Cases

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.

PER CURIAM. DECISION Appellants, two federal firefighters, appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (Black, J.), granting appellee's motion for summary judgment. Correspondingly denying appellants’ motion for summary judgment, the district court ruled that the formula in Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) Letter 551-5 used by the Office of Personnel Manageme

473 F.Supp.2d 131 (2005) UNITED STATES of America v. Clarence L. EARLE. Cr. A. No. 04-10065-MLW. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. November 2, 2005. Amended November 7, 2005. *132 Seth P. Berman, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA, for United States of America. MEMORANDUM

ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY ALLEGRA, Judge. Owing to its interaction with more than 250 million taxpayers annually, the Internal Revenue Service (Service or IRS) has a robust administrative practice, characterized by a panoply of multi-faceted and multi-purposed administrative pronouncements and positions. Among these are Treasury regulations (both interpretative and legislative), revenue rulings, private l

OPINION SMITH, Chief Judge. This matter is before the court on defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.1 2Plaintiffs, nineteen (19) present and former border patrol agents, brought this action pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1353a (1931) (1931 Act) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) (codified a

644 F.Supp. 370 (1986) UNITED STATES of America, v. John GOTTI, et al., Defendants. No. 85 CR 178. United States District Court, E.D. New York. October 2, 1986. *371 *372 Andrew J. Maloney, U.S. Atty. (Diane F. Giacalone, John Gleeson, Asst. U.S. Attys., of counsel), Brooklyn, N.Y., for the U.

BRYSON, Circuit Judge. This case concerns the amount of annual leave accrued each pay period by certain federal civil servants who work more than a standard eight-hour shift and more than a standard 40-hour workweek. The plaintiffs contend that they are entitled to accrue leave based on the length of their workday, contrary to regulations promulgated by the Office of Personnel

CLARY, Chief Judge. Defendants, Eric R. Clarke, M. D., and Horace R. Johnson, M. D., were indicted as of the above captioned number in a true bill returned on February 6, 1963. The indictment was laid in six Counts, charging both defendants, in Count 1, with conspiracy to violate the Narcotic Laws of the United States, Title 18 U.S.C. § 371. Defendant, Clarke, was charged in Counts 2, 4, 5 and 6 with vari

Cardona, P.J. Appeal (transferred to this Court by order of the Appellate Division, Fourth Department) from an order of the Supreme Court (Galloway, J.), entered November 17, 2009 in Monroe County, which, among other things, denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of serious injury. Plaintiff commenced this action for injuries she allegedly sustained in September 2006 when her motor vehicle

OPINION OF THE COURT Robert B. Wiggins, J. In this proceeding pursuant to article 10 of the Mental Hygiene Law, respondent moves, inter alia, to preclude the State’s experts from using various records in forming their opinions as to whether he suffers from a mental abnormality. He bases this application on the Court of Appeals decision in Matter of State of New York v Floyd Y (22 NY3d 95 [2013]) as

USCA11 Case: 21-10195 Date Filed: 08/15/2022 Page: 1 of 13 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-10195 ____________________ SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, JOSEPH CAPUTO,

OPINION OF THE COURT Robert B. Wiggins, J. In this proceeding pursuant to article 10 of the Mental Hygiene Law, respondent moves, inter alia, to preclude the State’s experts from using various records in forming their opinions as to whether he suffers from a mental abnormality. He bases this application on the Court of Appeals decision in Matter of State of New York v Floyd Y (22 NY3d 95 [2013]) as

344 S.W.3d 678 (2009) 2009 Ark. App. 664 Daniel G. PRICE, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. No. CA CR 08-942. Court of Appeals of Arkansas. October 7, 2009. *680 Daniel G. Price, appellant, pro se. Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee. KAREN R.

283 S.W.3d 631 (2008) Kanai GIKONYO, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. No. CA CR 07-00609. Court of Appeals of Arkansas. April 30, 2008. *632 David O. Bowden; and Hicks Law Firm, Little Rock, by: Rickey H. Hicks, for appellant. Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Karen Virginia Wallace, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee

2023 WI 2 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2020AP877 COMPLETE TITLE: Rachel Slabey, Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. Dunn County, Wisconsin, Dennis P. Smith, Brenda LaForte, Marshall L. Multhauf and Paul Gunness, Defendants-Respondents,

118 S.W.3d 691 (2003) Flennord SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent. No. WD 62704. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. November 4, 2003. Vanessa Caleb, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, MO, for Appellant. Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Attorney *692 General, Jeffers

RULING AND ORDER BRIAN A. JACKSON, Chief Judge. Before the Court is Defendant Cajun Deep Foundations LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46), filed by Defendant Cajun Deep Foundations, LLC (“Cajun Deep”), seeking an order from this Court dismissing Plaintiff Terrance J. La-vigne’s (“Lavigne”) claims against it, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.1 Lavig

228 F.3d 388 (5th Cir. 2000) SHEILA STOCKSTILL JACOBS, Deceased; ANTHONY JULIUS LAFORTE, Son of Sheila Stockstill Jacobs; and CHRISTOPHER LOFORTE, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.WEST FELICIANA SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants,BILL DANIEL; EARL REECH; and WAYNE RABALAIS, Defendants-Appellants. No. 99-30185 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Sept

561 N.W.2d 463 (1997) 221 Mich. App. 171 PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William MESSENGER, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 178923. Court of Appeals of Michigan. Submitted September 5, 1996, at Detroit. Decided January 21, 1997, at 9:15 a.m. Released for Publication April 9, 1997.