IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CIVIL NO. 4:86CV00291
|
|
- Maud Bond
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CIVIL NO. 4:86CV00291 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, ET AL., Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT S REQUEST THAT COURT DETERMINE v. ELECTION SCHEDULE CITY OF THOMASVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA; CITY COUNCIL OF THOMASVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL., Defendants, Plaintiffs respectfully submit this Response to Defendant City of Thomasville s Request That Court Determine Election Schedule filed February 28, 2006 [hereinafter Request ]. The City of Thomasville [hereinafter the City ] asks the Court to specify whether all seven seats on the City Council will be up for election in 2007, as required by the referendum approved by the voters on April 15, 2003, or whether only four of the seven seats should be elected. The City takes no position on which is the proper method of implementing the referendum. The Court should deny the defendant s request that it enter a supplemental order because the Order and Judgment entered on November 23, 2005, (Docket Number 63 clearly required full implementation of the 2003 referendum in the 2007 City Council
2 elections and there are no grounds to vary from the referendum or from this Court s Judgment. I. STATEMENT OF CASE Plaintiffs, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP, and two African American registered voters, originally filed this action on March 31, 1986, alleging that the City s at-large method of electing city council members had the purpose and/or effect of diluting minority voting strength in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C Approximately a year later the parties reached an agreement and on March 18, 1987, the Court entered a consent judgment finding that the at-large election procedure violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Judgment, March 18, 1987, (Docket No. 18. The Court ordered the City of Thomasville to amend its charter to provide that the City would be divided into five single-member electoral wards (electing one member from each ward to four-year staggered terms, and that two members of the Council be elected at-large every two years. The new plan was first implemented in the City s 1987 election. On April 15, 2003, voters approved referenda that changed the length of city council members terms to two years and changed the method of election to an at-large system with no ward residency requirements. Memorandum Opinion, November 23, 2005, (Docket No. 62 at pg. 4 [hereinafter Memorandum Opinion ]. Plaintiffs then sought to enjoin implementation of the at-large election system and on October 10, 2003 the Court granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the City from conducting elections for mayor and members of the City Council by any method other than that provided in 2
3 the Consent Judgment entered March 18, Order and Preliminary Injunction, Docket No. 24. On December 6, 2004, Defendants filed a Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requesting that the Court terminate its 1987 Judgment. After two hearings on the motion, the Court held that although voting in the City is still racially polarized, the election method established by the 2003 referenda would have significantly fewer barriers than the at-large method before the court in 1987 and therefore will not dilute minority voting strength. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 30. The Court ordered that the 1987 judgment be vacated to allow the 2007 elections for seats on the Thomasville City Council to be conducted utilizing the seven seat at-large election method approved by the voters in the April 15, 2003, referendum. On February 28, 2006, the City filed a Request That Court Determine Election Schedule asking the Court to rule whether all seven seats on the City Council should be up for election or only four seats, the latter option allowing Council members elected to seats in 2005 to serve four-year terms and not stand for election until II. STATEMENT OF FACTS Currently there is one African-American elected to the City Council, George Burton, who was most recently elected from the majority-black Ward 3 in a delayed election held in February Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 4 & 6. If the Court were to alter its Order and Judgment to allow the City Council members elected from Wards 1, 2 and 4 to serve until 2009, Mr. Burton, a candidate of choice of black voters, 3
4 would have to run in 2007 in an at-large election where only four seats would be up for election. The changes approved by the voters in the April 2003 referenda will mean that the Thomasville City Council will consist of seven members elected concurrently every two years in at-large, non-partisan, plurality elections. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 11. In dissolving the 1987 Consent Judgment, the Court directed the City to conduct the 2007 elections utilizing the election method approved by the voters in the April 15, 2003, referendum. