Cases

615 F.3d 97 (2010) MORTIMER OFF SHORE SERVICES, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, v. The FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant. Docket Nos. 08-1783-cv (L), 08-2358-cv (XAP). United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: May 13, 2009. Decided: July 26, 2010. *98 Peder A.

David C. Nye, U.S. District Court Judge I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court is Defendants Gerald Mortimer and Linda G. McKinnon Mortimer's (the "Mortimers") Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. 16. Defendant Obstetrics and Gynecology Associates of Idaho Falls, P.A.'s ("OGA") also filed a Motion to Dismiss based upon the same general arguments. Dkt. 17. After holding oral argument, the Court took the motions

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DANTON MORTIMER and SILVANIE MORTIMER, Appellants, v. FIRST COMMUNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. No. 4D19-2760 [October 29, 2020] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; David

Matter of Mortimer Nurse (2018 NY Slip Op 02473) Matter of Mortimer Nurse 2018 NY Slip Op 02473 Decided on April 11, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant t

GROSS, J. The trial court admitted evidence under a common law hearsay exception that was not a part of the Florida Evidence Code1 at the time of trial. After the trial, the legislature amended the Evidence Code to include the very hearsay exception applied by the trial court. Under these circumstances, the error in invoking the exception at the trial does not justify reversal, since the same evide

Cordy, J. Pursuant to SJ.C. Rule 3:10, § 1 (g), as amended, 416 Mass. 1306 (1993), a judge in the Superior Court found that the defendant, Thomas J. Mortimer, IV, was indigent but able to contribute $40,000 to his defense against indictments charging him with the murders of his wife, mother-in-law, and two children. In setting the amount of the defendant’s required contribution, the judge considered various assets that the defend

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROGER D. MORTIMER, individually  and as representative of the class of persons defined in averment 15; No. 07-55393 DEANE DANA; DON KNABE, Plaintiffs-Appellants,  D.C. No. CV-00-13002-DDP v. OPINION LEROY D. BACA, Defendant-Appel

594 F.3d 714 (2010) Roger D. MORTIMER, individually and as representative of the class of persons defined in averment 15; Deane Dana; Don Knabe, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Leroy D. BACA, Defendant-Appellee. No. 07-55393. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted August 7, 2009. Filed February 5, 2010.

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2014 GUY MORTIMER, Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. No. 4D14-496 [July 9, 2014] Petition for writ of habeas corpus to the Seve

Opinion by Judge MILAN D. SMITH, JR.; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge WILLIAM A. FLETCHER. OPINION M. SMITH, Circuit Judge: The individual Plaintiffs are a group of elderly, low-income tenants of a former project-based, federally subsidized Section 8 housing complex. They argue that federal law gives them a right to remain in the complex and to pay a portion of the

135 N.J. 517 (1994) 641 A.2d 257 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DAVID MORTIMER, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. The Supreme Court of New Jersey. Argued October 12, 1993. Decided May 26, 1994. *522 Simon Louis Rosenbach, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant (Robert W. Gluck,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STAY IN FAVOR OF ARBITRATION JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) and Wachovia Bank, N.A.’s (‘Wachovia”) Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay in Favor, of Arbitration (DE # 1384), filed ■ April 29, 2011. The Court is fully briefed in the m

955 A.2d 99 (2008) 110 Conn.App. 466 Violet F. MUNDELL v. Mortimer A. MUNDELL. No. 27679. Appellate Court of Connecticut. Argued April 29, 2008. Decided September 23, 2008. *101 Shawn Council, Bloomfield, for the appellant (defendant). David P. Mester, with whom was Mark Miller, Har

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT UNION BANK’S MOTION TO DISMISS THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant Union Bank’s Motion to Dismiss (DE # 1355), filed April 20, 2011. Therein, Defendant seeks dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint (DE # 1317), claiming both that 1) Plaintiffs’ claims are preempted by the Natio

OPINION PREGERSON, Circuit Judge: On May 18, 2011, Mark Hiedeman, the Bannock County, Idaho prosecuting attorney, filed a felony criminal complaint in the district court of the State of Idaho, in and for Bannock County against Jennie Linn McCormack. The complaint charged McCormack with “the public offense of Unlawful Abortion, Idaho Code § 18-606,” whic

ORDER GRANTING CLASS CERTIFICATION JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE # 1387) (“Motion”).1 The Court has carefully considered the Motion, response, reply, and the documents attached to them, as well as Plaintiffs’ voluminous evidentiary submissio

ORDER PRELIMINARILYAPPROVING CLASS SETTLEMENT AND CERTIFYING SETTLEMENT CLASS JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. The parties to the above-captioned actions currently pending against Bank of America, N.A. (“BofA”) as part of this multidistrict litigation have agreed to a settlement, the terms and conditions of which are set forth in an executed Settlement Agreement and Release (the “Settlement”

OMNIBUS ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.’s Motion to Dismiss on Grounds of Preemption and Further Reconsideration (DE # 1484), filed May 17, 2011.1 Defendants move for reconsideration of the Court’s earlier Omnibus Order Denying Dism

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Dean A. Monco, John S. Mortimer, and Wood, Phillips, Katz, Clark, & Mortimer allege that defendant Zsolt Rumy tortiously interfered with plaintiffs' expectancy of recovering legal fees for representing defendant Zoltek Corporation in patent litigation spanning the course of 20 years. Plaintiffs also seek recovery from defendants Zoltek and Toray Industries,

SUTER, J.A.D. *398*1134Defendant B.A. appeals his judgment of conviction for third-degree stalking, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10(c). He argues the statute is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, that he was denied a fair trial based on certain evidence rulings