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.
20 opinions for “Samson v. United States”
Samson v. United Statespublic domain
Case below, 540 Fed.Appx. 927.Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Samson v. United Statespublic domain
Alemay Samson was charged with attempted distribution of marijuana1 and attempted possession with intent to distribute marijuana2 stemming, respectively, from a sale to an undercover officer inside an apartment on one day and the recovery of marijuana from the same apartment two days later when Samson was arrested during the execution of a search warrant. After he was arrested, Samson
United States v. Samson Xavior-Smithpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-3085 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Samson Diamonte Xavior-Smith
United States v. Samsonpublic domain
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Charles Samson has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Samson has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the
United States v. Samsonpublic domain
PER CURIAM: Jackenson Constant and Carl Richard Samson jointly appeal their convictions for conspiring to interfere with commerce by robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a); attempting to interfere with commerce by robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) and 2; and possessing firearms in furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) and 2. On appeal, Constant and Samson jointly
Samson v. United Statespublic domain
OPINION ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHITE, Senior Judge. This is an action by Sister Mary K. Samson (“Sister Mary” or “the plaintiff”) for the recovery of internal revenue taxes.1 The jurisdiction of the court is invoked under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1), as amended by section 133(a) of Public Law No. 97-164 (96 Stat. 25, 39-40).
Samson v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Samson v. Gordonpublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Minnesota denied.
Sister Mary K. Samson v. United Statespublic domain
FRIEDMAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I conclude that under the governing provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (Code) and the implementing Treasury Regulations, Sister Mary was not subject to Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes on the salary she received from the St. Louis County Hospital (Hospital) for working there as a speech therapist, as
United States v. Samson Aldacopublic domain
BYE, Circuit Judge. After a bench trial, Samson Aldaco was convicted of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1), and 846 and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). He appeals the district court’s
United States v. Samson Aldacopublic domain
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-2533 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * Distr
BRENDAN LINEHAN SHANNON, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE The efficacy of releases in Chapter 11 plans has been a hot topic for many years. Barrels of ink have been spilt on the issue in judicial opinions, scholarly journals, trade publications and legal education conferences. Attention typically is focused on complex jurisdictional and constitutional concerns, as well as profound policy debates about the wisdom and fairness of provi
Jones v. Samson Res. Corp.public domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Samson v. Manleypublic domain
Petition for rehearing denied. Former decision, 562 U.S. 962, 131 S. Ct. 468, 178 L. Ed. 2d 289, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7994.
Williams v. Samson Res. Corp.public domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Samson v. Manleypublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, denied.
Atigeo LLC v. Samson (In re Blixseth)public domain
TERRY L. MYERS, U.S. BANKRUPTCY JUDGE INTRODUCTION *109In this adversary proceeding, Western Capital Partners LLC ("WCP") as third-party plaintiff filed suit against third-party defendants Michael Sandoval ("Sandoval"); xPatterns, LLC, a Washington limited liability company ("xPatterns"); and Opspring LLC ("O
Troy v. Samson Manufacturing Corp.public domain
MOORE, Circuit Judge. Stephen P. Troy, Jr. appeals from the district court’s judgment in a civil action under 35 U.S.C. § 146 and challenges the court’s conclusion that the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) properly cancelled the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,216,451 (’451 patent) in an interference proceeding with Samson Manufacturing Corp. (Samson). Because the
Samson v. Manleypublic domain
Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. Certiorari denied.
United States v. William M. Samsonpublic domain
162 F.3d 1153 U.S.v.William M. Samson NO. 97-7483 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. June 22, 1998 Appeal From: M.D.Pa. ,No.97cr00003 1 Affirmed.