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 31; See also, Order and Judgment, November 23, 2005, Docket No. 63 (same. The Court s Memorandum Opinion dated November 23, 2005 contains extensive findings of fact concerning elections for the Thomasville City Council and the patterns of polarized voting that characterize those elections. For the purposes of this post-judgment motion, the significant fact is that black voters ability to elect candidates is enhanced by the elimination of staggered terms and residency districts so that candidates for all seven seats run together in non-partisan, plurality elections for two-year terms, allowing the use of single-shot or bullet voting (refraining from casting all seven votes in order to avoid the risk of giving lower-ranked candidates enough votes to defeat higher-ranked choices. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 11. Moreover, the Court concluded that [a]n election method in which all seven seats for the City Council are elected at the same time in a non-partisan plurality election, with the elimination of staggered terms and residency districts, has significantly fewer barriers than the at-large election method before the court in 1987, is suitably tailored to the changed circumstances since the 1987 judgment, and does not have a significant 4
5 likelihood of diluting minority voting strength in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 30. Indeed, with seven seats available in each biennial plurality election, and the availability of single-shot voting, black voters should be able to duplicate or even exceed the success that they have had under the current method. Memorandum Opinion at 31. These findings and conclusions were well supported by evidence in the record. For example, Plaintiffs expert witness testified that single-shot or bullet voting (refraining from casting all seven votes in order to avoid the risk of giving lower-ranked candidates enough votes to defeat higher-ranked choices is an effective strategy of electing minority candidates of choice in at large elections. Deposition of O. Vernon Burton, April 20, 2005 at pg. 9, (Docket No. 58 [hereinafter Burton Deposition ]. In addition, increasing the number of seats elected concurrently increases the effectiveness of single-shot voting because adding more candidates increases the opportunity for minority voters to eliminate lower ranked candidates by casting all of their votes for higher ranked candidates and increases the possibility that the majority voters will distribute their votes among numerous lower ranked candidates. Burton Deposition at 11. III. ARGUMENT A. ALL SEVEN SEATS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE ELECTED AT THE SAME TIME AND ALL TERMS SHOULD BE TWO YEARS Plaintiffs will be severely disadvantaged in their efforts to elect candidates of their choice if the Court alters, amends, or vacates its order to allow less than seven candidates to run in the 2007 election. The effect of minority voters single-shot votes would be 5
6 significantly weakened. The Court emphasized the importance of the single shot voting method providing greater opportunities when seven seats are open, as a basis for its order of November 23, Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 11, 22, and 31. With fewer seats available, African American voters in Thomasville would have less opportunity to use the single shot vote to elect candidates of their choice. Granting the City s motion and adopting this method of implementing the referendum would eviscerate the very basis for the Court s conclusion that the proposed method of election would not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. In circumstances where the Court s Judgment that the referenda limiting city council members terms to two years and that all seven seats for the city council be elected at one time should be fully implemented in 2007 is clear, where the City takes no position on the course the Court should take, and where changing the method of election would prejudice the Plaintiffs, it is clear that the City s motion should be denied. In addition, there is no legal basis for the Court to take the action requested by the City. B. THE CITY S REQUEST DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS FOR A MOTION IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES The City labeled its pleading a Request That Court Determine Election Schedule. In it, the City presents the question of whether all seven council seats are subject to election in 2007 or whether those members elected to ward seats in 2005 may serve four-year terms and not stand for election until 2009, and requests that the Court enter a supplemental order specifying the offices to be elected in Request at 1. However, the City offers no legal basis for the Court s entry of such a supplemental order. 6
7 The Court should treat the Request as a Motion to Alter or Amend a Judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Motions are properly treated according to their substance rather than their labels. See, Marine Midland Bank v. Slyman, 995 F.2d. 362, 365 (2d. Cir (holding that a pleading while not formally styled as a motion under rule 59, it may appropriately be treated as one. and since it was filed within the time limit imposed by rule 59(e and served to amend the final judgment, it was functionally equivalent to a rule 59(e motion; United States v. City of Chicago, 631 R.2d 469, 474 (7 th Cir ( Any motion that draws into question the correctness of the judgment is functionally a motion under Civil Rule 59(e, whatever its label. Cf. Gonzalez v. Crosby, U.S., 125 S.Ct. 2641, 2647, 162 L.Ed.2d 480 (2005 (Rule 60(b motions should be treated as