Cases

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2022 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 600 U. S. Part 1 Pages 181–411 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 29, 2023 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requ

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT (Docket No. 304) EDWARD M. CHEN, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs in this multidistrict litigation— eighteen (18) individuals from thirteen different states — have filed a second consolidated amended complaint (“SCAC” or

20 F.Supp.2d 727 (1998) LAIDLAW, INC. and Laidlaw Transit, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. STUDENT TRANSPORTATION OF AMERICA, INC., Denis Gallagher, Robert H. Byrne, John Reddan, John Emberson, John Carey, Peter Pearson, and Thomas Gallagher, Defendants. No. CIV. 98-2241(WGB). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. September 14, 1998. *728</

ACCEPTED 03-14-00706-CV 4055487 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

449 F.Supp.2d 1 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, and National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, Intervenors, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., (f/k/a Philip Morris, Inc.), et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 99-2496(GK). United States Distri

FRANCES WIHBEY v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE PINE ORCHARD ASSOCIATION (SC 20839) Robinson, C. J., and McDonald, D’Auria, Mullins, Ecker, Alexander and Dannehy, Js. Syllabus The defendant zoning board of appeals and the intervening defendants appealed, on the granting of certification, from the judgment of the Appellate Page 90 CONNECTICUT LAW

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2019 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF : No. 171 MM 2014 ATTORNEY GENERAL, : : Petitioner : : : v. : : : SUPERVISING JUDGE OF THE THIRTY- : FIFTH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATI

Case: 10-16645 04/11/2011 Page: 1 of 87 ID: 7711547 DktEntry: 199-1 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 10-16645 v. STATE OF ARIZONA; JANICE K.  D.C. No.

SANBORN, Circuit Judge. ■ This cas'e is before this Court under .§ 10(f) and (e) of'the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 160(f) and (e), upon a petition of the Site Oil Company of Missouri and its wholly owned subsidiary, Site Oil Company of Michigan, Inc. (herein referred to in the singular as “Site”), which are engaged in the acquisition and distribution o

ACCEPTED 15-25-00207-CV Cause No. _________ FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/14/2025 4:30 PM I

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 96-DP-01030-SCT JAMES EARNEST WATTS a/k/a "SQUIRREL" v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 8/09/96 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. R.I. PRITCHARD, III COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: MARION COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: MORRIS SWEATT JOHN

ACCEPTED 03-14-00518-CV 6061835 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

OPINION OF THE COURT SLOVITER, Circuit Judge. I. Appellant Loretta E. Stana brought this suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1982), alleging that the defendants, the School District of Pittsburgh and Charles N. Allebrand, Assistant Director of Personnel for the District, violated her consti

J-A05031-22 2022 PA Super 84 ELLISON O. JORDAN : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellant : : : v. : :

USCA11 Case: 19-13838 Document: 120-1 Date Filed: 01/06/2023 Page: 1 of 35 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-13838 ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

USCA11 Case: 20-14044 Date Filed: 06/09/2022 Page: 1 of 53 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-14044 ____________________ BRANDI MCKAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a Municipal Corp

USCA11 Case: 19-10332 Document: 302-1 Date Filed: 12/02/2024 Page: 1 of 142 19-10332 Opinion of the Court 1 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-10332 _______

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2012 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit