Cases

966 A.2d 398 (2009) DREHER v. U.S. No. 07-CF-238. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. February 25, 2009. Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

39 F.3d 1169 Dreher (Herbert)v.U.S. NO. 94-5031 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Sept 26, 1994 Appeal From: D.N.J., Brown, J. 1 AFFIRMED.

Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.

Memorandum Ruling and Order MELANQON, District Judge. Before the Court are motions filed by both the Plaintiff and Defendant. Defendant, the United States of America, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (“ATF”), moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) or, in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56(c). Plaintiff, Hugh T. Dreher (“Dreher”)

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Hugh Dreher appeals a summary judgment in which the district court refused to declare that he has not been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20) (West Supp.1997). Finding no error, we affirm. I.

540 U.S. 888 DREHERv.PINCHAK, ADMINISTRATOR, EAST JERSEY STATE PRISON, ET AL. No. 03-5107. Supreme Court of United States. October 6, 2003. 1 Appeal from the C. A. 3d Cir. 2 Certio

375 F.Supp. 1061 (1972) Cecil DREHER et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Civ. No. 52044-OJC. United States District Court, N. D. California. September 27, 1972. Grossman, Ackerman & Peters, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs. James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., Robert J. Finan, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for defendan

Claim of uncompensated taking; dredging of navigable river allegedly the but-for cause of collapse of support of land and installations along banks; no jurisdiction over due process claim; disputed issues of material fact regarding takings claim OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge. Plaintiffs, Donald and Brenda Pellegrini and Anne Ebel, bri

O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge. This is a consolidated appeal arising from claims by Appellants — abutting landowners — that the United States effected a taking of their property without just compensation when it converted a former railroad corridor into a recreational trail pursuant to the National Trails System Act Amendments of 1983 (“Trails Act”).

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Motion for Reconsideration; Rule 59(a)(1); Fifth Amendment Taking; National Trails System Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1241 et seq.; Severance Damages; Loss of Access; Sufficient Support for Expert Opinion; Proper Scope of Expert Opinion; Fed. R. Evid. 702; Post-Trial Admission of Deposition; Fed. R. Civ. P. 32. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDE

OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge, This rails-to-trails class action is before the court on the parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and plaintiffs’ Motion for Court Approval of Fees and Proposed Division of the Common Fund. Plaintiffs are more than 500 landowners who allege a tak

SCHALL, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-Appellants Dorothy L. Biery, the Julia R. Chalfant Etvir Trust, K.A.K. Farms, Inc., American Packaging Corporation, and Collins Industries, Inc., are landowners in Kansas. Each of them owns land abutting a 2.88-mile stretch of rail corridor near the City of South Hutchinson, Kansas. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, their predece

OPINION AND ORDER Charles F. Lettow, Judge This takings case concerns a plot of land located in Culebra Island, Puerto Rico and turns in part on events that occurred more than 100 years ago. Pending before the court is defendant’s motion for leave to file its first amended answer (“Def.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 34, filed on February 17, 2014. The government ori

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. This Cause having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

OPINION HORN, J. Plaintiffs, a group of landowners in the Westlands Water District (the Westlands) within the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project, have filed claims in the United States Court of Federal Claims, under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, alleging that the government’s failure to comply with its statutory obligation to provide drainage to plaintiffs’ farmlands has

HUGHES, Circuit Judge. The Hopi Tribe filed suit against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims seeking damages to cover the cost of providing safe drinking water on the Hopi Reservation. In order to invoke the trial court’s jurisdiction, the Hopi Tribe must identify a statute or regulation imposing a specific obligation on the United States to provid

PER CURIAM. Sheik Aaron Hunter-El appeals the dismissal of his complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims for lack of prosecution. Under Rule 41(b) of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims, the court may dismiss a case if the plaintiff *924fails to prosecute. Having reviewed the papers and Mr. Hunter-El’s brief, we conclude that the Court of Federal Cla