Cases

OPINION SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge: I. INTRODUCTION This litigation represents a challenge to the construction of a 20-mile, high-speed rail system (the “Project”) from the western portion of Oahu through the downtown area of Honolulu, Hawaii. Honolulu has been unsuccessfully struggling to cope with traffic congestion since the midl960s. That was when Congress passed the Urban Mass Tran

325 S.W.3d 389 (2010) Pamela SCROGGINS, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RED LOBSTER, et al., Defendants-Interpleader Plaintiffs, and Sisters of Mercy Health System, Interpleader Defendant-Appellant. No. SD 30214. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two. August 6, 2010. Motion for Rehearing or Transfer Denied August 30, 2010. App

ORDER The opinion filed on October 19, 1995 is hereby withdrawn. OPINION BEEZER, Circuit Judge. We reconsider whether a City of Phoenix ordinance which imposes a “floating buffer zone” restriction upon demonstrators outside of health care facilities violates the First Amendment. We affirm the district court’s decision declaring the Phoenix ordinance unconstitutional

SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge: In response to rising protest around abortion clinics in Phoenix, Arizona, the City Council in November of 1993 passed an ordinance regulating the conduct of demonstrators in public areas within 100 feet of health care facilities. Known as the Phoenix “bubble” ordinance, the law makes illegal a demonstrator’s failure to honor a person’s “clearly communicated request” to withdraw to a distance of e

ACCEPTED 04-14-00735-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 2/20/2015 1:49:45 PM

SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge: I. INTRODUCTION We review the order that the Federal Communications Commission entered as a result of our decision in California v. FCC, 905 F.2d 1217 (9th Cir.1990) (California I). In that case, we remanded for reconsideration certain FCC orders, known as Computer III,1 that specified the conditions under

171 Ill. App.3d 737 (1988) 525 N.E.2d 950 BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF CHICAGO et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. A, C AND S, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees. — BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 211 et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ABITIBI ASBESTOS MINING COMPANY et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 86-817. Illinois Appellate Court — First District

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge, dissenting in part and concurring in part, joined by Judges SCHROEDER and GRABER: Our antitrust law reflects Congress’s judgment that, with rare and specific exceptions, free competition for customers among firms protects and benefits the public by increasing efficiency and output, lowering prices, and improving the quality

779 N.E.2d 875 (2002) 202 Ill.2d 36 269 Ill.Dec. 21 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois ex rel. Joseph E. BIRKETT et al., Appellees and Cross-Appellants, v. The CITY OF CHICAGO, Appellant and Cross-Appellee. No. 93978. Supreme Court of Illinois. October 18, 2002. *877 Mara S. George

MARK D. PFEIFFER, Judge. Janey Archey, ■ Jamala Rogers, Johnson Lancaster, and Justin M. Stein III (“Appellants”) appeal the Judgment of the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri (“trial court”), approving the summary statement of an initiative petition ballot title. In their sole point on appeal, Appellants assert that the trial court erred in finding that the summary statement certified by the Secretary of State was fair an

120 F.3d 161 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5531, 97 Daily JournalD.A.R. 8990Katherine SABELKO and Nancy Barto, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.The CITY OF PHOENIX; Paul Johnson; Thelda Williams;Frances Emma Barwood; Skip Rimsza; CraigTribken; John Nelson; Kathy Dubs;Salomon F. Leija; Calvin C.Goode, Defendants-Appellants. No. 94-15495. United States Court of Appeals,Nint

225 S.W.3d 828 (2007) Dhiren S. SHETH, M.D., Appellant, v. Donald C. DEAREN, Appellee. No. 14-07-00004-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). May 24, 2007. *829 Nancy Bolin Broaddus, Houston, for appellant. John A. Davis, Houston, for appellee. Panel consists of Chief Justice HEDGES and Justices HUDSON

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge STEPHEN F. WILLIAMS. STEPHEN F. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: In the decisions under review the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission addressed a problem arising from natural gas pipelines’ and producers’ adjustments of their contract relations in response to federal ceiling prices on interstate sales at the wellhead. The Federal Power Commission (FERC’s predecessor) in

Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr

[Cite as Albers v. Lyon, 2026-Ohio-209.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO JAMES ALBERS, : APPEAL NO. C-250017 TRIAL NO. A-1903421 FRIEDA AARON, : PATRICIA ADAMS, : JUDGMENT ENTRY MICHELLE AGEE,

PROCEEDINGS (in chambers): Order Determining that Benham Has Not Carried Burden of Establishing Bankruptcy Appellate Standing; Permitting Taxation of Non-Fee Costs Under Fed. R.B.P. 8021; Declining to Sanction Benham Under Fed. R.B.P. 8020(a); Terminating and Closing the Case HONORABLE VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Appellant Erik

Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court

OPINION {¶ 1} Appellant, Kelley Haddox ("Haddox"), appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirming the order of the State Personnel Board of Review ("the SPRB") dismissing Haddox's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Because the SPRB properly concluded it lacked jurisdiction to hear Haddox's R.C. Chapter 124 appeal, we affirm. *Pa

ACCEPTED 03-14-00510-CV 3762693 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 1/14/201

LESLIE H. SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: This opinion addresses the issues in two related cases. The appeals were not consolidated prior to argument, and we do not consolidate them now. A single opinion is used to explain our decision in each appeal. In one of the two appeals, the former Chief Executive Officer of TransTexas Gas Corporation, John Stanley, arg