a successive habeas petition if it presents the same claims. Here, the Defendant s Request is, in substance, a Rule 59(e motion because it requests that the Court enter a supplemental election schedule specifying the offices to be elected in 2007 and suggests that the Court might delay implementation of the at-large election method (approved by the voters in the 2003 referendum until 2009, after the Court has already ordered the 2007 elections for seats on the Thomasville City Council to be conducted utilizing the election method approved by the voters in the April 15, 2003, referendum [that all seven City Council seats be elected at-large]. Memorandum Opinion, slip op. at 31. Therefore, if the Court permits only four seats (or any number less than seven to be elected at-large in the 2007 election, such a change would amount to an amendment or an alteration of the Court s order and would be subject to the limitations of Rule 59(e. 7
8 The Court should deny the defendant s Request pursuant to Rule 59(e because it fails to state sufficient grounds for alteration or amendment of the judgment and only raises a question which could have been raised prior to the issuance of the judgment. There are three grounds for amending a previously entered judgment: (1 to accommodate an intervening change in controlling law (2 to account for new evidence not available at trial (3 to correct a clear error of law or prevent manifest injustice. Pacific Insurance Co. v. American National Fire Insurance Co., 148 F.3d 396, 403 (4 th. Cir. 1998; See also, EEOC v. Lockhead Martin Corp. Aero & Naval Sys., 116 F.3d 10 (4 th Cir. 1997; Hutchinson v. Staton, 994 F.2d (4 th Cir Rule 59(e motions may not be used, however, to raise arguments which could have been raised prior to the issuance of judgment. Pacific Insurance Co, 148 F.3d at 403. The City alleges no intervening change in controlling law or discovery of new evidence that was not available at trial since entry of the judgment. Nor does the City allege that there is any error of law in the Court s judgment or that alteration or amendment of the judgment is necessary to prevent manifest injustice. The Request hints at the possibility of concern over whether those members elected to ward seats in 2005 should be permitted to serve four-year terms. However, such concerns are without significance where the voters have already spoken and decided, by referendum, to limit all seats to two-year terms. Moreover, the City failed to raise such concerns prior to entry of the judgment. The Court should also deny the defendant s Request pursuant to Rule 59(e because it was untimely filed. The Rule provides that: any motion to alter or amend a judgment shall be filed no later than ten days after entry of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. 8
9 P. 59(e. The judgment was entered on November 23, 2005, and the defendant s Request was not filed until February 28, Therefore, the motion is barred because it was filed more than ten days after entry of the judgment. In the alternative, if the Court treats the City s Request as a Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court should deny the motion because it fails to state sufficient grounds for such relief. Before a party may seek relief under Rule 60(b, a party must show timeliness, a meritorious defense, a lack of unfair prejudice to the opposing party, and exceptional circumstances. Dowell v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Auto. Inc. Co., 993 F.2d 46, 48 (4 th Cir. 1993, (citing Werner v. Carbo, 731 F.2d 204, 207 (4 th Cir After a party has crossed this initial threshold, the party then must satisfy one of the six specific sections of Rule 60(b which includes the following: (1 mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect (2 newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b (3 fraud, misrepresentation or other misconduct of an adverse party (4 the judgment is void (5 the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application (6 any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. Werner, 731 F.2d 207. Here, the City alleges no exceptional circumstances justifying vacating the Court s order under Rule 60(b. The defendant also alleges no facts satisfying any one of the six specific sections of Rule 60(b. 9
10 C. THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY AT THIS STAGE TO OVERRIDE THE METHOD OF ELECTION REQUIRED BY THE 2003 REFERENDA The Court has no authority to alter or amend the April 2003 referendum as the request of the City at this stage in the case. The tenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. Outside a field in which state law is completely and expressly preempted by state law or one in which federal law is so pervasive that it leaves little room for state law, state law is only preempted to the extent that it conflicts with federal law. Pacific Gas and Elec. Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Dev. Com., 461 U.S. 190, 103 S. Ct. 1713, 75 L.Ed.2d 752 (1983. North Carolina law reserves to the state authority over the structure and method of election of city boards. See N.C. CONST. art. 7, 1 ("The General Assembly shall provide for the organization and government... of counties, cities and towns, and other governmental subdivisions, and, except as otherwise prohibited by this Constitution, may give such powers and duties to counties, cities and towns, and other governmental subdivisions as it may deem advisable.". See also, N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A-101 (6 (prescribing modes of election for city councils. Subsequent changes in the structure and election of any board must take place in accordance with a specifically prescribed procedure. N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A-102. The April 2003 referendum was adopted by the City Council and approved by the voters in accordance with North Carolina law. Therefore, the Court can only alter or amend it to the extent that it conflicts with federal law. The defendant does not, however, offer any 10
