Cases

STOLL, Circuit Judge. Cynthia Nutt and her son, James Nutt, Jr., (collectively, “Appellants” or “Plaintiffs”) appeal a decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims granting the Government’s motion for summary judgment that it did not breach an agreement to pay a claim arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). Nutt v. United States (Summary Judgment O

Breach of Contract;' Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq.; Military Claims Act, 10 U.S.C. § 2731 et seq.; Summary Judgment, RCFC 56. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL ORDER BRADEN, Judge. I. RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND. 1 On September 27, 19

*347OPINION NETTESHEIM, Judge. These two consolidated actions for breach of express and implied-in-fact contract are before the court on defendant’s renewed motion for summary judgment. Argument and supplemental argument have been held. The principal issues, broadly framed, are whether the lending entity has made the Government amenable to suit for br

BAKER, Judge, joined by STUCKY, Judge (dissenting): I would affirm based on the analysis of the Court of Criminal Appeals in this case and based on my separate opinion in United States v. Sweeney, 70 M.J. 296, 306-13 (C.A.A.F. 2011) (Baker, J., joined by Stucky, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

MEMORANDUM ** Donnie Bobby Nutt (“Nutt”) appeals his jury conviction for making false statements in connection with receipt of compensation under the Federal Employees Compensation Act, in violation 18 U.S.C. *708§ 1920. Nutt claims that the district court abused its discretion in limiting the scope of cross-examination of a government’s witness reg

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.

*818 SETH, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal in forma pauperis from a jury trial and conviction in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma on a three count information charging appellant with violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708 (p

United States Tax Court 160 T.C. No. 10 ROY A. NUTT AND BONNIE W. NUTT, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent ————— Docket No. 15959-22. Filed May 2, 2023. ————— Ps electronically filed a Petition with this Court

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. Fed. Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW KRISTINE G. BAKER, District Judge. This matter came for a bench trial on May 28 and 29, 2014. Plaintiffs Kevin and Lisa Nutt appeared through their attorneys. Defendant Stafford Kees appeared pro se. Defendants Carroll County Nursing & Rehab Center, Inc. (“CCNRC”), and Osceola Therapy & Living Center, Inc. (“OTLC”), appeared through th

C. A. Fed. Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General to permit Charles A. Rothfeld, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.

Booth, J., delivered the opinion of the court: The findings of fact in this case disclose that the claimant, John W. Nutt, was appointed and commissioned regimental adjutant with the rank of captain in the Fourteenth Regiment of Infantry, National Guard-of the State of New York. On May 2,1898, the claimant, with his regiment, was enrolled for service in the volunteer army of the United States, and on May 15 a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) FRED L. NUTT, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 19-3220 (ABJ) ) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) GOVERNMENT, et al.

Cite as 2020 Ark. App. 137 Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS Date: 2021-07-01 11:37:03 DIVISION II Foxit PhantomPDF Version: No. CR-19-294 9.7.5 JERRY NUTT Opinion Delivered: February 26, 2020 AP

OPINION LAMBERT, Judge. Randy Pezzarossi has appealed from the judgment and order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his request to instruct the jury on punitive damages. We agree with Pezzarossi that he was entitled to an instruction on punitive damages in his fraud action. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand for a new trial on the issue of punitive damages.<

*666Justice Marshall, with whom Justice Brennan joins, dissenting. Today the Court holds that the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 requires that an arbitrator, when reviewing an agency disciplinary action taken in violation of collectively bargained procedures, must ignore the possibility that sustaining the adverse action would