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.
12 opinions for “Lloyd A Eggen”
State v. Henleypublic domain
N. PATRICK CROOKS, J. ¶ 104. {dissenting). The majority poses the question, "[C]an convicted criminal defendants still seek a new trial in the interest of justice?" It responds, "The answer is certainly yes."1 Except, as here, when the answer is "certainly not." The majority's decision limits a circuit court's authority to grant a new trial in the interest of justice to those cases where the m
United States v. Watkinspublic domain
U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________ No. 201700073 _________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. MARTINZIE G. WATKINS Gunnery Sergeant (E-7), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant
Walker v. Gribblepublic domain
689 N.W.2d 104 (2004) Pamela J. WALKER, Appellant, v. Charles E. GRIBBLE, Appellee, and Gribble & Prager, P.C., Intervenor-Appellee. No. 03-1380. Supreme Court of Iowa. November 10, 2004. *106 Mark D. Sherinian of Sherinian & Walker, P.C., Des Moines, for appellant. Mark J. Wiedenfeld and Joseph P. McLaughlin o
In Re Firearm Casespublic domain
24 Cal.Rptr.3d 659 (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 959 In re FIREARM CASES. The People, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Arcadia Machine & Tool, Inc., et al., Defendants and Respondents. [And two other cases.].[*] Nos. A103211, A105309. Court of Appeal, First District, Division One. February 10, 2005.
United States v. Caropublic domain
Affirmed by published opinion. Judge DUNCAN wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge SHEDD concurred. Judge GREGORY wrote a dissenting opinion. OPINION DUNCAN, Circuit Judge: This appeal arises from a death sentence imposed under the Federal Death Penalty *610Act (the “FDPA”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 3591-98, following a conviction for m
Al-Marri v. Pucciarellipublic domain
DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge, concurring in the judgment: For over two centuries of growth and struggle, peace and war, the Constitution has secured our freedom through the guarantee that, in the United States, no one will be deprived of liberty without due process of law. Yet more than five years ago, military authorities seized Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, an alien lawfully residing here. He has been he
Howlett Ex Rel. Howlett v. Rosepublic domain
496 U.S. 356 (1990) HOWLETT, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HOWLETT, HIS MOTHER, NATURAL GUARDIAN, AND NEXT FRIEND v. ROSE, AS SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, ET AL. No. 89-5383. Supreme Court of United States. Argued March 20, 1990 Decided June 11, 1990 CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT
BROWNING, Circuit Judge: In August 1951, Ward Mayer and his wife and son — who, with D. F. Kinder, were the stockholders of Timber Structures, Inc. — contracted to sell the business to the West Los Angeles Institute for Cancer Research, a tax-exempt entity. The transaction was patterned after the sale and leaseback agreements descri
Shonts v. Hirlimanpublic domain
28 F.Supp. 478 (1939) SHONTS et al. v. HIRLIMAN et al. CALDWELL v. SAME. WOGAHN v. SAME. Nos. 8358-Y, 8301-Y, 21-Y. District Court, S. D. California, Central Division. July 17, 1939. *479 *480 *481 Frederick W. Mahl, Jr., of San Fran
443 P.2d 205 (1968) SMITH TUG & BARGE CO., a Corporation; Shepard Towing Co., a Corporation; and Shaver Transportation Co., a Corporation, Respondents, v. COLUMBIA-PACIFIC TOWING Corporation, a Corporation, Appellant, Mark O. Hatfield, Thomas L. McCall and Robert W. Straub, As Members of the State Land Board of the State of Oregon, Defendants. Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc. Argued an
De Vall v. De Vallpublic domain
Opinion by Mr. Chief Justice Eakin. 1. It thus appears that, although there was a motion to set aside the verdict, the court in its discretion set aside such motion on the ground of error not assigned in it, and the contention of defendant is that the court had no authority to set aside a verdict upon its own motion, nor upon a ground not assigned in the motion. There is no bill of exce
Schwartz v. Peoplepublic domain
Mr. Justice Bailey delivered the opinion of the court: On this review but two propositions are presented and argued by counsel: (1) Is the so-called local option law a valid and constitutional one? (2) If yes, then when a ward proposition is submitted under it to the qualified electors thereof as to whether the ward shall become anti-saloon territory, and at the same time a separate and distinct like precinct p