Cases

Opinion DONDERO, J. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, the Environmental Law Foundation (ELF), filed a complaint against Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation and various other food manufacturers, distributors, and retailers, seeking enforcement of the provisions of the *312 <

715 F.Supp. 1230 (1989) M/S SHIRAZ IMPEX, Plaintiff, v. BEECH-NUT NUTRITION CORP., Defendant. BEECH-NUT NUTRITION CORP., Third-Party Plaintiff, v. MILUPA CORPORATION, Third-Party Defendant. No. 88 Civ. 3520 (KTD). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 22, 1989. *1231 Irving Levine, New York City, for plain

Filed 4/16/15 Unmodified version attached CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW FOUNDATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, A139821 v. (Alameda County BEECH-NUT NUTRITION CORP. et al., S

871 F.2d 1181 27 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 849 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.BEECH-NUT NUTRITION CORPORATION, Neils L. Hoyvald, John F.Lavery, Zeev Kaplansky, Raymond H. Wells, Nina B.Williamson, South Orange Express, Inc.,Danny A. Shaeffer, Defendants,Appeal of Neils L. HOYVALD and John F. Lavery, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 422, 423, Dockets 88-1287, 88-1288.

CARDAMONE, Circuit Judge, dissenting in part: Although I agree that the conspiracy and mail fraud convictions should be affirmed, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion reversing the substantive FDCA convictions on the grounds of improper venue. I would hold, as did the district court, that violations of 21 U.S.C. § 331(a) are “continuing offenses,” to which the venue provisions of

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PLATT, District Judge. In this straightforward criminal case charging defendants with misbranding and adulterating apple juice products, defense counsel, in a brilliant display of imaginative creativity, have attempted in a series of pre-trial motions to convert rather simple allegations contained in the indictment herein into a complex maze of confusing theories based in large par

925 F.2d 604 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.BEECH-NUT NUTRITION CORPORATION and Niels L. Hoyvald, Defendants,Niels L. Hoyvald, Defendant-Appellant. No. 605, Docket 90-1368. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Nov. 27, 1990.Decided Feb. 13, 1991. John D. Cline, Washington, D.C.

CARDAMONE, Circuit Judge: This appeal by Thomas Gambino from his judgment of conviction for racketeering consisting of illegal gambling and loansharking, and for conspiracy to engage in racketeering raises several issues. The first is whether governmental delay resulted in a violation of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161-3174 (1988 & Supp. II 1990) (

906 F.2d 814 30 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 528 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Moe TILLEM, et al., Defendants.Appeal of Thomas OVERTON, Desmond Larrier, Astley Campbell,Elissa Cohen-Deutsch, a/k/a "Lisa", BernardTaynor, Albert Simms, Harvey Cohen, CarlBower, Defendants-Appellants.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee-Cross-Appellant, (Re: 89-1225)v.Moe TILLEM, et al., Defendants.Appea

23-6877-cr United States v. Novis (Denkberg) In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM 2024 Nos. 23-6877 (L), 23-6925 (CON) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. GARY DENKBERG, SEAN NOVIS

Filed 8/3/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT MARK BRAWERMAN et al., B305802 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC576947) v. LOEB & LOEB LLP et al., Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL from judgment of the Superior Court of Los Ang

*65SUMMARY ORDER Defendants Tyrell Evans, Robert Thomas, and Craig Moye appeal judgments of conviction entered in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Hall, J.). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and the record of prior proceedings. A. Tyrell Evans Evans, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute c

WILLIAM B. SHUBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the court is plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Docket No. 29.) The court held a hearing on the motion on February 20, 2018. I. Factual and Procedural History This case concerns a challenge to California's listing of glyphosate1 as a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer, as w

19-0325 USA v. Chow 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 ------ 4 August Term, 2019 5 (Argued: January 6, 2020 Decided: April 6, 2021) 6 Docket No. 19-0325 7 _________________________________________________________ 8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 9

DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge: Defendant-Appellant Michelle Favreau1 (“Favreau”) appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont (Sessions, J.) entered February 29, 2008, following a jury trial, convicting her of one count of international parental kidnapping in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1204. On appeal, Favreau argues that the district court er

BERNSTEIN, J., This appeal presents straightforward issues: (1) Whether a non-party to a contract may invoke a contract’s arbitration clause to dismiss all allegations in a class action lawsuit, and (2) when dismissal is denied, may that non-party to the contract claim aright of interlocutory appeal by having characterized their motion as a motion to compel arbitration. This class action was commenced on

*********************************************** 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

SUMMARY ORDER AFTER ARGUMENT AND UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HERE*107BY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED, except with respect to the daily reporting requirement and travel ban imposed as conditions of the Appellant’s probation, for which judgment is VACATED and REMANDED to the District Court for clarification

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION SAYLOR, District Judge. This is a criminal prosecution arising out of allegedly false representations concern*259ing a corporation’s eligibility to obtain contracts as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (“SDVOSB”). Defendant David Gorski is charg

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER MATSUMOTO, District Judge: INTRODUCTION The government charges defendants Courtney Dupree (“Dupree”) and Thomas Foley (“Foley”) with various counts of Bank Fraud, Making a False Statement, and Conspiracy to Commit Bank, Mail, and Wire Fraud. Presently before the court are the government’s motions in limine to admit and preclude certai