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 “Sibley v. Dick”
Flynn, John v. Dick Corppublic domain
Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge HENDERSON. KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge. The appellants, John Flynn (Flynn) et al., trustees of the Bricklayers & Trowel Trades International Pension Fund (IPF or the Fund), sued Dick Corporation (Company) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq.
Sibley v. Simontonpublic domain
Dick, J. This is a creditor’s bill filed against the defendant, as executrix and sole devisee under the will of R. F. Simonton, for the purpose of administering the assets of the estate of the testator. Under previous orders, decrees, and proceedings, the proceeds arising from the sale of the personal property and the lands have been inadequate to satisfy the claims of the plaintiffs. A motion is now made, after due notice, to c
725 F.2d 843 5 Employee Benefits Ca 1001 TEXTILE WORKERS PENSION FUND, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.STANDARD DYE & FINISHING CO., INC., Rocco Barone, BillCarafello, Adolph Nazarro, Sr., Adolph Nazarro,Jr., Joseph Nazarro, Dick Knight, DavidLavorgna and Morris Wax, Defendants,Standard Dye & Finishing Co., Inc., Defendant-Appellant.SIBLEY, LINDSAY & CURR CO., A DIVISION OF ASSOCIATED DRY
Rindley v. Gory Associated Industries, Inc.public domain
PER CURIAM. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the authority of King v. Insurance Company of North America, 426 So.2d 1302 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). LETTS, HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
United States v. Petersonpublic domain
Case: 24-30043 Document: 151-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/27/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit FILED No. 24-30043 August 27, 2025
Shuler v. Dickspublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MELODIE SHULER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 24-1292 (RDM) MOSES DICKS, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Melodie Shuler and her emancipated son, Meleik Delaney, both of whom are proceeding pro se, filed this action
Drescher v. Maleepublic domain
10/18/2022 DA 21-0619 Case Number: DA 21-0619 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2022 MT 200 CHARLES DRESCHER, Plaintiff, Counter Defendant, and Appellee, v. J
Hunter v. Usagencies Insurancepublic domain
MOORE, J. h USAgencies Casualty Insurance Company appeals a judgment ordering it to pay Joey Hunter $8,905.07, the salvage value of his truck, after an accident in which the truck was a total loss and USA-gencies paid off Hunter’s mortgage lender in accord with the insurance policy. We reverse and render. Factual and Procedural Background Hunter, a resident of Monroe, bough
State v. Andres C.public domain
STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. ANDRES C.* (SC 20692) Robinson, C. J., and McDonald, D’Auria, Mullins, Ecker, Dannehy and Bright, Js.** Syllabus Convicted of the crimes of sexual assault in the third degree and risk of injury to a child in connection with his alleged sexual abuse of the * In accordance with our policy of protecting the privacy interests of the victims of sexual abuse and the crime
United States v. Petersonpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 24-30043 December 9, 2025 ____________
United States v. Petersonpublic domain
Case: 24-30043 Document: 195-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/09/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-30043 FILED
Jones v. District of Columbiapublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DOUGLAS JONES, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 21-836 (RC) : v. : Re Document No.: 41 : DISTRICT O
Greene v. Hensepublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SHELBY GREENE, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 16-00901 (ESH) FRIENDSHIP PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL, INC., et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the
Sparkman v. Zwicker & Associates, P.C.public domain
374 F.Supp.2d 293 (2005) Felicia SPARKMAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ZWICKER & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Defendant. No. 04 CV 1143(NG)(KAM). United States District Court, E.D. New York. June 30, 2005. *294 Abraham Kleinman, Lawrence Katz, Katz & Kleinman, Uniondale, NY, for Plaintiff.</
Judgment rendered October 12, 2022. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 54,761-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA ***** TEQUILLA DORSEY Plaintiff-Appell
Finch v. Conrailpublic domain
Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover for work-related injuries sustained by David Finch (plaintiff), an employee of third-party defendant, Warner Cable Company (Warner). Prior to his accident, plaintiff was using" an aerial bucket truck to transfer cable lines from existing utility poles to new poles that were jointly owned by def
CARDAMONE, Circuit Judge: On these two appeals we are called upon to analyze the withdrawal liability provisions in the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (MPPAA or Act), Pub.L. No. 96-364,94 Stat. 1208 (codified in scattered sections of 29 U.S.C.). Although the two employers before us withdrew from the multiemployer plans, of which they had been members prior to the enactment of the MPPAA, the Act provides fo
Bratton v. City of Florencepublic domain
Randy and Alice Bratton appeal from a summary judgment for the City of Florence in their action against the City seeking damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Brattons argue that the City violated their rights to equal protection of the law when it denied them permission to build an apartment complex. They argue that the zoning ordinance is unconstitutional because, they say, it delegates unbridled discretion to the Planning Commission, and they
Haaland v. Brackeenpublic domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2022 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
Haaland v. Brackeenpublic domain
PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 599 U. S. Part 1 Pages 255–381 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 15, 2023 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requ