Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
11 opinions for “Vance v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution”
Noble v. Adamspublic domain
ORDER With the filing of the Amended Opinion, Pro Se Appellee’s petition for rehearing filed April 8, 2011, is hereby DENIED, no further petitions for rehearing will be accepted. OPINION TROTT, Circuit Judge: Adams and Cuevas are prison officials responsible for a post-riot lockdown of Corcoran State Prison in California. They appeal the district court’s denial
Noble v. Adamspublic domain
636 F.3d 525 (2011) Steve Joseph NOBLE, IV, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. D. ADAMS; D. Cuevas, Defendants-Appellants. No. 09-17251. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted February 15, 2011.[*] Filed March 17, 2011. Constance L. Picciano, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for the appellants. Steve Joseph Noble IV,
Noble v. Adamspublic domain
646 F.3d 1138 (2011) Steve Joseph NOBLE, IV, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. D. ADAMS; D. Cuevas, Defendants-Appellants. No. 09-17251. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted February 15, 2011.[*] Opinion Filed March 17, 2011. Amended Opinion Filed August 2, 2011. *1139 Constan
Forrest Andrew Jordan v. Ray Lippman, Warden, and Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General for the State of Georgiapublic domain
R. LANIER ANDERSON, III, Circuit Judge: On July 23, 1978, there was a riot at the Georgia State Prison in Reidsville (“GSPReidsville”). The riot left two inmates and *1266 one prison guard dead and another guard seriously wounded. Appellant Forrest Andrew Jordan was charged with mutiny in a penal
Borden v. United Statespublic domain
(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
Hayes v. Doveypublic domain
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) (ECF No. 79) BARRY TED MOSKOWITZ, Chief Judge. I. Procedural Background Dontay Hayes (“Plaintiff’), a state prisoner incarcerated at Calipatria State Prison (“CAL”), is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1
Mast v. A.A.public domain
PRESENT: Powell, Kelsey, McCullough, Chafin, Russell, and Mann, JJ., and Millette, S.J. JOSHUA MAST AND STEPHANIE MAST Record No. 240707 OPINION BY v. Court of Appeals Nos. 1855-22-2, JUSTICE D. ARTHUR KELSEY 0876-23-2, 0940-23-2, and 0953-23-2 FEBRUARY 12, 2026 A.A. AND F.A. FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA In 2020, a Virginia circuit cour
Hernandez v. Catepublic domain
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE MANUEL L. REAL, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge (“Report”) and the objections to the Report, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation. Good cause appearing, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations contained in the Report after havi
Lacy v. Statepublic domain
ROY NOBLE LEE, Presiding Justice, for the Court: This is a pro se appeal by Roosevelt Lacy, who is presently incarcerated at the Mississippi State Penitentiary, from an order of the Circuit Court of Sunflower County, Mississippi, dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus. The sole question involved in this appeal and presented in the petition for writ of habeas corpus is whe
District Attorney for the Suffolk District v. Watsonpublic domain
381 Mass. 648 (1980) 411 N.E.2d 1274 DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE SUFFOLK DISTRICT vs. JAMES WATSON & others.[1] Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. May 29, 1980. October 28, 1980. Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., QUIRICO, BRAUCHER, KAPLAN, WILKINS, LIACOS, & ABRAMS, JJ. William P. Homans, Jr. (John Rei
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Assn.public domain
Mr. Justice Black delivered the opinion of the Court. For seventy-five years this Court has held, whenever the question has been presented, that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution does not deprive the individual states of power to regulate and tax specific activities of foreign insurance companies which sell policies within their territories. Each state has been held to have this power even though negotiat