Cases

USCA11 Case: 23-12101 Document: 55-1 Date Filed: 01/07/2026 Page: 1 of 20 FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12101 ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

OPINION RAWLINSON, Circuit Judge: Edgar Alvirez, Jr. (Alvirez) appeals his jury conviction and sentence for assault resulting in serious bodily injury on an Indian reservation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 113(a)(6). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to review the district court’s judgment. We conclude t

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , No. 11-10244 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:10-cr-08049- DGC-1 EDGAR MIKE ALVIREZ, JR., Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

LOUIS H. POLLAK, Senior District Judge. Appellant Bartley “Barney” Walsh appeals his multicount conviction on charges related to his use of labor union and employee-benefit plan funds. We affirm. I. On September 15, 1989, a federal grand jury returned a twenty-three count indictment aga

133 F.Supp. 638 (1955) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Harry Renton BRIDGES, Defendant. No. 28876. United States District Court N. D. California, S. D. July 29, 1955. *639 Lloyd H. Burke, U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., Lynn J. Gillard and Robert H. Schnacke, Asst. U. S. Attys., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff. <

RIVES, Circuit Judge. A jury returned a verdict of guilty on each count of a four-count indictment charging appellant-defendant with attempted income tax evasion 1 for the years 1951 to 1954, inclusive. The court adjudged him guilty and committed him to the custody of the At

140 Ariz. 238 (1983) 681 P.2d 390 UNITED CALIFORNIA BANK, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. The PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New Jersey corporation, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. NAMETCO, an Arizona corporation, HRP Hotel Company, an Arizona limited partnership, the partners of which are Sam Shapiro, Barry Shapiro, Lawrence J. Shapiro, Michael Haskes, Ben Klimist, Joseph

Sawyer, J., (Sabin, J., concurring.) This, and the six other suits, are brought by the United States against the Central Pacific Railroad Company, as patentee, and its various grantees, now holding the title, to vacate seven different patents, embracing, in the aggregate, many thousand acres of land, as having been, improperly, issued by mistake. They are the same patents sought to be vacated in U. S. v. Centra

PARDEE, Circuit Judge. This appeal was submitted on the record without argument. The case shows that on the 20th of April, 1908, on a warrant of that date charging that one Woo Jew Dip *472did unlawfully, and in violation of the Chinese exclusion acts of the United States, ‘enter into and be and remain in the United States, Woo Jew Dip was arrested and brought before a Un

People v Ruiz (2024 NY Slip Op 03189) People v Ruiz 2024 NY Slip Op 03189 Decided on June 12, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

THOMAS, Circuit Judge: A-l Ambulance Service, Inc. (“A-l”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of its qui tam action against the County of San Mateo, the County of Monterey, and two private ambulance companies for alleged violations of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733. The district court dismissed A-l’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the “public disclosure bar” of 31 U.S.C. § 373

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RODNEY BURCH, No. 24-3646 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:22-cv- 00366-AKB v. CITY OF CHUBBUCK, a political subdivision of the State of Idaho; and OPINION KEVIN B. ENGLAND, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States Distric

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SAM FRIEDENBERG, personal No. 21-35078 representative of the estate of Marc Sanford; DEREK LARWICK, D.C. No. personal representative of the estate of 6:18-cv-00177- Richard Bates; LORRE SANFORD, MK an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellees, OPINION v. LANE COUNTY; LANE COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH, AKA Lane County Behavio

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEVEN W. CROWE, No. 21-15802 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 1:18-cv-00288- ACK-RT CHRISTINE WORMUTH, Secretary of the Army, Defendant-Appellee, OPINION RYAN D. MCCARTHY, Defendant-Appellee, and MARK

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 21-2728 _______________ CITY OF HOBOKEN v. CHEVRON CORPORATION; CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.; EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION; EXXONMOBIL OIL CORPORATION; SHELL PLC; BP P.L.C.; BP AMERICA, INC.; CONOCOPHILLIPS; CONOCOPHILLIPS CO.; PHILLIPS 66; PHILLIPS 66 COMPANY; AMERI

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 18, 2013 Session CAROLE HOKE JOHNS v. SAM N. JOHNS, JR. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C-10-198 Roy Morgan, Jr., Judge No. W2013-01102-COA-R3-CV - Filed November 15, 2013 This appeal involves the latest in a series of attempts by Mother to recover child support

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA TAMELIN STONE et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. ALAMEDA HEALTH SYSTEM, Defendant and Respondent. S279137 First Appellate District, Division Five A164021 Alameda County Superior Court RG21092734 August 15, 202

21-1446 Connecticut ex rel. Tong v. Exxon Mobil Corp. United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2022 Argued: September 23, 2022 Decided: September 27, 2023 No. 21-1446-cv STATE OF CONNECTICUT, by its

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER FRANK MAAS, United States Magistrate Judge. In this putative class action, Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, allege that the process by which the United States Census Bureau (“Census Bureau”) screens applicants for temporary jobs- for the Decennial Census is racially discriminatory and therefore violates Title VII of the Civil Rights

Filed 5/25/23 See Dissenting Opinion CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION ∗ IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, E077772 Plaintiff and Appellant; (Super.Ct.No. CIVSB2025319) v.