Cases

OPINION JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. In 2005, in connection with a magnetic resonance imaging procedure (“MRI”), Paul Decker received a dose of Omniscan, a gadolinium-based contrast agent manufactured by GE Healthcare Inc. and GE Healthcare AS (“GEHC”). After taking Omniscan, Mr. Decker developed Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (“NS

HADLOCK, J. *323Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for unlawful possession of methamphetamine, ORS 475.894, and felon in possession of a restricted weapon, ORS 166.270(2). Defendant was convicted of those crimes in a stipulated-facts trial after the trial court denied his motion to suppress evidence that law enforcement officers found a

OPINION BROWN, Judge. Paul Allen Decker appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress. Decker raises three issues which we consolidate and restate as whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. On cross-appeal, the State raises the issue of whether this court should vacate its grant of Decker’s motion to accept jurisdict

Denied.

BROWN, C.J. Plaintiff, Mildred Decker, appeals from a judgment partially dismissing her claims of fraud and redhibition related to the sale of a home that Decker purchased from Defendants, Merrill Melton and Paul Holloway. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants did not disclose that part of the home was susceptible to flooding prior to her purchase of the home. Decker sought reduction of the purchase price, damages, and attorney fees. Fo

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER DAN AARON POLSTER, District Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendant GE Healthcare’s motion for a new trial, to *811alter or amend the judgment, and for remittitur (Doc. #: 271). For the reasons to follow, the motion is DENIED. I. Background On September 2, 2005, P

MCKEIG, Justice. *386Daniel Decker was convicted of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct and indecent exposure for sending a picture of his genitals to a minor via Facebook Messenger. He appeals, arguing that he did not meet the "presence" requirement of either crime because he and the victim were in different physical locations, and because he

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Muhammad v. Crosby, 922 So.2d 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (on motions for rehearing, rehearing en banc, certification, and consolidation). KAHN, C.J., ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

OPINION & ORDER LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox (“Report”), recommending that (1) Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus be granted, (2) Respondents be directed to provide an individualized bond hearing to Petitioner within seven days of the date of this Opinion and Order to determine wh

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, United States District Judge Petitioner Paul Anthony Brissett ("Brissett" or "Petitioner"), who has been detained without a bond hearing by the United States Department of Homeland Security ("DHS" or "the Government") since November 1, 2017, in connection with removal proceedings, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

PER CURIAM. Frederick Webster filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in Union County Circuit Court, on August 1, 2003, claiming that the indictment against him charging burglary'and felony murder was invalid, because the offenses were committed in more than one county and thus a statewide grand jury had subject-matter jurisdiction rather than the Broward County grand jury. The trial court dismissed the petition. Webster ha

PER CURIAM. Dismissed. Appellant argues his notice of appeal was timely filed because he timely filed a motion for rehearing. Appellant’s motion for rehearing was untimely filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a). The burden is on the appellant to demonstrate that he timely filed the motion for rehearing under the “mail box rule,” as set forth in Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla.1992). Appellant

PER CURIAM. Lawrence Lee Jones petitions for writ of certiorari to review an order of the circuit court which denied his petition for writ of mandamus and found that the petition was frivolous and subjected him to disciplinary action by the Department of Corrections pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes. We conclude that the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law when

JUDGMENT Per Curiam This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

PER CURIAM: Appellant, a state prison inmate, filed a civil rights complaint alleging an unconstitutional deprivation of his right to meaningful access to the courts. We must decide whether we have jurisdiction over Appellant’s appeal and whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Appellant’s several motions. We AFFIRM in part and VACATE and REMAND in part.

*601Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. These cases present the question whether the Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations require permits before channeled stormwater runoff from logging roads can be discharged into the navigable waters of the United States. Under the statute and its implementing regulations, a permit is requir

ORDER In Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011), we reversed the decision of the district court dismissing plaintiffs suit brought under the Clean Water Act. While our decision was awaiting review by the United States Supreme Court, the Environmental Protection Agency amended the relevant regulation. See Rev

ORDER** We affirm for the reasons expressed in the well-supported opinions of the Bankruptcy Court in Decker v. Mariani, et al. (In re Portofino Development Corp.), No. 93-57024 (Bankr.N.D.Cal., March 31, 2000), and the District Court in Decker v. Mariani, et al. (In re Portofino Develop-merit Corp.), No. 00-20462 (N.D.Cal., April 4, 2002). AFFIRMED,

ATLEE, Judge. After a bench trial, the Circuit Court for the City of Newport News (“trial court”) convicted appellant Michael Paul Reid of two counts of obtaining money by false pretenses. On appeal, Reid argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike the Commonwealth’s evidence regarding the two counts of obtaining money by false pretenses because: (1) a loan

Opinion SULLIVAN, C. J. The defendant, Mark J. Decker, a physician, appeals from the judgment of the Appellate Court reversing the trial court’s judgment in his favor and granting the plaintiff, Gilbert Hayes, a new trial. The sole question in this certified appeal is “[d]id the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiffs expert’s proffered testimony regarding the effect of discontinuatio