Cases

FLAUM, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Timothy Thomas is one of approximately 200 prisoners in federal custody serving “mixed sentences” for committing separate offenses under the United States Code and the District of Columbia Code. This case involves the interaction of federal and D.C. parole eligibility provisions as they apply to Thomas. The United States Parole Commission (“the C

807 F.Supp.2d 563 (2011) ACTIVEVIDEO NETWORKS, INC., Plaintiff, v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Verizon Services Corp., Verizon Virginia Inc., and Verizon South Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:10cv248. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. August 17, 2011. *564 Nathan Wayne McCutcheon, David Michael

807 F.Supp.2d 544 (2011) ACTIVEVIDEO NETWORKS, INC., Plaintiff, v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Verizon Services Corp., Verizon Virginia Inc., and Verizon South Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:10cv248. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. August 17, 2011. *549 Nathan Wayne McCutcheon, David Michael

Catherine C. Blake, United States District Judge This is a case about consumer debt-collection practices. The plaintiffs own a home in Bel Air, Maryland, that sits within a homeowners' association called "Country Walk Community Association, Inc." (hereafter "Country Walk"). Am. Compl. ¶ 11. Defendant Elmore & Throop, P.C. is a law firm retained by Country Walk to collect debts owed to it by constituent homeowners, including, as

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 15a0176p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ┐ Plaintiff-Appellee, │

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOSEPH F. BIANCO, District Judge: On March 18, 2014, plaintiffs Thomas Foster and Coralie J. Foster (“plaintiffs” or “the Fosters”) filed this flood insurance action, bringing claims against the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”), Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”), and Alan Aronson (collectively, “defendants”). Allstate Insurance Company is a “Write Your Own” (“WYO”) flood

501 F.3d 832 (2007) Joseph THOMPSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick V. VEACH, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 06-2141. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued May 23, 2007. Decided September 7, 2007. *833 Song K. Cheng, argued, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner-Appellant.</

BROWN, Chief Judge. |! Purchasers of real property brought this action in redhibition and fraudu*1223lent/negligent misrepresentation against the seller and the seller’s real estate agent and broker. The seller, Laura DeLaCruz, had moved to Nevada and was served pursuant to Louisiana’s long arm statute. She did not answer the lawsuit or appear at trial. A prelimina

Kevin Whittington v. State, No. 2591, Sept. Term, 2018, Opinion by Leahy, J. Fourth Amendment > Search > GPS Tracking We hold that a court order issued under CP § 1.203.1, meets the requisites of a warrant under Fourth Amendment Law. The statute requires that an order be signed by a neutral and detached magistrate, based on probable cause, and supported by oath or affirmation. It must also identify, with reasonable particularity, the technology to be employed and the person about whom location

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 06a0472p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Petitioner-Appellant, - PAUL FAZZINI,

590 F.3d 592 (2010) William A. ARMSTRONG, Appellee, v. Mike KEMNA, Appellant. No. 09-2495. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: September 22, 2009. Filed: January 5, 2010. *593 Michael Joseph Spillane, AAG, argued, Jefferson City, MO, for appellant. JoAnn Trog, argued, St. Louis, MO,

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, United States District Judge THIS CAUSE is before the Court on (1) Defendant State of Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation’s Motion to Dismiss Counts III and V of Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. No. 4; DB & PR’s Motion),1 filed on March 16, 2016, and (2) Defendant Eugene R. Baker, Jr.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff

824 F.Supp. 624 (1992) Harry B. BARTLEY, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs, and Ronald Brown, et al., Intervenors, v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 3-91-CV-1857-H. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. December 11, 1992. *625 *626</

REGGIE B. WALTON, United States District Judge *6The plaintiff, Corey LeRoy Bey, proceeding pro se, filed this civil suit against the defendants, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority ("WMATA"), Amalgamated Transit Union Local 689 (the "Union"), and various individuals employed by both WMATA and the Union. See Second Amended Complaint ("Bey II

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 09-2495 ___________ William A. Armstrong, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court fo

[Cite as State v. Majid, 2012-Ohio-1192.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96855 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

WILNER, Judge, dissenting. A jury in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County awarded $1,000,000 in damages to the Estate of Douglas Beynon to compensate Mr. Beynon’s beneficiaries for the one-and-a-half to two-and-a-half seconds of fright that it assumed Mr. Bey-non must have suffered before crashing into the rear of Mr. Kirkland’s truck. Only by virtue of the stat

DYK, Circuit Judge. After a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, appellant Franklin Azubike (“Azubike”) was found guilty of (1) conspiring to possess with intent to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and (2) possessing heroin with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. He asserts that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for judgment of

CADY, Chief Justice. In this appeal from a judgment entered for the plaintiffs in a legal malpractice action, we must determine if the district court erred in concluding the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for emotional distress and punitive damages as a matter of law. On our review, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals, reverse the deci*11sion of the distri