11 legal basis for amending the referendum to allow for any number less than all of the seats to be elected concurrently. IV. CONCLUSION The City of Thomasville must conduct the 2007 City Council election utilizing the method of election approved by the voters in the April 15, 2003 referendum (the at-large election of all seven candidates in full accordance with the Court s order of November 23, For the reasons set forth above, the Court should deny the City s request that it enter a supplemental order modifying the election schedule. Respectfully submitted, this 22nd day of March, /s/ Anita S. Earls Anita Earls Bar Number Attorney for Plaintiffs UNC Center for Civil Rights CB# 3380, Van Hecke-Wettach Hall Chapel Hill, N.C Telephone: ( earls@ .unc.edu Angela Ciccolo Kimberly Perkins NAACP Legal Department 4805 Mt. Hope Drive Baltimore, MD Romallus O. Murphy N.C. Bar No P. O. Box Greensboro, N.C (
12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, ET AL., Plaintiffs, Case No. 4:86 CV 291 v. CITY OF THOMASVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA; CITY COUNCIL OF THOMASVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL., Defendants, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 22, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: Michael Crowell, Attorney for Defendants, and I hereby certify that I have mailed the document to the following non CM/ECF participants: Paul R. Mitchell, Thomasville City Attorney, 17 Randolph Street, Thomasville, N.C Respectfully submitted, /s/ Anita S. Earls Anita S. Earls UNC Center for Civil Rights CB# 3380, Van Hecke-Wettach Hall Chapel Hill, N.C Phone: ( earls@ .unc.edu N.C. Bar Number
Case 2:11-cv BSJ Document 460 Filed 02/02/17 Page 1 of 10
Case 2:11-cv-00099-BSJ Document 460 Filed 02/02/17 Page 1 of 10 Alan Edelman aedelman@cftc.gov James H. Holl, III jholl@cftc.gov Attorneys for Plaintiff U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission 1155 21
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Equal Opportunity Employment ) CASE NO. 1:10 CV 2882 Commission, ) ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN ) Vs. ) ) Kaplan Higher
More informationSEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA
SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA Tribal Court Small Claims Rules of Procedure Table of Contents RULE 7.010. TITLE AND SCOPE... 3 RULE 7.020. APPLICABILITY OF RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE... 3 RULE 7.040. CLERICAL
More informationCase 3:14-cv SDD-EWD Document /05/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA RULING
Case :-cv-00069-sdd-ewd Document 6 /05/8 Page of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA TERREBONNE PARISH BRANCH NAACP, ET AL. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS -69-SDD-EWD PIYUSH ( BOBBY ) JINDAL,
More informationto the response may be filed unless ordered by the Court...
Case :0-cv-00-SMM Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of 0 WO EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff, AUTOZONE, INC., a Nevada corporation, Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT
More informationDIRECTIONS FOR FILING A MOTION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN DISTRICT COURT
DIRECTIONS FOR FILING A MOTION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN DISTRICT COURT [If the default judgment comes from Small Claims Court, go to that court and ask the small claims clerk for information
More informationCase 0:06-cv JIC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/10/2013 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:06-cv-61337-JIC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/10/2013 Page 1 of 6 KEITH TAYLOR, v. Plaintiff, NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, Defendant. / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationAdams, in her Official capacity as Chairman of the Moore BOE, Carolyn M. McDermott, in her Official capacity as Secretary of the Moore BOE; William R.
Case 1:16-cv-01274-LCB-JLW Document 63 Filed 01/26/17 Page 1 of 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Civil Action No. 1:16-cv-1274-LCB-JLW NORTH CAROLINA STATE
More informationSTATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS (FILED DECEMBER 11, 2009) DECISION
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. (FILED DECEMBER 11, 2009) SUPERIOR COURT K S BUILDERS, INC. Alias, and : KEVIN J. FERRO, Alias : : v. : P.C No. 08-1451 : LING CHENG, Alias,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION 1 1 MARY SWEARINGEN and ROBERT FIGY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiffs, ATTUNE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :0-cv-000-WQH-KSC Document Filed // Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for LA JOLLA BANK, FSB, Plaintiff, vs.
