Cases

OPINION FRANKEL, District Judge. One defendant is named in all counts of the 35-count indictment, the others in only 34. The defendants are Apartment Development and Management, Inc. (“ADAM”), its manager, Virginia Fried, and three others of its employees, Brianne Goldstein, Rose De Angelis, and Robert De Angelis.1 A motion now to be granted seeks dismissal of Counts 2 through

546 F.2d 419 U. S.v.Fried No. 76-1137 United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit 10/7/76 1 D.N.J. AFFIRMED

MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER BARTELS, District Judge. Zali Fried moves this court, pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C., for an order granting a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence and upon evidence of an exculpatory nature allegedly suppressed by the prosecutor, Assistant U. S. Attorney Thomas P. Puccio. Incidental to the motion for a new trial, defendant m

C. A. 8th Cir. Certio-rari denied.

456 F.2d 1336 73-1 USTC P 9207 U. S.v.Fried35694 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Second Circuit Jan. 6, 1972 1 E.D.N.Y.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

REGAN, District Judge. This action is brought by the Government under Title 26 U.S.C. §§ 7401 and 7403 to reduce to judgment the unpaid balance due on income tax liabilities of the defendants for the years 1952, 1953 and 1954. The tax liabilities, and penalty and interest additions to the tax, totaling $122,872.55, were determined by a stipulated- decision of the Tax Court, of the United States in the case of Meyer Fried and

527 F.3d 439 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, ex rel., Joseph FRIED; Public Program Testing Organization, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. WEST INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee. No. 07-50732. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. May 9, 2008. *440 Mitchell Reed Kreindler (argued), Kreindler & Associates, Hous

183 F.Supp. 371 (1960) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Solomon FRIED and New York Life Insurance Company, Defendants. Civ. No. 15371. United States District Court E. D. New York. April 18, 1960. *372 Cornelius W. Wickersham, Jr., U. S. Atty., E. D. New York, Brooklyn, N. Y., (Elliott Kahaner, Chief Asst. U. S. Atty., Broo

544 U.S. 1036 BASCOMv.FRIED ET AL. No. 04-9023. Supreme Court of United States. May 16, 2005. 1 C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 116 Fed. Appx. 300.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DAVID NAMDAR, ) ) Plaintiff and Counterclaim ) Defendant, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2024-0535-JTL ) JORDAN FRIED and JEFFREY ) GARRETT LONG, )

674 F.Supp. 636 (1987) Sherman FRIED, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, et al., Defendants. No. 81 C 5387. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. November 30, 1987. James A. Romanyak, Romanyak & Miller, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff. Anton R. Valukas, U.S. Atty., William T. Clabault, Asst. U.S. Atty., Russell M. Young, U.S. Dept. of Energy

579 F.Supp. 1212 (1983) Sherman FRIED, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne University Association, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Argonne Occupational Health and Safety Division, Defendants. No. 81 C 5387. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. December 21, 1983. *1213

The petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is granted.

PER CURIAM. On appeal from a judgment of conviction for selling liquor in violation of § 904(a) of Title 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, at prices higher than those fixed by the regulations of the Price Administrator of the Office of Price Administration, in accordance with § 902(a). Only two questions are raised upon this appeal: the insufficiency of the information, and the incompetency of the testimony by which the prosecution es

Super. Ct. Pa. Cer-tiorari denied.

C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.