Cases

300 F.Supp. 256 (1968) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. George W. HENNEN, State Engineer for the State of Nevada, et al., Defendants. Civ. No. LV-927. United States District Court D. Nevada. May 2, 1968. *257 Joseph L. Ward, U. S. Atty., Las Vegas, Nev., Martin Green, U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for plaintif

[Cite as State v. Hennen, 2012-Ohio-2278.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 25903 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE TRACI A. HENNEN

17 B.R. 720 (1982) Robert L. HENNEN and Patricia Hennen, Plaintiffs, v. The DAYTON POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, Debtor, and George W. Ledford, Intervenor-Trustee. In the Matter of Robert L. HENNEN, Patricia Hennen, Debtors. Bankruptcy No. 3-80-02754, Adv. No. 3-80-0612. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio, W.D. February 17, 1982.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 17-3080 SUSAN HENNEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Vincent S. Hennen, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, RespondentHennen v. CommissionerDocket No. 69552United States Tax Court

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 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

7/8/2021 1:59:43 PM Compare Results Old File: New File: 19-1434.pdf 19-1434_new.pdf versus 72 pages (362 KB) 72 pages (360 KB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HEIDI STIRRUP et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 21-1893 (TJK) JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his official capac- ity as President of the United States, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This case challenges the Biden administration’s ma

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-3306 ___________________________ United States of America, ex rel. Kenneth Kraemer, et al. lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs Relators - Appellants v. United Dairies, L.L.P.; Union Dairy, L.L.P.; Westland Dair

236 F.3d 410 (8th Cir. 2000) MICHAEL MCNAMARA; NANCY B. MCNAMARA APPELLANTS,V.COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, APPELLEE.VINCENT E. BOT; JUDY BOT, APPELLANTS,V.COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, APPELLEE.JOHN P. HENNEN; TERESA HENNEN, APPELLANTS,V.COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, APPELLEE. Nos. 99-3876, 99-3891 and 99-3968 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHT

982 P.2d 652 (1999) 96 Wash.App. 932 UNITED STATES TOBACCO SALES AND MARKETING COMPANY INC. Appellant, v. STATE of Washington, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Respondent. No. 22676-6-II. Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2. August 20, 1999. *654 John Gerhart Hennen, Olympia, for Respondent. Norman J.

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. When the Framers drafted the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution in 1787, the notion of administrative law judges (“ALJs”) presiding at securities law enforcement hearings could not have been contemplated. Nor could an executive branch made up .of more than 4 million people,1 most, of them employees. Some of them are “Officers- of the United States,” i

429 F.Supp.2d 27 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, v. I. Lewis LIBBY, Defendant. Criminal No. 05-394(RBW). United States District Court, District of Columbia. April 27, 2006. *28 Patrick Fitzgerald, Office of the United States Attorney, Northern District of Illinois, Debra R. Bonamici, Office of the Special Counsel, Chicago, IL, K

CLIFTON, Circuit Judge: This appeal poses the issue of whether sovereign immunity bars individual landowners and water users (collectively, “the farmers”) of the Westlands Water District (“Westlands”) from suing the United States for allegedly having violated a contract the United States entered into with Westlands for the delivery of water. The district court originally concluded that sovereign immunity had been waived and

358 F.3d 1137 Francis A. ORFF; Brooks Farms II; Brooks Farms IV; Brooks Farms V; G.S. Farms; Five-D Westside Farms, Inc.; R & S Farming; Cardella Ranch; Gramis Family Farms II; Edwin R. O'Neill, Bro Partnership; BTO Partnership; EJC Partnership; ERO Partnership; JEO Partnership; SLO Partnership; TBO Partnership; C.S. Stefanopoulos Trust; Elena Stefanopoulos Trust; Estate of Helen Stefanopoulos; D.D. Stefanopoulos Trust;Pagona Stefanopoulos;

660 F.3d 65 (2011) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Respondent. No. 11-1225. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard October 4, 2011. Decided October 27, 2011. Nicole Lancia, Attorney, with whom Usha Dheenan, Supervisory Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, was on brief for petitioner.

Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. We must determine in this case whether Congress has authorized the Secretary of Transportation to appoint civilian members of the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals, and if so, whether this authorization is constitutional under the Appointments Clause of Article II. I The Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals (formerly k

Mr. Justice CATRON dissenting.. A principal question in this case is, how far it is affected bj .the decree, in. the case of Gaines and wife v. Chew, Relf, and .others, reported in 12 Hovvard.- In that casé the complainant sought to recover: first, four *618fifths of the real estate of Daniel Clark, alleged to be vested in t

69 F.Supp.2d 286 (1999) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Jeannette SOTOMAYOR VAZQUEZ (02); Defendant. No. CR. 97-091(JAF). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. October 25, 1999. *287 Maria A. Dominguez-Victoriano, Asst. U.S. Attorney, Edna Rosario, Asst. U.S. Attorney, Guillermo Gil, U.S. Attorney, San Juan, PR, f

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, DENYING ALL OTHER PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT ALAN B. JOHNSON, Chief Judge. Before the court is the defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). The defendants contend this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to reach the merits of the Sta