Cases

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. ID WALTER H. RICE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. *939#11), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time

203 F.3d 964 (6th Cir. 2000) Larry Lucas, d/b/a Lucas Towing, Plaintiff,Sottile's Inc., d/b/a S.T.A.R. Towing; James Sottile, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Monroe County; Carl Van Wert, Sheriff; Ronald Cole, Undersheriff; Darwin Paz, Captain; Tom Hoffman, Captain, Defendants-Appellees. No. 98-1876 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Argued: September 2

Wilbur, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s 1980 Federal income tax in the amount of $1,529. The sole issue for decision is whether compensation earned by petitioner while she was a member of a religious order is includable in her gross income. FINDINGS OF FACT Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The st

Michael J. Newman, United States Magistrate Judge This Social Security disability benefits appeal is before the undersigned for disposition based upon the parties' consent. Doc. 15. At issue is whether the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") erred in finding Plaintiff not "disabled" and therefore unentitled to Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB"). This case is before the Court on Plaintiff's Statement of Errors (doc. 9), the Commissio

Fearing, C.J. ¶38 (dissenting) — And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and. make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and. of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and. lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.” Matthew 28:18-20 (Revised Stan

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1731 ___________________________ Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Stuart T. Williams; Stacey Jassey; Mary Phipps; Andrew Behm; James Bialk

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge 1. INTRODUCTION Presently before the court is petitioner Kenneth L. Holland’s (“petitioner”) application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (D.1.2) Petitioner is incarcerated at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Institution in Smyrna, Delaware. For the reasons that follow, the court will dismiss his application.

ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court are Defendant Catherine Cortez-Masto’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 10), and Defendants Clark County, Diana Alba, and David Rogers’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 15). *1136I. BACKGROUND This is a civil rights action challenging the constitutionalit

Gregory F. Van Tatenhove, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court upon Movant Timothy Alexander Conley's petition to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. [R. 153.] Consistent with local practice, this matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert E. Wier, wh

OPINION JAMES KNOLL GARDNER, District Judge. *630 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF DECISION. PROCEDURAL HISTORY. C* CO to CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES. ^ CO CD Petitioner’s Contentions. ^ CO CD Respondent

OPINION CLAY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-Appellants, James Sottile and Sottile’s Inc., d/b/a S.T.A.R. Towing, ap *967 peal from the order entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, granting summary judgment on behalf of Defendants-App

MEMORANDUM JOHN E. JONES III, District Judge. Pending before the Court is a counseled petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, on *430behalf of Petitioner Seifullah Abdul-Salaam (“Petitioner” or “Abdul-Salaam”), a state inmate under sentence of death and currently incarcerated at the State Correctional Inst

319 F.Supp.2d 592 (2004) Andre STEVENS, Petitioner, v. Martin HORN, Commissioner, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al., Respondents. No. 99-CV-1918. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. May 26, 2004. *593 *594 Billy H. Nolas, Esquire, Kathy Swedlow, Esquire, Defender Asso

538 F.Supp.2d 1073 (2008) Robert PEARSON, Plaintiff v. GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF TYCO INTERNATIONAL (US), INC., Defendant. No. 4:07CV00871 JLH. United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Western Division. March 3, 2008. *1075 Larry James Hartsfield, Hartsfield, Almand & Denison, PLLC, Little Rock, AR,

In the Iowa Supreme Court No. 23–1766 Submitted December 18, 2024—Filed June 27, 2025 Eugene Sikora, Appellant, vs. State of Iowa and Beth Skinner, in her official capacity as Director of the Iowa Department of Corrections, Appellees. Appe

872 S.W.2d 489 (1994) Arthur E. WELSHANS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOATMEN'S BANCSHARES, INC., Defendant-Respondent. No. 62511. Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three. January 18, 1994. Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied February 23, 1994. Application to Transfer Denied April 26, 1994.

276 F.Supp.2d 490 (2003) YAMAHA MOTOR CORP., U.S.A., Plaintiff, v. Demerst B. SMIT, in his Official Capacity as the Acting Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Jim's Motorcycle, Inc., d/b/a Atlas Honda/Yamaha Defendants. No. CIV.A. 3:01CV471. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. July 31, 2003.

300 F.Supp.2d 690 (2004) James P. HARRISON, Petitioner, v. Rondle ANDERSON, Superintendent, Respondent. No. IP 99-0933-C-B/S. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. January 22, 2004. *691 *692 *693 *

228 N.J. Super. 428 (1988) 549 A.2d 1275 LEONARD WOLFE AS ADMINISTRATOR AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF DEBRA WOLFE, PLAINTIFFS, v. SPERLING AGENCY, INC., AND THE HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS. Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division Essex County. Decided August 12, 1988. *429 Pamela Giannotto for Plaint

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 373 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 374 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE N