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.
16 opinions for “Meg Reilly”
Marguerite Tamasy v. Lone Star College Systempublic domain
Reversed and Remanded and Majority and Concurring Opinions filed October 12, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-19-00883-CV MARGUERITE TAMASY, Appellant V. LONE STAR COLLEGE SYSTEM, Appellee On Appeal from the 127th District Court Harris County, Texas T
In Re Nicholas K., Jr.public domain
761 N.E.2d 352 (2001) 326 Ill. App.3d 497 260 Ill.Dec. 508 In re NICHOLAS K., JR., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Nicholas K., Respondent-Appellant). No. 2-00-0968. Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District. December 21, 2001. *353 G. Joseph
Gulshan R. Jallan v. PNA Investments, LLCpublic domain
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 18, 2023. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00460-CV GULSHAN R. JALLAN, Appellant V. PNA INVESTMENTS, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court No. 1 Galveston County, Texas
Wetsell v. Reillypublic domain
Jenks, P. J.: ' The defendant, T. Reilly, was a contractor at work on a sewer in West 72d street near Columbus "avenue, New York *689city. ’^^^^BB^lefendant, P. Eeilly, is the father of T. Eeilly aHPHáhis servant. T. Eeilly maintained a shanty on the surface of the street incidental to this work. About 7:20 a. m. of November 23, 1911, P. Eeilly lighted a fire in the s
Scholz v. Boston Herald, Inc.public domain
McIntyre, Francesa., J. INTRODUCTION The Boston Herald, Inc. and its two longtime columnists, Gayle Fee and Laura Raposa, wrote and published three stories in 2007 regarding the suicide of Brad Delp, the lead singer of the band “Boston.” Allegedly, the articles relied on information from Delp’s ex-wife, Micki Delp, and various unnamed “insiders” and “friends.” Donald Thomas Scholz, the founder of Boston,
Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc. v. Union Bank of California, N.A. (In Re Cornerstone E & P Co.)public domain
435 B.R. 390 (2010) In re CORNERSTONE E & P COMPANY, L.P., et. al., Debtors. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc., et. al., Plaintiffs, v. Union Bank of California, N.A. n/k/a Union Bank, N.A., et. al., Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 09-35228-BJH-11. Adversary Nos. 09-3447-bjh, 09-3448, 09-3450, 09-3452, 09-3457. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division.
MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBERT L. WILKINS, District Judge. Plaintiff Libertarian National Committee, Inc. (“LNC”) has been left a bequest that it is unable to take in one lump sum payment because Defendant Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) believes that, due to the large amount of the bequest, to do so would violate the Federal Election Campaig
Infinity Outdoor, Inc. v. City of New Yorkpublic domain
165 F.Supp.2d 403 (2001) INFINITY OUTDOOR, INC., Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Satish K. Babbar, and Ann McCarthy, Defendants. No. 01 CV 1521(NG). United States District Court, E.D. New York. October 11, 2001. *404 *405 Floyd Abrams, New York City, for plaintiff. Lawrence S. Kahn, Deb
Daka, Inc. v. Breinerpublic domain
TERRY, Associate Judge: Daka, Inc., appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court in favor of James Breiner, a former Daka employee. Alleging age discrimination, Breiner filed suit against Daka under the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C.Code §§ 1-2501 et seq. (1993) (“DCHRA”). After a five-day trial, the jury found that Bremer had not established a prima facie case of wrongful termination, but it r
People v. Pagepublic domain
* Certified for publication except as to parts II B, C and D of the Discussion. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 976(b) and 976.1.) [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 163 OPINION On November 4, 1984, University of California at Berkeley (U.S. Berkeley) unde
Mary Ann Castro v. Manuel Castropublic domain
In the Fourth Court Of Appeals Fourth Court Of Appeals District San Antonio Texas Bexar County Maryann Castro v. Manuel Castro Re: Court Of Appeals Number: 04-14-00785-CV Trial Court Case 2011 -CI-15957 To The Fourth Court of Justices In Appeals Court STATEMEN
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Goldstonepublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND AMENDED ORDER1 JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Defendants’ Motion to Compel Production of PCAOB Deposition Transcripts and Plaintiffs Notes and Memoranda of Interviews with Non-Party Witnesses, filed November 28, 2012 (Doc. 90) (“Motion to Compel”);2 (ii) Non-Party KPMG L
WORTENDYKE, District Judge. This is a seizure case under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C.A. § 301 et seq. The subject matter of the seizure is a quantity of drug labelled “Jenasol RJ Formula 60” capsules or “Jenasol” containing as active ingredients a substance designated as “Royal Jelly”1 and certain vitamins.2 The libel of information
Streeter v. Humrichousepublic domain
Mr. Justice Boggs delivered the opinion of the court. An action on the case was instituted by appellee against, appellant in the circuit court of Kankakee county to recover pecuniary damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of the death of appellee’s intestate in a collision between appellant’s automobile and a switch engine on which appellee’s intestate was riding.</
Garnett v. Phœnix Bridge Co.public domain
DALLAS, Circuit Judge. This action was brought to recover for personal injury suffered by the plaintiff, in consequence, as alleged, of the negligent conduct of the defendant. When the accident occurred the plaintiff was a man of about 40 years of age, and of at least ordinary intelligence. Having previously been employed successively in two rolling mills, he, in May, 1896, entered the service of the defendant corporation, which
United States v. C.R.public domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JACK B. WEINSTEIN, Senior District Judge: I.Introduction...............................................................347 II.Facts.....................................................................349 A. Defendant’s Childhood..................................................349