More informationUtah Court Rules on Trial Motions Francis J. Carney
Revised July 10, 2015 NOTE 18 December 2015: The trial and post-trial motions have been amended, effective 1 May 2016. See my blog post for 18 December 2015. This paper will be revised to reflect those
More informationS.C. Code Ann (2013) (Methods of election of council; mayor elected at large; qualifications). 4
New York Office 40 Rector Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10006-1738 T 212.965.2200 F 212.226.7592 www.naacpldf.org Washington, D.C. Office 1444 Eye Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, D.C. 20005T 202.682.1300F
More informationSUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY OF WALTER SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DC APPLESEED CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE
DC APPLESEED 1111 Fourteenth Street, NW Suite 510 Washington, DC 20005 Phone 202.289.8007 Fax 202.289.8009 www.dcappleseed.org SUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY OF WALTER SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DC APPLESEED CENTER
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:16-cv-01164-WO-JEP Document 33 Filed 12/19/16 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF NORTH CAROLINA, et al., Plaintiffs,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON September 21, 2005 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON September 21, 2005 Session ANDRE MATTHEWS v. SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT A Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Shelby County No. 110180-2 The Honorable
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE
MARGIOTTI v. SELECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA Doc. 18 NOT FOR PUBLICATION (Doc. No. 17) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE GERARD MARGIOTTI Plaintiff,
More informationCase acs Doc 52 Filed 08/20/15 Entered 08/20/15 16:11:30 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Case 14-34747-acs Doc 52 Filed 08/20/15 Entered 08/20/15 16:11:30 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY In re: ) ) CLIFFORD J. AUSMUS ) CASE NO. 14-34747 ) CHAPTER 7
More informationCase 2:02-cv JS -WDW Document 43 Filed 09/17/10 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:02-cv-06025-JS -WDW Document 43 Filed 09/17/10 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------X ER & JR PUB, INC. d/b/a LONG ISLAND
More informationCase 5:06-cv FL Document 35 Filed 01/25/2007 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:06-cv-00462-FL Document 35 Filed 01/25/2007 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION Civil Action No. 5:06-CV-00462-FL RICHARD
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF MEDINA ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION
[Cite as Schoen v. Schoen, 2012-Ohio-5432.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF MEDINA ) MICHAEL STEVEN SCHOEN Appellee C.A. No. 11CA0040-M v. BONNIE JEAN SCHOEN
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CIVIL ACTION No. 1:15-CV-559 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:15-cv-00559-CCE-JLW Document 27 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CIVIL ACTION No. 1:15-CV-559 THE CITY OF GREENSBORO, LEWIS
More informationUnited States District Court
Case:-cv-0-PJH Document Filed0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY, et al., Plaintiffs, No. C - PJH v. ORDER MARGARET A. HAMBURG, M.D., 0 Defendant.
More informationCivil Procedure Basics. N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure 7/6/2010
Civil Procedure Basics Ann M. Anderson N.C. Association of District Court Judges 2010 Summer Conference June 23, 2010 N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure 1A-1, Rules 1 to 83 Pretrial Injunctive Relief 65 Service
More informationNo. In The United States Court of Appeals For the Fourth Circuit
Appeal: 12-2250 Doc: 3-1 Filed: 10/09/2012 Pg: 1 of 23 No. In The United States Court of Appeals For the Fourth Circuit In re RONDA EVERETT; MELISSA GRIMES; SUTTON CAROLINE; CHRISTOPHER W. TAYLOR, next
More informationARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of -- ) ) Triad Microsystems, Inc. ) ASBCA No. 48763 ) Under Contract No. DAAH01-84-C-0974 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT:
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
Rel: 08/21/09 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v. Murphy-Kesling, 2010-Ohio-6000.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:15-cv-00399-TDS-JEP Document 189 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SANDRA LITTLE COVINGTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 1:15-cv-00399-TDS-JEP
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Hunter v. Salem, Missouri, City of et al Doc. 59 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ANAKA HUNTER, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SALEM PUBLIC LIBRARY, et
More informationSTATE DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO AMICUS BRIEF OF UNITED STATES AND FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Nos. 17-2433, 17-2445 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH CIRCUIT VILLAGE OF OLD MILL CREEK, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ANTHONY STAR, in his official capacity as Director of the Illinois
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:12-cv-00691-WKW-MHT-WHP Document 372 Filed 10/12/17 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION ALABAMA LEGISLATIVE ) BLACK CAUCUS, et al.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FLORIDA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP), as an organization and representative of its
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 26, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D16-849 Lower Tribunal No. 04-20174 Coral Gables Imports,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. Plaintiffs, No. 1:15-cv-00399
Case 1:15-cv-00399-TDS-JEP Document 185 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SANDRA LITTLE COVINGTON, et al., v. Plaintiffs, No. 1:15-cv-00399
More information2:14-cv LPZ-RSW Doc # 21 Filed 05/08/14 Pg 1 of 10 Pg ID 235 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:14-cv-11296-LPZ-RSW Doc # 21 Filed 05/08/14 Pg 1 of 10 Pg ID 235 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ROBERT DASCOLA, vs. Plaintiff, Case No. 2:14-cv-11296-LPZ-RSW
More informationCase 1:05-cv RMC Document 35 Filed 04/19/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:05-cv-02345-RMC Document 35 Filed 04/19/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TEMBEC INC., et al., Petitioners, v. Civil Action No. 05-2345 (RMC UNITED STATES
More information8 California Procedure (5th), Attack on Judgment in Trial Court
8 California Procedure (5th), Attack on Judgment in Trial Court I. INTRODUCTION A. Direct Attack. 1. [ 1] Nature and Significance of Concept. 2. Methods of Direct Attack. (a) [ 2] In Trial Court. (b) [
More informationMADELYN BOHANNON GALLAGHER PIPINO, INC., ET AL.
