Cases

RONALD M. GOULD, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part: This case presents the question whether the City of Pasco, Washington (“Pasco”) violated the First Amendment when it invited local artists to display their work in *1084its new city hall and then refused to permit certain pieces of art to be

762 F.Supp. 1434 (1991) Roger L. COMEAU; David L. Comeau; Charles G. Comeau; Rooks County Savings Association; and Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (as successor in interest to Rooks County Savings Association); and Rupp Financial Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. Terry RUPP; C.F. Rupp; Farmers National Bank; Alexander Grant & Co., Defendants, Grant Thornton, (formerly Alexander Grant & Co., a partnership); and Fox & Compa

The opinion of the court was delivered by Harvey, J.: This is an original proceeding in mandamus brought by the school board of a newly organized rural high-school district which includes territory in Russell and Ellis counties and by the clerk of Russell county to compel the county clerk of Ellis county, first, to furnish plaintiffs a certificate of the assessed value of property in that part of the di

Ostrander, J. (after stating the facts). The first question presented is whether or not an appeal lies from the order of the circuit court. This question is answered when it is determined whether the demurrer is general or special. Previous to September 8, 1883, appeals from orders overruling demurrers were not permitted. Bennett v. Nichols, 12 Mich. 22; Kirchner v. Wood, 48 Mich. 199. The amen

OPINION In a trial before a jury, appellant was convicted of murder. Punishment was assessed at life. In his first ground of error, appellant complains of the court's failure to include in its charge to the jury instructions on the law of circumstantial evidence. Appellant timely in writing objected to the omission of such instruction, which objection was overruled by the court prior to the reading of the charge to the jury. We conclude from the evidence that t

The opinion of the court was delivered by Wedell, J.: This action was brought in the district court to obtain a lump-sum judgment covering all past and future weekly installment payments provided for in a judgment previously rendered in a workmen’s compensation case. Plaintiff, the workman, prevailed and defendant, the employer, appeals. The instant action was brought pursuant to a 1943 law wh

Justice ALBIN delivered the opinion of the Court. Many of our citizens suffering from mental disabilities, who are presently institutionalized, can live independent and productive lives in supportive housing in our communities. The challenge has been to find sufficient housing with accompanying services for the mentally disabled. In 2005, the Governor’s Task Force on Mental Health reported that many persons i

McGirr v Zurbrick (2023 NY Slip Op 03568) McGirr v Zurbrick 2023 NY Slip Op 03568 Decided on June 30, 2023 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, phone (907) 264-0608, fax (907) 264-0878, email corrections@akcourts.us. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA SHELLEY FREDRICKSON, ) ) Supreme Cour

Memorandum Decision CHRISTIANSEN, Judge: T1 Keith and Sharon Lilley (Plaintiffs) appeal from the district court's order dismissing their breach of contract and negli-genee causes of action against Defendant Blake Ingram. We affirm. *472T 2 "When reviewing a 12(b)(6) motion [to dismiss], we recite the facts in a light most favorab

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 694 CA 12-00183 PRESENT: FAHEY, J.P., PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. BARBARA ANDERSON AND DAN FAULKNER, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RAY JUSTICE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, AND STEVE EZARD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. RUPP, BAASE, PFALZGRAF, CUNNINGHAM & COPPOLA LLC, ROCHESTER (MATTHEW A. LENHARD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APP

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #014 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 22nd day of March, 2024 are as follows: BY Griffin, J.: 2023-C-00928 GUSTAVO BONILLA VS. VERGES ROME ARCHITECTS - A PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL CORPORATION, PIVOTAL ENGINEERING LLC, STEVEN HANNAH ROME AND JAMES E. A

771 F.Supp. 337 (1991) OXY USA INC. and Oxy Helex Inc., Plaintiffs, v. PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY, National Helium Corporation, Williams Natural Gas Company, Mobil Oil Corporation, and Mesa Operating Limited Partnership, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 91-4055-S. United States District Court, D. Kansas. August 20, 1991. *338 Mar

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Alejandra Padilla v. Young Il An (A-43-22) (087862) Argued November 8, 2023 -- Decided June 13, 2024 PIERRE-LOUIS, J., writing for the Court. In this appeal, the Court considers whether o

PER CURIAM. Article III, section 45 of the Missouri Constitution establishes when the General Assembly must redistrict Missouri for the election of members to the United States House of Representatives, and that the districts “shall be composed of contiguous territory as compact and nearly equal in population as may be.” Plaintiffs alleged in their petitions that the districts were not drawn “as compact ... as may be,” specifi

678 F.Supp. 831 (1988) David C. SEITTER, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of Select Brands Industries, Inc., v. Frederick P. SCHOENFELD, et al. v. LAVENTHOL AND HORWATH CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, Third-Party Defendant. Civ. A. No. 87-2074-S. United States District Court, D. Kansas. January 8, 1988. *832 George M. Bock,

ORDER AND REASONS SECTION: “E” (5) SUSIE MORGAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is Defendant’s motion for summary judgment.1 For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND This is a products liability action. Plaintiff Joel C. Thibodeaux (“Thibodeaux”) was hired by Plaintiff-in-Interv

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DANIEL D. CRABTREE, District Judge. The University of Kansas fired plaintiff Dr. Curtis Klaassen, a longtime medical professor at the school, on January 24, 2014. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against the University of Kansas, the University of Kansas School of Medicine, and the University of Kansas Medical Center (collectively, “KUMC”). Plaintiff also sued various KUMC o

Kavanagh, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Columbia County (Nichols, J.), rendered June 19, 2007, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of murder in the first degree (two counts). Defendant was charged by indictment with two counts of murder in the first degree in connection with the fatal shooting in June 2006 of his estranged wife’s parents, Dennis Lynch (here

MEMORANDUM OPINION KESSLER, District Judge. This matter is now before the Court on Defendants’1 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment With Respect to the Government’s Nicotine Manipulation and Addiction Allegations (“Motion”). Upon consideration of the Motion, the Government’s Opposition, the Reply, and the entire rec*21