Cases

FLAUM, Circuit Judge. William Patrick Clark’s trucking business was hired to perform hauling services on a state-and federally funded highway project in Missouri. Because federal funds were in play, Clark’s contract with the project’s general contractor required that he pay his truck drivers the federal prevailing wage pursuant to the Davis-Bacon Act (which, at the time, was $35

W. JONES, Justice. I.Nature of the Case This is an appeal from a judgment of the magistrate court concerning the division of certain property pursuant to the divorce between Appellant, Bill Clark (“Bill”), and Amy Baruch (“Amy”). Bill appealed the magistrate court’s decision to the district court, which affi

741 F.2d 257 21 ERC 2111, 14 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,797 CARSON-TRUCKEE WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, Sierra PacificPower Company, and the State of Nevada,Plaintiffs-Appellants, Cross-Appellees,v.William P. CLARK, Secretary of the Interior, et al.,Defendants-Appellees,andPyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians,Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee, Cross-Appellant. Nos. 83-1549, 83

SCALIA, Circuit Judge. ' Appellant Stephen Thompson, an independent oil and gas developer, seeks review of the District Court’s dismissal of his application for declaratory and injunctive relief against the appellees, Secretary William P. Clark and the Department of the Interior. Thompson v. Watt, Civ. Action No.

HARRISON L. WINTER, Chief Judge: The Secretary of the Interior appeals from an order of the district court preliminarily enjoining him from enforcing against Mullins Coal Company (Mullins) a cessation order issued pursuant to 30 U.S.C. § 1271(a)(3). 600 F.Supp. 645. Because Mullins failed to exhaust available administrative remedi

720 F.2d 1475 20 ERC 1001, 14 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,061 SOUTHERN OREGON CITIZENS AGAINST TOXIC SPRAYS, INC.,Plaintiff-Appellee and Cross-Appellant,v.William P. CLARK*, Secretary of the Interior, etal., Defendants- Appellants and Cross-Appellees. Nos. 83-3562, 83-3655. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth

744 F.2d 1424 Jack J. BENDER, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William P. CLARK, as Successor to James G. Watt, et al.,Defendants-Appellants. No. 83-1306. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. Sept. 28, 1984. S. Kirk Ingebretsen, Denver, Colo. (David W. Furgason, Denver, Colo., with him on brief) of Welborn,

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge J. SKELLY WRIGHT. *741 J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: The State of Montana appeals a District Court order upholding an Interior Department regulation, 30 C.F.R. § 872.11(b)(3) (1983), ag

NELSON, Circuit Judge: Leo Williams, a member of the Quileute Tribe of Indians, appeals the district court’s affirmance of a decision by the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA). The IBIA decision reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s (AU) ruling that Williams is an eligible devisee of land on the Quinault Indian Reservation. We reverse

*972The extraordinary remedy of equitable estoppel may be invoked to bar the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations only where the defendant’s affirmative wrongdoing contributed to the delay between accrual of the cause of action and commencement of the legal proceeding. Further, the plaintiff must demonstrate reasonable reliance on the defendant’s misrepresentations, and the plaintiff’s

EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge. Congress has decided that funds set aside for retirement need not be used to pay pre-retirement debts. This policy is implemented through 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(C) and (d)(12), which exempt retirement funds from creditors’ claims in bankruptcy. This appeal presents the question whether a non-spousal inherited individual retirement account (“inherited IRA

*623 WOOD, Circuit Judge. A grand jury sitting in the Southern District of Illinois returned an indictment charging William Patrick Clark, the owner and president of a company based in East St. Louis, Illinois, with making false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(3). Clark’s company had entere

FILED JUNE 28, 2018 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE In re the Marriage of: )

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge WILKEY. Opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part filed by Circuit Judge WALD. WILKEY, Circuit Judge: This appeal concerns the constitutional validity of regulations promulgated by the *1520National Park Serv

SNEED, Circuit Judge: Evelyn Jordan appeals from a district court judgment against her in her Title VII suit in which she alleged sexual discrimination and harassment, retaliation for filing an administrative complaint, and constructive termination arising out of her employment with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. We affirm. I. FACTS AND PROCEEDING

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION To the Appellate Division, Superior Court: A petition for certification of the judgment in A-1072/1568-14 having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same; It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied, with costs.

PER CURIAM. This petition for writ of prohibition seeks disqualification of the trial judge in a dissolution of marriage case. Concluding that the trial-judge correctly ruled that the motion to disqualify was legally insufficient, we deny the petition. After entering an initial order dissolving the parties’ marriage on May 12, 2014, the trial judge reserved jurisdiction to rule on the financial issues

755 F.2d 608 15 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,391 SIERRA CLUB and Defenders of Wildlife, et al., Appellees,v.William P. CLARK, as Secretary of the Interior and theDepartment of the Interior, et al., Appellants. Nos. 84-5042, 84-5134. United States Court of Appeals,Eighth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 10, 1984.Decided Feb. 19, 1985.

PARIENTE, J. The certified conflict between the First District Court of Appeal in Graney v. Caduceus Properties, LLC, 91 So.Bd 220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), and the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Gatins v. Sebastian Inlet Tax District, 453 So.2d 871 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), involves the scope of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190(c) governing t

REVERSED. REMAND.