Cases

A take-nothing summary judgment terminated plaintiff John W. Hays' actions for damages against defendants Ray McNeice, Jim Ed Waller, individually and in his capacity as president of Plains National Bank of Lubbock, Texas, and the Plains National Bank. The judgment was rendered on the ground that Hays' pleadings established that the causes of action he alleged were barred by statutes of limitations. Disagreeing that the defendants conclusively established the affirmative defense, we r

802 F.2d 473 McNeicev.D.O.T., F.A.A. 85-1669 United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. 9/26/86 MSPB Affirmed

550 F.2d 39 McNeicev.Safeway Stores, Inc.* No. 75-2656 United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit 3/14/77 1 N.D.Tex. AFFIRMED

250 Minn. 142 (1957) 84 N.W. (2d) 232 JOHN R. McNEICE v. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND ANOTHER. No. 37,026. Supreme Court of Minnesota. June 28, 1957. Miles Lord, Attorney General, Robert W. Garrity, Deputy Attorney General, John R. Murphy, Assistant Attorney General, Charles A. Sawyer, City Attorney, and Raymond H. H

EGAN, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s objections to interrogatories filed by the plaintiff. Specifically, the defendant maintains that the information sought is privileged under the rulings of Hickman v. Taylor, 1947, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451 and Alltmont v. United States, 3 Cir., 1949, 177 F.2d 971. As enunciated in many decisions, the party moving for disc

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1113 ___________________________ Pitman Farms lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Kuehl Poultry, LLC; Rodney Boser; Dan Schlichting; John Tschida; Chr

ORDER MARY S. SCRIVEN, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. McCoun III on June 20, 2014 (Dkt. 142). The Report and Recommendation recommends that Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 98) be granted in part and denied in part, and that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt.

PAGE, Justice (concurring specially). I agree that the district court’s decision to adopt the recommendation of the sentencing circle should be affirmed, but would do so not because the state agreed to be bound by the circle recommendation, but because the restorative justice statute authorizes that result. While the statute admits of some ambiguity, I conclude that, by applying established principl

OPINION Chief Justice SUTTELL, for the Court. This case originated as a negligence and wrongful death action brought by Kathryn Manning (Mrs. Manning or plaintiff), individually and as administratrix of the estate of Michael Manning (Manning) and on behalf of her four minor children, against Peter J. Bellafiore, M.D. (Dr. Bellafiore or defendant), but has since evolved into extensive liti

OPINION ROBERT H. SCHUMACHER, Judge. Relator Minnesota Property Insurance Placement, an insurance provider, challenges an order of the Commissioner of Commerce that it honor a damages claim filed by respondent HomeComings Financial Network, Inc. for losses sustained in a fire involving property insured by Minnesota Property and mortgaged to HomeComings. Minnesota Property argues that because the fire insura

ROTH, Circuit Judge *. Our return to this case is prompted by the motion of defendant Robert Durnan for summary judgment on plaintiff Ramon Ospina’s two remaining claims. As explained in detail in our October 31, 1990 opinion, Ospina asserts that Durnan applied excessive force to Ospina’s wrist during an otherwise lawful arrest. He first claims that this alleged transgression violated his right t

749 F.Supp. 572 (1990) Ramon Elias OSPINA, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF DELAWARE; Department of Public Safety, State of Delaware; Robert Durnan; Clifford M. Graviet; Howard Young; and Robert J. Watson, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 89-585-JRR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. October 31, 1990. *573 Caroly

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER LOCKE, Magistrate Judge Plaintiffs Stanley Frederique, Luckelson Frederique, Eline Frederique, and Paul Frederique (collectively, the “Plaintiffs” or “Frederiques”) bring this action against Defendants County of Nassau, Police Officer Hector Rosario, and Police Officer Jason Scholl (collectively, the “Defendants”), alleging causes of action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York

681 F.Supp. 965 (1987) Byron MENIDES, Plaintiff, v. THE COLONIAL GROUP, INC., John A. McNeice, Jr., and C. Herbert Emilson, Defendants. Civ. A. No. 87-0098-MA. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. October 26, 1987. Richard Dahlen, Richard E. Sanderson, Hale, Sanderson, Byrnes & Morton, Boston, Mass., for plaintiff. William A. McCormack, Richard

535 S.W.2d 651 (1976) Lindsey Henton BENTLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 51851. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. April 20, 1976. *652 Daniel H. Benson, Lubbock, for appellant. Alton R. Griffin, Dist. Atty. and Mark L. Withrow, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lubbock, Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty. and David S. Mc

789 F.Supp. 1279 (1992) MUTUAL EXPORT CORP., Plaintiff, v. WESTPAC BANKING CORP., Defendant. No. 90 Civ. 1479 (WK). United States District Court, S.D. New York. April 21, 1992. *1280 Daniel A. Ross, Sharfman, Shanman, Poret & Siviglia, P.C., New York City, for plaintiff. Edwin G. Shallert, Andrea L. Labov, Debevoise &a;

307 Md. 216 (1986) 513 A.2d 291 E. EDWARD HOUGHTON ET UX. v. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND. No. 76, September Term, 1985. Court of Appeals of Maryland. August 22, 1986. Submitted to MURPHY, C.J., and ELDRIDGE, COLE, RODOWSKY, COUCH and McAULIFFE, JJ., and CHARLES E. ORTH, Jr., Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals (retired),

ROBERT MADDEN HILL, Circuit Judge. Coastal Distributing Company, Inc., (Coastal) appeals from the adverse entry of judgment by the district court in its suit against NGK Spark Plugs (U.S.A.), Inc., (NGK-USA) and NGK Spark Plug Company, Ltd., (NGK, Ltd.) (collectively referred to as NGK). 1 Because the district court pro

304 Md. 404 (1985) 499 A.2d 940 STATE OF MARYLAND v. ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-EIGHT GAMING DEVICES. No. 106 September Term, 1984. Court of Appeals of Maryland. November 7, 1985. Avery Aisenstark, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Stephen H. Sachs, Atty. Gen., Lynette M. Phillips, Asst. Atty. Gen., on brief), Baltimore, for appellant. Thomas C. Morrow (Wi

OPINION OF THE COURT Samuel L. Green, J. This is a CPLR article 78 proceeding. Petitioners question the application and constitutionality of a 1952 City of Buffalo Ordinance (ch 7, § 27) which regulates the licensing of coin-operated amusement devices. They seek declaratory and injunctive relief. Petitioners contend that the ordinance is substantively vague, procedurally deficient, unevenly applied and bey