[Cite as Bohannon v. Pipino, Inc., 2009-Ohio-3469.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 92325 MADELYN BOHANNON PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT vs. GALLAGHER
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:16-cv-01274-LCB-JLW Document 33 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA NAACP, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOHN GALLEGOS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA :-cv-000-ljo-mjs 0 Plaintiff, v. MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT, Defendant. CHAU B. TRAN, Plaintiff, v. MERCED IRRIGATION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ~ V ~= o '~ ~ n N a~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY, et al., v. Plaintiffs, ~ MARGARET A. HAMBURG, M.D., Defendant. J No. C - PJH -~. Before
More informationALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
REL: 09/18/2015 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:16-cv-00236-TDS-JEP Document 207 Filed 07/21/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA JOAQUÍN CARCAÑO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 1:16-cv-00236-TDS-JEP
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 January 2011
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationFollow this and additional works at:
2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 8-1-2008 Katz v. Westfall Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 07-2692 Follow this and additional
More informationIn Re: Syntax Brillian Corp
2015 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 6-26-2015 In Re: Syntax Brillian Corp Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:18-cv-04776-LMM Document 13-1 Filed 10/22/18 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION RHONDA J. MARTIN, DANA BOWERS, JASMINE CLARK,
More informationCase 1:17-cv LJA Document 1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00109-LJA Document 1 Filed 06/14/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ALBANY DIVISION MATHEW WHITEST, M.D., SARAH : WILLIAMSON, KENYA WILLIAMSON,
More informationNOTICE OF MOTION. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at a.m./p.m. on, Defendant(s) will bring the following Motion on for hearing before the Honorable MOTION
STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DISTRICT COURT JUDICIAL DISTRICT DIVISION: CASE TYPE: EVICTION ACTION v Plaintiff,, NOTICE OF MOTION AND VERIFIED MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT AND/OR FOR OTHER RELIEF UNDER MINN
More informationMOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT/ORDER
EN November 01 MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT/ORDER A. What is a motion to vacate? Civil Rule 0 It asks the court to take back an earlier order or judgment it entered. You must base this motion on a reason
More informationCase 2:68-cv MHT-CSC Document 759 Filed 09/09/2005 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:68-cv-02709-MHT-CSC Document 759 Filed 09/09/2005 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, TIMOTHY
More informationPlaintiff s Memorandum of Law in Reply to the. Defendants Response to the. Plaintiff s Motion to Reconsider Order of Abstention
Case 3:11-cv-00005-JPB Document 44 Filed 10/20/11 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 312 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT MARTINSBURG West Virginia Citizens Defense
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 15-2047 Document: 01019415575 Date Filed: 04/15/2015 Page: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF NEW MEXICO ex. rel. State Engineer Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:07-CV-231 PAMELA L. HENSLEY, Plaintiff, MOTION FOR LEAVE v. TO AMEND ANSWER JOHNSTON COUNTY BOARD
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS JOHN DOE, ) Plaintiff ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16cv-30184-MAP v. ) ) WILLIAMS COLLEGE, ) ) Defendant. ) ) PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE EX
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA MARCOS SAYAGO, individually, Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO.: 2014-CA- Division BILL COWLES, in his official capacity as Supervisor
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv WLS
Case 1:14-cv-00042-WLS Document 71 Filed 07/28/16 Page 1 of 9 Case: 15-13628 Date Filed: 07/28/2016 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 15-13628
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 95 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 11
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 95 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, HAROLD DUTTON, JR. AND GREGORY TAMEZ,
More informationCase 3:15-cv HEH-RCY Document 161 Filed 02/16/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID# 2253
Case 3:15-cv-00357-HEH-RCY Document 161 Filed 02/16/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID# 2253 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION BARBARA H. LEE, et al., v. Plaintiffs,
More informationCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL ====== PRESENT: THE HONORABLE S. JAMES OTERO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:11-cv-04175-SJO -PLA UNITED Document STATES 11 DISTRICT Filed 08/10/11 COURT Page 1 of Priority 5 Page ID #:103 Send Enter Closed JS-5/JS-6 Scan Only TITLE: James McFadden et. al. v. National Title
More informationCase 3:15-cv GNS Document 12 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 482
Case 3:15-cv-00773-GNS Document 12 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 482 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-00773-GNS ANGEL WOODSON
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. No. CV PHX-DGC (SPL) Petitioner, vs.
