Cases

VICTOR C. HOWARD, Presiding Judge. Jeffery W. Holloway appeals from the judgment of the trial court, sitting without a jury, in favor of Student Loan Marketing Association (also known as Sallie Mae, hereinafter “SLMA”) in its suit on promissory notes executed by Mr. Holloway. He brings five claims of error on appeal, all based on alleged evidentiary insufficiencies at trial. The judgment of the trial cour

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 14-1806 BRYANA BIBLE, Individually and on Behalf of the Proposed Class, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STUDENT AID FUNDS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the Un

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOSEPH H. McKINLEY, JR., Chief Judge. This matter is before the Court on motion by the Defendants, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., and MERSCORP Holdings, Inc., to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) [DN 27] and on a motion by Defendants, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, in its capacity as Conserva

MEMORANDUM DECISION Rebecca B. Connelly, United States Bankruptcy Judge The United States Trustee asserts that the totality of Mr. Hall’s financial circumstances demonstrates abuse of the provisions of chapter 7 óf the Bankruptcy Code under section 707(b)(3)(B). On this basis, the United States Trustee moves this Court to dismiss Mr. Hall’s case pursuant to section 707(b)(1). For the reasons set forth below,

04/14/2025 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 5, 2025 Session TODD MICHAEL PERKINS V. ELIZABETH MUNDY (PERKINS) SLOANE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumner County No. 2021-CV-600 Joe Thompson, Judge

06/06/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 9, 2019 Session RICHARD ALAN PEARSON v. CHRISTEN CREIGHTON PEARSON Appeal from the Chancery Court for Shelby County No. CH-15-0482 JoeDae L. Jenkins, Chancellor ___________________________________

OPINION AND ORDER RAYMOND P. MOORE, United States District Judge On the last day of 2015, appellants Rich-ard William Palmer (“Mr. Palmer”) and Dar Mae Palmer (collectively, “appel-lants”) appealed the decision of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colo-rado ("the Bankruptcy Court”), granting appellee the U.S, Trustee’s (“the UST” or “appellee”) Motion to Dismiss Debtors’ Case Under 11 U.S.C. §

OPINION OF THE COURT Daniel P. Conviser, J. The defendant was charged in this case with one count of unlawful use of secret scientific material in violation of Penal Law § 165.07 for conduct which occurred on June 1, 2009 (count 1), one count alleging a violation of the same statute with respect to conduct which occurred on June 5, 2009 (count 2) and one count of unlawful duplication of computer related m

OPINION OF THE COURT AMBRO, Circuit Judge. We revisit equitable mootness, a judge-made abstention doctrine that allows a court to avoid hearing, the merits of a bankruptcy appeal because implementing the requested relief would cause havoc.1 As many courts have noted, though its name suggests mootness in the constitutional sense, that is where the similarity between the doctrines end

632 F.3d 762 (2011) PLUMBERS' UNION LOCAL NO. 12 PENSION FUND, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Plumbers' & Pipefitters' Welfare Educational Fund; NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION; John P. Graham; Nathan Gorin; John McCarthy; David Findlay; Alternative Loan Trust 2006-AF1; Alternative Loan Trust 2006-AF2; Alternative Loan Trust 2006-AP1; Alternative

714 F.Supp.2d 508 (2010) Antonio GIORDANO, M.D. v. Pier Paolo CLAUDIO, M.D., et al. Civil Action No. 09-1456. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. May 14, 2010. *514 Richard L. Scheff, Jeffrey S. Feldman, Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiff. Jason A. Poling, Huntington,

PER CURIAM. Petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission (“AGC”), acting through Bar Counsel, filed, in accordance with Maryland Rule 16-751,1 a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action against Cristine Kepple (“Respondent”) for violation of the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct (“MLRPC”). Petitioner alleges that Respondent violated MLRPC Rule 8.1(a) (Bar Admission and Disciplinary

10/31/2022 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs April 19, 2022 JAMES FRANKLIN BYRD v. VALERIE FINLEY BYRD v. BYRD BROTHERS, LLC, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-003838-16 Robert Samual Weiss, Judge

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ No. 12-2736 ________________ In re: SEMCRUDE, L.P., et al., Reorganized Debtors SAMSON ENERGY RESOURCES COMPANY, et al. v. SEMCRUDE, L.P., et al. Luke Oil Company, C & S Oil/Cross Properties, Inc.,

09/27/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON June 18, 2019 Session ANDREA (MESSER) SCHWAGER v. TIMOTHY SCOTT MESSER Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-004762-08 Jerry Stokes, Judge ___________________________________

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-2051 WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ALLIANCE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CURTIS T. HILL, JR., et al., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of Indiana, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-2051 WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH ALLIANCE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CURTIS T. HILL, JR., et al., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of Indiana, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS <

(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