Cases

Helen H. Brandenburg filed a bill in the circuit court of Cook county against the Country Club Building Corporation, which prayed for an injunction commanding the *Page 138 defendant to remove, remodel or reconstruct so much of a nine- story apartment building which it had erected on its premises on the west side of South Shore drive, in the city of Chicago, as extended east of a building line established for such premises, so as to conform to certain res

249 P.3d 932 (2010) 2011-NMCA-015 TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC. and New Mexico Mining Association, Petitioners-Appellees, v. John D'ANTONIO, Jr., New Mexico State Engineer, Respondent-Appellant. No. 27,802. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. October 28, 2010. Certiorari Granted, No. 32,704, February 9, 2011.

612 So.2d 597 (1992) In re ORDER ON MOTIONS TO WITHDRAW FILED BY TENTH CIRCUIT PUBLIC DEFENDER. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. December 16, 1992. EN BANC. The Public Defender of the Tenth Judicial Circuit has filed motions entitled "Certification of Conflict and Motion to Withdraw Due to Excessive Caseload and Motion for Writ of Mandamus". The motions allege a

319 F.Supp. 113 (1970) Catherine J. HEALY et al., Plaintiffs, v. F. Don JAMES et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 13721. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. October 29, 1970. Alvin Pudlin, Abraham S. Silver, Pudlin & Silver, New Britain, Conn., for plaintiffs. F. Michael Ahern, Asst. Atty. Gen., State of Conn., Hartford, Conn., for defendants. <

196 Cal.App.3d 367 (1987) 241 Cal. Rptr. 715 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELIAS ZENDEJAS, Defendant and Appellant. Docket No. H002027. Court of Appeals of California, Sixth District. November 19, 1987. *369 COUNSEL Steven L. Whiteside, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defend

784 F.Supp. 146 (1992) Robert J. JEFFREYS, Jr., d/b/a Jeffreys Flex-Flow Restrictor Company, Plaintiff, v. Gerald M. EXTEN, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 86-32 LON. United States District Court, D. Delaware. January 15, 1992. *147 Richard F. Stokes of Tunnell & Raysor, Georgetown, Del. (Elliott D. Goldberg of Goldberg &

STEPHENSON, Circuit Judge. These consolidated appeals arise out of the district court’s1 approval of a proposed settlement, pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of a private antitrust national class action brought by International House of Pancakes (IHOP) franchisees against their franchisor, a division of International Industries, Inc.’ The approved settlement, filed o

William B. Brown, J. 1(A). Appellants’ first three propositions of law raise essentially the same issue: that only negligence principles should be applied in a design defect case involving a so-called “second collision.” In this case, appellees seek to hold appellants liable for injuries “enhanced” by a design defect of the vehicle in which appellees were riding when an accident occurred. This cause of act

Opinion PERRY, Judge: We granted review in these cases to consider identical claims, made by the appellants, that evidence leading to their convictions was seized during searches authorized by commanding officers who, by reason of their involvement in ferreting out evidence of crime, were not neutral and detached magistrates and that hence the evidence was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to

539 F.Supp. 730 (1982) Fidel RAMOS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Richard D. LAMM, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 77-K-1093. United States District Court, D. Colorado. March 17, 1982. As Amended March 26, 1982. *731 *732 Edwin S. Kahn, Kelly, Haglund, Garnsey & Kahn, Denver, Col

513 F.2d 114 1975-1 Trade Cases 60,222 Abraham GRUNIN, Appellant,v.INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF PANCAKES, a Division of InternationalIndustries, Inc., Appellee.SHAPIRO, POSELL & PILLING and Mitchell S. Shapiro, Appellants,v.INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF PANCAKES, a Division of InternationalIndustries, Inc., Appellee.Mark J. KLEIN, Appellant,v.INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF PANCAKES, a Division o

MEMORANDUM ** Intervenor-Appellant Freddie Fuiava’s petition for habeas corpus is currently pending in state court. The state court partially granted Fuiava’s motion under California Penal Code § 1054.9 to take additional discovery in support of his petition. Fuiava then moved to intervene in this closed case in the Central District of California seeking modification of any protective order covering the di

MEMORANDUM ** Intervenor-Appellant Freddie Fuiava’s petition for habeas corpus is currently pending in state court. The state court partially granted Fuiava’s motion under California Penal Code § 1054.9 to take additional discovery in support of his petition. Fuiava then moved to intervene in this closed case in the Central District of California seeking modification of any protective order covering the di

MEMORANDUM ** *667Freddie Fuiava appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to intervene in this closed case in the Central District, to seek modification of a protective order that apparently is still in effect. Fuiava, a prisoner seeking post-conviction relief in state court, alleges a need to access parts of the district

438 F.Supp. 1303 (1977) In re EQUITY FUNDING CORPORATION OF AMERICA SECURITIES LITIGATION. No. M.D.L.-142-MML. United States District Court, C. D. California. September 29, 1977. *1304 *1305 *1306 *1307