Case 2:14-cv-00110-DGC--SPL Document 4 Filed 02/12/14 Page 1 of 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
More informationCase 2:09-cv KJM-CKD Document 35 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 13
Case :0-cv-0-KJM-CKD Document Filed 0// Page of KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California PETER A. KRAUSE Supervising Deputy Attorney General ANTHONY R. HAKL, State Bar No. Deputy Attorney General
More informationcag Doc#413 Filed 04/02/18 Entered 04/02/18 13:54:23 Main Document Pg 1 of 8
18-50085-cag Doc#413 Filed 04/02/18 Entered 04/02/18 13:54:23 Main Document Pg 1 of 8 IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED and DECREED that the below described is SO ORDERED. Dated: April 02, 2018. CRAIG A. GARGOTTA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA KATSUMI KENASTON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) Supreme Court No. S-11600 vs. ) ) Trial Court Case No. 3AN-04-3485 CI ) STATE OF ALASKA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) APPEAL FROM
More informationCase 2:10-cv SDW -MCA Document 22 Filed 07/02/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 292
Case 2:10-cv-00809-SDW -MCA Document 22 Filed 07/02/10 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 292 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : JEFFREY SIDOTI, individually and on : behalf of all others
More informationCLOSED CIVIL CASE. Case 1:09-cv DLG Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/14/2010 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-23093-DLG Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/14/2010 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CLOSED CIVIL CASE Case No. 09-23093-CIV-GRAHAM/TORRES
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION BARBARA GRUTTER, vs. Plaintiff, LEE BOLLINGER, et al., Civil Action No. 97-CV-75928-DT HON. BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN Defendants. and
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 3:75-CR :06-CV-24-F
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 3:75-CR-26-3 5:06-CV-24-F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JEFFREY R. MacDONALD Defendant UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO
More informationCase pwb Doc 1097 Filed 11/26/14 Entered 11/26/14 10:26:12 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9
Document Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION In re: Chapter 11 CGLA LIQUIDATION, INC., f/k/a Cagle s, Case No. 11-80202-PWB Inc., CF
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Cyberspace Communications, Inc., Arbornet, Marty Klein, AIDS Partnership of Michigan, Art on The Net, Mark Amerika of Alt-X,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 21, 2009 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 21, 2009 Session JOHNNY HATCHER, JR. v. CHAIRMAN, SHELBY COUNTY ELECTION COMMISSION, ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Shelby County
More informationmg Doc 9056 Filed 08/25/15 Entered 08/25/15 15:53:55 Main Document Pg 1 of 6. Debtors.
Pg 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL, LLC, et al., Debtors. Case No. 12-12020 (MG) Jointly Administered ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c; ARCAP 28(c; Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF
More informationCase4:09-cv CW Document69 Filed01/06/12 Page1 of 5
Case:0-cv-0-CW Document Filed0/0/ Page of 0 SARA ZINMAN, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiffs, WAL-MART STORES, INC., and DOES through 00, Defendants. UNITED STATES
More informationSnell & Wilmer IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case :-cv-0-ckj Document Filed // Page of One Arizona Center, 00 E. Van Buren, Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 00-0..000 0 Brett W. Johnson (# ) Eric H. Spencer (# 00) SNELL & WILMER One Arizona Center 00 E.
More informationCASE NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 10-2258 Document: 01018632075 Date Filed: 04/29/2011 Page: 1 CASE NO. 10-2258 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel. S.E. Reynolds, State
More informationMARGARET DICKSON, et al., ) Plaintiffs ) ) v. ) 11 CVS ) ROBERT RUCHO, et al., ) Defendants )
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF WAKE IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION MARGARET DICKSON, et al., ) Plaintiffs ) ) v. ) 11 CVS 16896 ) ROBERT RUCHO, et al., ) Defendants ) NORTH
More informationCase 4:13-cv RC-ALM Document 49 Filed 06/06/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 960
Case 4:13-cv-00416-RC-ALM Document 49 Filed 06/06/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 960 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, -- against
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.
