Cases

OPINION Miquel Lujan appeals from his conviction for the offense of driving while intoxicated, upon his plea of guilty to the court. The court assessed his punishment at a $300.00 fine, plus court costs and 60 days in jail, probated for two years. In his sole ground of error, Lujan complains that the trial court erred by not granting his motion to quash the information. In his motion to quash, he contended that the information accused him of driving while intoxicated

Rush, C.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I take no issue with my colleagues' conclusion that the plaintiffs have standing as taxpayers, or with their analysis that Article 8, Section 2 applies to civil forfeitures. I disagree with my colleagues, however, on two fronts. First, their broader discussion of the public-standing doctrine-properly charac

James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Curry County's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed June 12, 2018 (Doc. 121)("Motion"). The Court held a *1188hearing on September 25, 2018. The primary issues are: (i) whether Board of County Commissioners of Curry County, New Me

*1142MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THE HONORABLE GREGORY J. FOURATT, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, Presiding by Consent , THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s “Motion for Summary Judgment No. I: Notice Under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act” (“Motion”) [ECF No. 24], filed Fébruary 17, 2017. After careful considération of the pertinent law

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part; and Opinion Filed April 25, 2023 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00934-CV KALEI MERRILL, Appellant V. MITCHELL CURRY, MELINDA DEFELICE AND TAMIRA GRIFFIN, EACH INDIVIDUALLY AS DEFENDANTS, Appellees On Appeal from the 38

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1202 Summary judgment was granted in favor of respondent, Labor Commissioner of the State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement in an action against Southern California Gas Company (hereinafter referred to as Employer).1

OPINION INTRODUCTION Appellants Arthur Lujan, as Labor Commissioner of the State of California, and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement of the California Department of Industrial Relations appeal a summary judgment in favor of respondent California School of Culinary Arts declaring respondent is exempt from paying its instructor employees one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for hours worked in exce

42 F.Supp.2d 1219 (1999) George LUJAN and John Gurule, Plaintiffs, v. EARTHGRAINS BAKING COMPANIES, INC., Robert Pratt, Dennis Smith, and John Does I-V, Defendants. No. Civ 98-1191 BB/LFG. United States District Court, D. New Mexico. March 2, 1999. Patrick R. Brito, Santa Fe, NM, for plaintiffs. Henry M. Bohnhoff, Mary Keleher Castle, Rodey Law Firm, Albuquer

751 F.Supp. 1454 (1990) MARATHON OIL COMPANY, Joan L. Savage, Barbara Cliff Toner, and Frank G. Cooley, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Cameron Cliff, Plaintiffs, v. Manuel LUJAN, Jr., Secretary of the Interior, Delos Sy Jamison, Director, Bureau of Land Management, and the Department of the Interior, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 89-F-1829. United States District Court, D. Colorado.

712 F.Supp. 1456 (1989) PORTLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY, Headwaters, Lane County Audubon Society, Oregon Natural Resources Council, the Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, Inc., Siskiyou Audubon Society, Central Oregon Audubon Society, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Umpqua Valley Audubon Society, Natural Resources Defense Council, Plaintiffs, v. Manuel LUJAN, Jr., in his official capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Interior, Defendant, and<

988 F.Supp. 541 (1997) Susan CURRY, James Kleissler, Arthur Clark and Heartwood, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, Michael P. Dombeck, Chief Forester, United States Forest Service, Robert T. Jacobs, Regional Forester for the Eastern Region, United States Forest Service, and John Palmer, Forest Supervisor for the Allegheny National Forest, United States Forest Service, Defendants. No. Civ.A. 97-1081.

167 F.3d 420 132 Ed. Law Rep. 300 Matthew CURRY; Jessie Roos; Amber Harpel; AaronFagerness; Grant Buse; Plaintiffs - Appellees,v.REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA; William E. Hogan,II; Patricia B. Spence; Robert S. Bergland; Julie A.Bleyhl; Warren C. Larson; David R. Metzen; H. Bryan Neel,III; Michael O'Keefe; William R. Peterson; Jessica J.Phillips; Thomas R. Reagan; Ma

BOWMAN, Chief J. The Queer Student Cultural Center (QSCC), La Raza Student Cultural Center (La. Raza), and University Young Women (U-YW) appeal the denial of their motion for intervention of right or permissive intervention. We affirm. On February 3, 1998, five students filed a complaint against the Regents of the University of Minnesota alleging violations

Appellant corporation, a distributor of gasoline, refused to pay to the appellee, State Comptroller, excise taxes upon certain quantities of fluid handled and used by the appellant, upon the theory that such fluid was not gasoline and therefore not subject to the tax. Appellee sued and recovered judgment for the amount of the tax alleged to be due and unpaid. Chapter 60, Comp. St. 1929 (section 60-101 et seq.), levies and imposes an excise tax upon the use of all gasoline and

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-17-00310-CV YATES ENERGY CORPORATION, EOG Resources, Inc., Jalapeno Corporation, ACG3 Mineral Interests, Ltd., Glassell Non-Operated Interests, Ltd., and Curry Glassell, Appellants v.

270 S.W.2d 208 (1954) CURRY v. CURRY et al. No. A-4648. Supreme Court of Texas. July 21, 1954. *209 H. L. Williford, Fairfield, Justice, Justice & Rowan, Athens, for petitioner. Bowlen Bond, Teague, for respondents. CALVERT, Justice. On January 21, 1950, N. S. Curry executed and delivered to Joseph Curry,

423 F.3d 1079 Miguel Osmar RIVAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.RAIL DELIVERY SERVICE, INC., a California corporation, Defendant-Appellee.Tobias Renteria, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.K & R Transportation Inc., a California corporation; Adriana Vasquez; Robert A. Curry, Sr., Defendants-Appellees.Salvador Rodriguez, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.RWA Trucking Company, Inc.; And

21 F.3d 1120 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. Af

A fundamental component to a retaliation claim is the employee's engagement in a protected activity. See United States ex rel. Yesudian v. Howard Univ. , 153 F.3d 731, 736 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (explaining that a retaliation claim requires an employee to show that she engaged in protected activity and that her employer discri

OPINION Marc W. Brown, Justice Appellant Steven Elliot Lollie appeals the trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress. Appellant alleges that incriminating evidence was seized as a result of an unlawful detention. Because the record supports that the arresting officer was fulfilling a community earetaking function at