⚖ 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.

9 opinions for “Reborn v. University of North Texas”

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022-11-23 · Published · cited 0×
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 18-CV-1257 & 19-CV-64 NICHOLAS ANTHONY CZAJKA, APPELLANT, v. HOLT GRAPHIC
Trump v. Barbarapublic domain
Supreme Court of the United States · 2026-06-30 · Published · cited 0×
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2025 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
District Court, D. Connecticut · 2016-08-09 · Published · cited 6× · 200 F. Supp. 3d 312; 2017 A.M.C. 520; 95 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 766; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105097; 2016 WL 4250222
OMNIBUS RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS HAIGHT, Senior District Judge “If the highest aim of a captain were to preserve his ship, he would keep it in port forever.” This aphorism is attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas,1 whose resume did not include ocean yacht racing. The ship involved in this action, an ocean racing yacht, did not remain in port. Rather, in August
Supreme Court of the United States · 2026-06-30 · Published · cited 0×
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2025 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
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018-01-31 · Published · cited 0×
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued May 24, 2017 Decided January 31, 2018 No. 15-1177 PHH CORPORATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, RESPONDENT On Petition for Rehearing En Banc Theodore B. Olson argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018-01-31 · Published · cited 67× · 881 F.3d 75
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued May 24, 2017 Decided January 31, 2018 No. 15-1177 PHH CORPORATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, RESPONDENT On Petition for Rehearing En Banc Theodore B. Olson argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs
Indiana Court of Appeals · 1979-01-31 · Published · cited 15× · 384 N.E.2d 1177; 1979 Ind. App. LEXIS 1527
384 N.E.2d 1177 (1979) THE SEYMOUR NATIONAL BANK AS GUARDIAN FOR TIMOTHY CLYDE O'SULLIVAN, the Seymour National Bank, As Special Administrator of the Estate of Deborah O'Sullivan, John L. O'Sullivan, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. STATE of Indiana, Defendant-Appellee. No. 1-578A125. Court of Appeals of Indiana, In Banc, First District. January 31, 1979.
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · 2014-06-18 · Published · cited 0×
THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB Hearing: Mailed: March 7, 2013 June 18, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _____ Trademark Trial and Appeal Board _____ Amanda Blackhorse, Marcus Briggs-Cloud, Philip Gover,