Blank v. Hydro-Thermal Corporation et al Doc. 0 0 AARON BLANK, v. HYDRO-THERMAL CORPORATION, et al., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, Defendants. Case No. -cv--w(bgs)
More informationCase 1:12-cv LJO-SKO Document 10 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION
Case :-cv-0-ljo-sko Document Filed 0// Page of LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH M. FOLEY KENNETH M. FOLEY, ESQ. (State Bar #0) North Main Street, Suite No. MAILING ADDRESS: P. O. Box San Andreas, CA Telephone: ()
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 1:16-cv MOC-DLH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 1:16-cv-00118-MOC-DLH EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. ORDER MISSION HOSPITAL, INC.,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:15-cv-05617 Document #: 23 Filed: 10/21/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:68 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION THOMAS HENRY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, et al., Defendants. 1:13CV861 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
More informationMOTION TO VACATE FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 13th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA LIQUIDATED INVESTMENTS, LLC., n/k/a CITICOMPANY HOLDINGS, INC. CASE NO: 2009-xxxxx CA 01 Plaintiff, v. HECTOR R.
More informationCase 1:06-cv SPM-AK Document 14 Filed 07/05/2006 Page 1 of 11
Case 1:06-cv-00047-SPM-AK Document 14 Filed 07/05/2006 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION DINAH JONES, on behalf of herself and all
More informationCase: 3:07-cv KKC Doc #: 42 Filed: 03/20/08 Page: 1 of 8 - Page ID#: 282
Case: 3:07-cv-00032-KKC Doc #: 42 Filed: 03/20/08 Page: 1 of 8 - Page ID#: 282 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION at FRANKFORT ** CAPITAL CASE ** CIVIL ACTION NO.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Case 4:17-cv-00516-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION JOHN DOE, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 4:17-cv-516 On removal from
More informationLOCAL RULES OF PRACTICE FOR CIVIL SUPERIOR COURT CASES JUDICIAL DISTRICT 22A ALEXANDER AND IREDELL COUNTIES REVISED January 2015
LOCAL RULES OF PRACTICE FOR CIVIL SUPERIOR COURT CASES JUDICIAL DISTRICT 22A ALEXANDER AND IREDELL COUNTIES REVISED January 2015 The following Local Rules of Practice for the calendaring of civil matters
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION MISSOURI COALITION FOR THE ) ENVIRONMENT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case Number: 03-4217-CV-C-NKL ) MICHAEL O. LEAVITT, Administrator
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ERIKA MALONE, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION June 3, 2008 9:05 a.m. v No. 272327 Wayne Circuit Court LC No. 87-721014-DM ROY ENOS MALONE, Defendant-Appellee. Before:
More informationCase 2:12-cv JLH-LRS-SWW Document 88 Filed 05/24/12 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:12-cv-00016-JLH-LRS-SWW Document 88 Filed 05/24/12 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION FUTURE MAE JEFFERS, et al. PLAINTIFFS v.
More informationCase 0:06-cv JIC Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/27/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:06-cv-61337-JIC Document 86 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/27/2013 Page 1 of 10 KEITH TAYLOR, v. Plaintiff, NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, Defendant. / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationFLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES TABLE OF CONTENTS
FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES TABLE OF CONTENTS FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES TABLE OF CONTENTS... 1 CITATIONS TO OPINIONS ADOPTING OR AMENDING RULES... 3 RULE 7.010. TITLE AND SCOPE... 4 RULE 7.020. APPLICABILITY
More information) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs the North Carolina State Conference for the National Association for the
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA WAKE COUNTY IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION Civil Action No. NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 537 U. S. (2002) 1 Per Curiam NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiff-Appellant, : No. 05AP-217 (C.P.C. No. 04CVC ) v. : (REGULAR CALENDAR)
[Cite as Chirico v. Home Depot, 2006-Ohio-291.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Samuel Chirico, : Plaintiff-Appellant, : No. 05AP-217 (C.P.C. No. 04CVC02-01231) v. : (REGULAR CALENDAR)
More informationCase 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document 1323 Filed 10/23/15 Page 1 of 9
Case 5:11-cv-00360-OLG-JES-XR Document 1323 Filed 10/23/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SHANNON PEREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 24, 2009 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 24, 2009 Session AUDREY PRYOR v. RIVERGATE MEADOWS APARTMENT ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County
More information