lease payments from 50(p to $1.00 per acre. 43 C.F.R. § 3103.3-2 (1977). The suit also questions the lawfulness of the Department’s actions in implementing the amended regulation and handling pending lease applications of the plaintiffs.</

WILLIAM E. DOYLE, Circuit Judge. These are consolidated appeals from a series of orders entered by the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming subsequent to a prior judgment in this same case which was rendered February 21, 1979. See Winkler v. Andrus, 594 F.2d 775 (10th Cir. 1979). The cited case was one in which the parties were Joseph A. Winkler and the Secretary of the Interior. The controversy

503 F.Supp. 605 (1980) Pearle TOINEETA, Plaintiff, v. Cecil D. ANDRUS, Secretary of the Interior; Sidney L. Mills, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Interior; William Hallett, Commissioner of Indian Affairs; Harry Rainbolt, Director of the Eastern Area Office Bureau of Indian Affairs; Jeff W. Muskrat; Robert Evans; Jerome Parker; John Crowe; Leroy Wahneetah; Glen Joe Bradley; Thomas Lambert; Bertha Saunooke; Robin Toineeta; Quentin Beck; Gerard P