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.
20 opinions for “John Michael Piper”
United States v. David Piper, Jr.public domain
PER CURIAM: David Piper, Jr. and Carlos Cortinas were convicted by a jury of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B) from approximately March 2015 through January 2016.
Theobald v. Piper Aircraft, Inc.public domain
ROBIN L. ROSENBERG, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Piper Aircraft, Inc.'s ("Piper") Motion for Summary Judgment.1 See DE 98. Plaintiffs responded, DE 111, and Piper replied, DE 128. The Court held a hearing on March 21, 2018. Having considered all relevant filings in this matter, Piper's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 98] is GRA
Piper Partridge v. City of Benton, Arkansaspublic domain
BENTON, Circuit Judge. Benton police officer Kyle Ellison shot and killed 17-year-old Keagan Schweikle. His parents, Piper Partridge and Dominic Schweikle, sued Ellison, the Chief of Police, and the City of Benton under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Arkansas law. The
Kevin Scott Karsjens v. Emily Johnson Piperpublic domain
SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge. Class plaintiffs, civilly committed sex offenders, bring a facial and as applied challenge under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming their substantive due process rights have been violated by Minnesota’s Civil Commitment and Treatment Act and by the actions and practices of the managers of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP). The Minnesota state defendants
Carrier Corp. v. Piperpublic domain
460 F.Supp.2d 827 (2006) CARRIER CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Paul P. PIPER, Jr., et al., Defendants. No. 05-2307 Ml/V. United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division. September 30, 2006. *828 *829 *830 Joey Miranda, Robinson & Cole LLP, H
Carrier Corp. v. Piperpublic domain
460 F.Supp.2d 853 (2006) CARRIER CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Paul P. PIPER, Jr., et al., Defendants. No. 05-2307 Ml/V. United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division. October 24, 2006. Joey Miranda, Robinson & Cole LLP, Hartford, CT, John A. Poakeart, Pamela Elkow, Robinson & Cole, LLP, Stamford, CT, Michael E. Keeney, Cheryl R. Estes, Thomaso
Piper v. Scottpublic domain
LANDAU, P. J. Plaintiff initiated this personal injury action for damages resulting from a motor vehicle collision with a steer that had wandered onto the highway in an open range area. Plaintiff named as defendants both the owners of the steer, Warren and Jacqueline Scott, and the State of Oregon. He alleged that the Scotts were negligent in permitting their steer to wander onto the highway and that the state was negligent in f
30 A.3d 1083 (2011) The PIPER GROUP, INC., Charles E. Sigety, Katharine S. Sigety, Nero Enterprises, Sigety Trust c/o Trustees Charles Birge Sigety and Katharine K. Yon, Piperlands Properties, L.P., 110 Dark Hollow Road, LLC., Robert G. Sigety, Cornelius E. Sigety, Elizabeth D. Sigety, and Robert G. Sigety, as Tenants by the Entireties and Robert G. Sigety Grat c/o Trustee Cornelius E. Sigety, Appellants v. BEDMINSTER TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISOR
Baggott v. Piper Aircraft Corp.public domain
101 F.Supp.2d 556 (1999) Thomas M. BAGGOTT, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. PIPER AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, Defendant. No. C-3-86-615. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. July 20, 1999. *557 Thomas McCann Baggott, Altick & Corwin, Dayton, OH, John H. Bennett, Jr., Pohl, Bennett & Mathews, Houston, TX, Benton Mus
Michael Day, Jr. v. Johns Hopkins Health Systempublic domain
WILKINSON, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs brought suit against Dr. Paul Wheeler and Johns Hopkins Health System et al. for Wheeler's actions as an expert witness in administrative hearings for the Federal Black Lung Program. This lawsuit included a federal claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), Pub. L. No. 91-452, Title IX (1970) (codified at
Karsjens v. Piperpublic domain
DONOVAN W. FRANK, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court following remand on three separate matters. First, the parties dispute the proper disposition *978of Plaintiffs' remaining Phase One counts in light of the Eighth Circuit's decision. (See Doc. Nos. 1095, 1097, 1
Long John Silver's Restaurants, Inc. v. Colepublic domain
514 F.3d 345 (2008) LONG JOHN SILVER'S RESTAURANTS, INCORPORATED; Long John Silver's, Incorporated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Erin COLE; Nick Kaufman; Victoria McWhorter, Defendants-Appellees. Secretary of Labor, Amicus Supporting Appellants. No. 06-1259. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued: December 6, 2007. Decided: January 28, 2008.
Palmquist v. Piper Aircraft Corp.public domain
ORDER FORRESTER, District Judge. This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery from defendant Aerostar Transport Corporation. Plaintiff seeks discovery of defendant Ae-rostar’s corporate tax returns for the years 1989 and 1990 and discovery of the “financial circumstances” of Aerostar. Other than the tax returns, it is unclear what information plaintiff seeks. The motion add
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND ROBERT A. MARK, Bankruptcy Judge. On April 10, 1996, the Court conducted a hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion to Dismiss”) and Plaintiffs Motion for Remand or, in the Alternative, Abstention (the “Motion for Remand”). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court took the
Yocum v. Piper Aircraft Corp.public domain
CRANDALL, Judge. Plaintiffs, Jewell Yocum and Margie Yo-cum, brought an action for the wrongful death of their son against defendants, Piper Aircraft Corp., Phoenix Aviation, Inc., Veteran Services, Inc., American Jet Leasing, Inc., and Michael J. Trueb. Plaintiffs appeal from the dismissal of their action against defendant, Veteran Services, Inc., for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiffs als
State v. St. John, Ca2007-01-032 (6-18-2007)public domain
DECISION {¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the Butler County Court of Common Pleas, and upon the brief filed by appellant's counsel, oral argument having been waived. *Page 2 {¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant
Piper v. Central Louisiana Electric Co.public domain
KNOLL, Judge. Insured Lloyds (hereafter Lloyds), a third-party defendant, seeks supervisory relief from a judgment of the trial court which denied its motion for summary judgment, seeking a dismissal of certain third-party demands filed by Central Louisiana Electric Company, Inc. (hereafter CLECO), and Evangeline Cable Television, Inc. (hereafter Evangeline) against Lloyds on the ground of res judicata. Lloyds’ motion for summ
State ex rel. Piper Aircraft Corp. v. Corriganpublic domain
In the action underlying the present mandamus action, relator previously was represented by attorneys David W. Mellott and Douglas B. Besman. These two attorneys are now employed by Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff, the firm representing the intervenors-respondents, the Midwest Defendants. The underlying action is currently pending in the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County where relator has been unsuccessful in seeking to
Wagner v. Piper Industries, Inc. (In Re Wagner)public domain
87 B.R. 612 (1988) In re Gary L. WAGNER and Martha A. Wagner, Debtors. Gary L. WAGNER and Martha A. Wagner, Plaintiffs, v. PIPER INDUSTRIES, INC., a Tennessee corporation, Piper Industries of Texas, Inc., a Texas corporation, Paul Piper, Jr., an individual, Jay Rigby, an individual, Norbert Starr, II, an individual, Michael A. Barragan, an individual, and Gardere and Wynne, a law partnership, Defendants. Bankruptcy No. S
Piper v. City of Elmirapublic domain
DECISION & ORDER MARIAN W. PAYSON, United States Magistrate Judge. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT James Piper, Joseph Piper, Carol Piper and Donald Piper (collectively, “plaintiffs”) have initiated this action against the City of Elmira (the “City”), its police department and the following individual police officers: Scott Drake, III (“Drake”), Michael Marrone (“Marrone”),