⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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 “Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic De v. Perry”

Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2008-08-28 · Published · cited 45× · 755 N.W.2d 713; 2008 Minn. LEXIS 484; 2008 WL 3926791
OPINION DIETZEN, Justice. Buddie Greene, an enrolled member of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe (Tribe) living off the reservation in Aitkin County, challenges the reduction of her benefits under the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP). After Greene was referred to the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe for employment services, she requested that she receive employment services through the County, and failed to
Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2025-04-24 · Published · cited 6× · 711 S.W.3d 142; 2025 Ark. 48
Cite as 2025 Ark. 48 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-24-558 Opinion Delivered: April 24, 2025 MICHAEL W. GATES AND SUSAN J. GATES APPEAL FROM THE GARLAND APPELLANTS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 26CV-21-100] V. HONORABLE GARY M. ARNOLD,
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008-09-16 · Published · cited 30× · 543 F.3d 275; 71 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 899; 44 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2582; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 19569
543 F.3d 275 (2008) ASSOCIATED BUILDERS & CONTRACTORS, Saginaw Valley Area Chapter, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants, v. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND ECONOMIC GROWTH, et al., Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees. Nos. 07-1639, 07-1649, 07-1654. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: July 23, 2008. Decided and Filed: Septemb
Perry v. Brownpublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012-02-07 · Published · cited 56× · 671 F.3d 1052; 2012 WL 372713
OPINION REINHARDT, Circuit Judge: Prior to November 4, 2008, the California Constitution guaranteed the right to marry to opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples alike. On that day, the People of California adopted Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. We consider whether that amendment violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
West Virginia Supreme Court · 2010-06-02 · Published · cited 17× · 694 S.E.2d 815; 225 W. Va. 482; 2010 W. Va. LEXIS 97
694 S.E.2d 815 (2010) Lenora PERRINE; Carolyn Holbert; Waunona Messinger Crouser; Rebeccah Morlock; Anthony Beezel; Mary Montgomery; Mary Luzader; Truman R. Desist; Larry Beezel; and Joseph Bradshaw; individuals residing in West Virginia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs below, Appellants in no. 34333, Appellees in nos. 34334 and 34335, v. E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, a Delaware corporation doing busin
District Court, District of Columbia · 2025-08-14 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 25-1775 (BAH) v. Judge Beryl A. Howell UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, et al., Defendants.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2020-08-05 · Published · cited 39× · 971 F.3d 220
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2222 CASA DE MARYLAND, INC.; ANGEL AGUILUZ; MONICA CAMACHO PEREZ, Plaintiffs – Appellees, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; CHAD WOLF, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT O
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018-10-02 · Published · cited 18× · 906 F.3d 94
JORDAN, Circuit Judge. The Giovanni family and the Palmer family live in neighborhoods close to contaminated federal facilities that were owned and operated for decades by the United States Navy. The families filed separate suits in state court under the Pennsylvania Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act ("HSCA"),
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2014-03-06 · Published · cited 1× · 2 F. Supp. 3d 667; 29 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 655; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28477
MEMORANDUM OPINION KIM R. GIBSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment filed by the parties pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 56. (ECF Nos. 92, 95). The Plaintiff seeks partial summary judgment on threshold issues relating to liability. (ECF No. 95). The' Defendants move for summary judgment with respect to all
United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013-08-27 · Published · cited 15× · 112 Fed. Cl. 231; 2013 U.S. Claims LEXIS 1174; 2013 WL 4572625
Claim of breach of a contract entered under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, 25 U.S.C. §§ 450-458ddd-2; applicability of the Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992; 25 U.S.C. §§ 3401-3417; Contract Disputes Act, now codified as 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109; contracting officer’s authority; third-party beneficiary rights; recovery in quantum
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012-02-07 · Published · cited 0×
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KRISTIN M. PERRY; SANDRA B.  STIER; PAUL T. KATAMI; JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO, Plaintiffs-Appellees, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Governor of California; KAMALA D. HARRIS, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California; MARK B. HORTON, in his official
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015-07-29 · Published · cited 90× · 795 F.3d 956; 81 ERC (BNA) 1283; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13201; 2015 WL 4547088
CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting: The State of Alaska appeals the District Court for the District of Alaska’s decision setting aside the Departure of Agriculture’s exemption of the Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Rule. The majority holds that Alaska has standing to appeal based on a statutory entitlement— *972an option to collect a share of t
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017-09-28 · Published · cited 5× · 170 A.3d 414; 2017 WL 4287879; 2017 Pa. LEXIS 2281
[J-82-2016] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT SAYLOR, C.J., BAER, TODD, DONOHUE, DOUGHERTY, WECHT, MUNDY, JJ. WILLIAM PENN SCHOOL DISTRICT; : No. 46 MAP 2015 PANTHER VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT; : THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF : Appeal from the Order of the LANCASTER; GREATER JOHNSTOWN : Commonwealth Court entered on April SCHOOL DISTRICT; WILKES-BARRE : 21
Supreme Court of Iowa · 2020-12-31 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 19–1278 Submitted September 16, 2020—Filed December 31, 2020 KRYSTAL WAGNER, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Shane Jensen, Plaintiffs, vs. STATE OF IOWA and WILLIAM L. SPECE a/k/a BILL L. SPECE, Defendants. Certified questions of law from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, C.J. Williams, United States District Court Judge.
District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2012-04-24 · Published · cited 6× · 283 F.R.D. 427; 2008 WL 11162797
*435 OPINION AND ORDER ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., Chief Judge. This multi-district litigation docket involving the classification of FedEx Ground pickup and delivery drivers is before the court on the motions for class certifications filed by plaintiffs in the actions categorized in this docket as “Wave 1,” ‘Wave 2,” and “Wave 3.”
Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012-05-15 · Published · cited 10× · 725 S.E.2d 651; 220 N.C. App. 419; 2012 WL 1672891; 2012 N.C. App. LEXIS 663
725 S.E.2d 651 (2012) BEROTH OIL COMPANY, Paula and Kenneth Smith, Barbara Clapp, Pamela Moore Crockett, W.R. Moore, N & G Properties, Inc. and Elton V. Koonce, Plaintiffs, v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Defendant. No. COA11-1012. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. May 15, 2012. *653 Hendrick Bryant Nerhood
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006-02-10 · Published · cited 378× · 437 F.3d 1322; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 3214; 2006 WL 305530
PROST, Circuit Judge. Lourdes Garcia appeals the dismissal of her claim for constructive reduction in grade by the Merit Systems Protection Board (the “MSPB” or “Board”). The Board determined that Ms. Garcia had not proven that her actions were involuntary and therefore dismissed Ms. Garcia’s case for lack of jurisdiction without granting her a hearing. Garcia v. Dep’t