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.
20 opinions for “William L. Hastie”
United States v. Kimberly Smith Hastiepublic domain
WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judge: This appeal requires us to decide two issues: first, whether the term “personal *1300information” in the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2721(a), 2725(3), includes email addresses; and second, whether the government presented sufficient evidence for the jury to find that the License Commissioner of Mobile County, Alabama,
Hastie v. Hendersonpublic domain
121 F.Supp.2d 72 (2000) Jimmie L. HASTIE, Plaintiff, v. William J. HENDERSON, Postmaster General, Defendant. Civil Action No. 94-1437 SSH. United States District Court, District of Columbia. October 27, 2000. As Amended November 20, 2000. *73 Mitchell Kastner, Highland Park, NJ, for plaintiff. Anthony Mich
Hastie v. JC Penney Co., Inc.public domain
886 F.Supp. 1017 (1994) Charles E. HASTIE, Plaintiff, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, INC., Defendant. No. 88-CV-1062A. United States District Court, W.D. New York. October 28, 1994. *1018 *1019 *1020 Falk & Siemer, Buffalo, NY (Donald G. McGrath, of counsel),
Hastie v. Rodriguezpublic domain
Appellant recovered $16,600.00 as damages for personal injury due to the appellees' negligence. Appellant pleaded wrongful death, the survival statute, bystander injury, negligence, and gross negligence. Appellant brings two points of error. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Appellant, by her second point of error, complains that the trial court erred in not rendering judgment for emotional trauma damages of $27,000.00 found by the jury.
Estate of Hastiepublic domain
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1287 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1288 OPINION I. INTRODUCTION Timothy Florez appeals from the probate cou
Hasty v. Keller HCP Partners, L.P.public domain
260 S.W.3d 666 (2008) Gary HASTY, Appellant v. KELLER HCP PARTNERS, L.P., Appellee. No. 05-07-00884-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. July 29, 2008. *667 James M. Murphy, Dallas, for Appellant. Robert Clary, William L. Foreman, Owens, Clary & Aiken, L.L.P., Dallas, for Appellee. Before Justices FITZGERALD,
Freund v. Hastiepublic domain
13 Wn. App. 731 (1975) 537 P.2d 804 ARNOLD R. FREUND, Respondent, v. JOHN L. HASTIE, Appellant. No. 3773-43640-1. The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One. June 23, 1975. As amended by order September 12, 1975. Schroeter, Jackson, Goldmark & Bender and Douglas D. McBroom, for appellant. Dav
Hastie v. Van Meterpublic domain
MOORE, Chief Justice. In this forcible entry and detainer action the trial court entered a decree granting plaintiff possession of the realty described in the pleadings and ordering defendants’ removal therefrom. Defendants have appealed. We affirm. Defendants assert the trial court erred in finding they were tenants and not purchasers of the property from plaintiff through their alleged oral conditional
In Re Hastiepublic domain
2 F.3d 1042 62 USLW 2113, Bankr. L. Rep. P 75,413, 21UCC Rep.Serv.2d 212 In re John Douglas HASTIE, Debtor.FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, and AcquisitionManagement, Inc., successor to the claims of FDIC, Appellant,v.John Douglas HASTIE, Appellee. No. 92-6034. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. Aug. 13,
L.G.M.L v. Noempublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA L.G.M.L. et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 25-2942 (TJK) KRISTI NOEM et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Just before midnight on the Saturday of Labor Day weekend, several Executive Branch agencies began to implement a plan to expel from the U
Carter, C., Pets. v. Chapman, L.public domain
[J-20-2022] [MO: Baer, C.J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT CAROL ANN CARTER, MONICA : No. 7 MM 2022 PARRILLA, REBECCA POYOUROW, : WILLIAM TUNG, ROSEANNE MILAZZO, : BURT SIEGEL, SUSAN CASSANELLI, LEE : ARGUED: February 18, 2022 CASSANELLI, LYNN WACHMAN,
Community Bank & Trust Company v. William J. Copsespublic domain
OPINION LUTTIG, Circuit Judge: Appellee, Community Bank & Trust Company, a North Carolina banking corporation, brought this diversity action under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 against appellant, William J. Copses, a South Carolina resident and citizen, to recover damages for breach of a loan guaranty agreement. Appellant asserted in defense to Community Bank &am;
Ziglar v. Abbasipublic domain
Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV-B. After the September 11 terrorist attacks in this country, and in response to the deaths, destruction, and dangers they caused, the United States Government ordered hundreds of illegal aliens to be taken into custody and held. Pending a determination whether a particular detainee had connections to terrorism, t
United States v. Ramone Williamspublic domain
SMITH, Chief Judge. *662 After Ramone Williams pleaded guilty to firearm offenses, the district court 1 sentenced him to 60 months' imprisonment. Williams argues three Sentencing Guidelines issues on appeal. We affirm.
In re M.L.public domain
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED In re M.L. May 8, 2020 No. 19-0219 (Kanawha County 16-JA-569) released at 3:00 p.m. EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK
William Battle, III v. J. Ledfordpublic domain
DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge: The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit. When a prisoner filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after exhausting those remedies, the district court held t
William Roy Tate v. the State of Texaspublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00352-CR William Roy TATE, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas,
PER CURIAM. This appeal presents the same issues as those decided today in United States v. Sullivan, 333 F.2d 100, and United States v. Wilson, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant, 333 F.2d 137, i. e., issues relating to automatic premium loans and policy loans. We resolve these issues here as we did in the eases
William Andrew Wright v. Stephen Spauldingpublic domain
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0245p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT WILLIAM ANDREW WRIGHT, ┐ Petitioner-Appellant, │
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Hastiepublic domain
BRORBY, Circuit Judge. The issue in this case is whether’a perfected security interest in registered and certificated common stock continues in cash dividends paid on that stock under the Uniform Commercial Code as enacted in the state of Oklahoma. I Acquisition Management, Inc., a successor in interest of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, acquired a security interest in s