Cases

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-1099 DONALD NICODEMUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, Defendant-Appellee and STATE OF INDIANA, Intervenor-A

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-1099 DONALD NICODEMUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, Defendant-Appellee and STATE OF INDIANA, Intervenor-A

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-1099 DONALD NICODEMUS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, Defendant-Appellee and STATE OF INDIANA, Intervenor-A

899 N.E.2d 1274 (2009) COOPER INDUSTRIES, LLC, et al., Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, Indiana, et al., Appellees (Defendants below). No. 49S04-0711-CV-541. Supreme Court of Indiana. January 22, 2009. *1277 Mark E. Shere, Vicki Wright, Libby Mote, Krieg Devault, LLP, Indianapolis, IN, Dale E. Stephenson, A

368 B.R. 733 (2007) In the Matter of Ginger Kay PHILLIPS, Debtor. Ginger Kay Phillips, Plaintiff, v. City of South Bend, defendant. Bankruptcy No. 05-34260 HCD, Adversary No. 06-3061. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division. March 27, 2007. *734 Loraine P. Troyer, Esq., Goshen, IN, attorney for plain

428 N.E.2d 217 (1981) SOUTH BEND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION, Paul J. Schwertley, and Joseph T. Helling, Appellants (Plaintiffs below), v. CITY OF SOUTH BEND, and City of South Bend, On Behalf of Its Department of Redevelopment, Appellees (Defendants below). No. 681S174. Supreme Court of Indiana. December 1, 1981. *218 Rich

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 602 U. S. Part 1 Pages 1–100 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT May 23, 2024 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 reque

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2023 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

STATON, Judge. Brooksfield Farm (Farm) filed a declaratory judgment action seeking the invalidation of an assessment, made by the City of South Bend (City), for the construction of a sewer system. The Farm alleged that the proceeding, with respect to the method of determination of the assessment, was defective in that it did not comply with the requirements of IC 1971, 19-2-7-1 et seq. After the City had failed to f

ACCEPTED 15-25-00022-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/26/2025 10:33 PM No. 15-25-00022-CV CHRIST

ACCEPTED 15-25-00104-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/7/2025 1:28 PM No. 15-25-00104-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE _________________________________________________ CLERK

124 S.W.3d 580 (2003) Bobby Wayne RAINS, et al. v. BEND OF THE RIVER, et al. Court of Appeals of Tennessee, at Nashville. October 11, 2000 Session. July 31, 2003. Permission to Appeal Denied November 24, 2003. *584 Richard W. Mattson, Nashville, Tennessee, Daniel H. Rader, III, Cookeville, Tennessee, for the appe

101 B.R. 10 (1989) In re CHICAGO SOUTH SHORE AND SOUTH BEND RAILROAD, Debtor. Bankruptcy No. 89 B 5898. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. June 16, 1989. *11 Leroy G. Inskeep of Rudnick & Wolfe, Chicago, Ill., Trustee. MEMORANDUM JOHN D. SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge. On April 7, 1989, the Chic

STATON, Judge, dissenting. I dissent. The record is absolutely void of any evidence which could establish an abandonment of the non-conforming use. A vested property interest does exist.’ Therefore, I would reverse the judgment of the trial court with an instruction to dissolve the preliminary injunction. The Majority Opinion predicates its abandonment conclusion upon two assumptions. Both

ORDER R. BRYAN HARWELL, District Judge. Plaintiff Leigh Ann Griffin (“Plaintiff’) filed the above action against Defendant alleging violations of her former employer, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 2003 & Supp.2010), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.A. §§

389 N.E.2d 23 (1979) THE SOUTH BEND FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, Indiana Education Employment Relations Board, Victor P. Hoehne, Cleon H. Foust, Jr., George Gardner, Appellants (Defendants below), v. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION — SOUTH BEND, Appellee (Plaintiff below). No. 2-677 A 222. Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District. April 25, 1979. Rehearing Denied

ORDER Patrick Amalemba, a native and citizen of Kenya, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding the immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT), cancellation of removal, voluntary departure, and adjustment of status. He also seeks review of the Board’s denial of his motion to reopen and remand remov

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 11, 2000 Session BOBBY WAYNE RAINS, ET AL. v. BEND OF THE RIVER, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Putnam County No. 98J-0254 John A. Turnbull, Judge No. M2000-00439-COA-R9-CV - Filed July 31, 2003 This appeal involves an eighteen year old who committed suicide with

Justice THOMAS, concurring. I join the Court's opinion in full but write separately to explain that I would find § 5 of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional as well. The Court's opinion sets forth the reasons. "The Voting Rights Act of 1965 employed extraordinary measures to address an extraordinary problem." Ante, at 2618. In the face of "unremitting and ingenious defiance" of citizens' constitution

WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge. Andriy Yasinskyy, a Ukrainian citizen, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture, and an immigration judge rejected his requests for relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals upheld the denial of relief, and Yasinskyy petitions for review. Although we are troubled by the IJ’s conclusion that the harms Yasi