Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to
consider using additional terms to narrow it.
 |
OPINION/ORDER
Opinion filed 1/25/02 is vacated PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444447 CHRISTINE BEAUMONT. We further hold that the prohibition on independent expenditures is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. That the proscription on contributions is not closely drawn to match a sufficiently important interest. Because the provisions at issue are constitutional in the overwhelming majority of applications. Stacy Thompson and Barbara Holt are challenging 2 U.S.C. § 441b(a) of the Federal Election Campaign Act (
|
 |
99-1581 -- VOIROL V. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS -- 07/26/2002
On behalf of the other American Federation members who have not seceded from International Co Masonry. The parties' various claims were tried to the district court without a jury during the week of April 14. All requests for attorney's fees were denied. Plaintiffs appealed. Haydn was a Freemason. As was Mozart. Benjamin Franklin was an enthusiastic Freemason.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Factual Background HOK Sport is a subsidiary of Hellmuth. Krause is the president and chief executive officer of Kum & Go. The Menace is a minor league soccer club located in Urbandale. The City of Urbandale would have owned the stadium and received a nominal rent payment. Would have operated the stadium as a for profit business. Would have paid rent to Calcio. TSF was to
|
|
FEC V. NRA
Argued the cause for appellee.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Article XXVIII of the Colorado Constitution is a citizen passed campaign finance reform amendment designed to limit the influence of certain types of corporations' general funds on state elections. Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman is automatically substituted for former Colorado Secretary of State Gigi Dennis as the Defendant Appellant/Cross Appellee in this case.
part to CRLC and in part to the Secretary. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm. We hold that the challenged sections of Article XXVIII regulating corporate expenditures and electioneering communications are unconstitutional as applied to CRLC because CRLC meets Supreme Court approved exemption requirements for a voluntary ideological corporation that seeks to engage in political speech. We conclude that Article XXVIII's definition of a political committee is unconstitutional as applied to CRLC because it fails to incorporate Buckley v. That political contributions from corporate treasuries are not an indication of popular support for the corporation's political ideas and can unfairly influence theoutcome of Colorado's elections.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Lawrence M. The NRA argues that because it is a not for profit organization formed to promote the political views of its members. Because the corporate contributions the NRA received in 1980 were de minimis. Which are not involved in this case) from making
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
Bader were on brief. Pierce Atwood were on brief. The Maine Committee is a nonprofit membership corporation. Among its activities thus funded is the publication of voter guides describing the position of congressional candidates on
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief. Were on brief for appellees.
|
|
01-9013 -- IHC HEALTH PLAN, INC V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE -- 04/09/2003
Will &. We have jurisdiction to review the Tax Court's decision under 26 U.S.C.
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
We must determine whether a non profit organization's obligation to reimburse the New Jersey Department of Labor (
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
Lorincz & Jacobi were on brief for appellee. Debtor's appeal from that decision asks us to do two things: reverse the district court's holding that federal credit unions are nonprofit organizations and hold that educational loans issued to him by creditor appellee TI Federal Credit Union are. We affirm the result achieved by the district court that debtor's loans are nondischargeable and elect not to reach the issue of federal credit unions' nonprofit status. From which DelBonis obtained no direct personal benefit and on which he is the sole obligor. Were acquired from the Texas Instrument Federal Credit Union. (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
I. BACKGROUND The boll weevil is a beetle that lives in and around cotton plants and causes them great damage. Eradication of the beetle is a goal of the federal government. Was incorporated as an Alabama non profit corporation in 1988. Southeastern's Articles of Incorporation state that the purpose of the foundation is to
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
For reimbursements to Michigan's Unemployment Trust Fund is not entitled to priority status as an excise tax under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(8)(E). The bankruptcy court's decision will be affirmed. I. ISSUE ON APPEAL Whether the bankruptcy court erred in finding that reimbursement payments owed to Michigan's Unemployment Trust Fund by a nonprofit employer are not excise taxes within the meaning of § 507(a)(8)(E). Neither party has timely elected to have this appeal heard by the district court. 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(b)(6). An order determining that a claim is not entitled to priority status is a final order. 200 F.3d 1070 (7th Cir. 2000)(finding that a priorityfixing order is treated as a final order). 685 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. 2005) (finding an order determining that a claim is not entitled to administrative expense priority constitutes a final order). The facts are not in dispute. The only issue before the Panel is the priority status of the Agency's claim. An order determining that a claim is not entitled to priority status is a question of law requiring de novo review on appeal.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Plaintiffs say the Defendants designed and constructed residences that were not accessible to handicapped persons as required by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
He was denied entry. The Kamehameha Schools were created through a charitable testamentary trust. Plaintiff argues that he was denied admission because of his race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Factual Background Historical Context2 The islands of Hawaii are geographically isolated in the South Pacific Ocean and were originally settled sometime between 1 and 750 A.D. The immediate result of that first encounter was that Native Hawaiians were introduced to Western goods and Western diseases. The first treaty was signed in 1826. Additional treaties were signed in 1849. Was commercially desirable. Western economic domination of the Hawaiian Islands was followed by an interest in establishing political control. Was overthrown by a small group of nonHawaiians. Who were assisted in their efforts by the United States Minister. Laws were then enacted suppressing the Hawaiian culture and language and allowing for the displacement of Native Hawaiians from their lands. The Hawaiian language was banned as a medium of instruction in schools.
|
|
ULEAD SYSTEMS, INC. (A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION), ET AL. V. LEX COMPUTER AND MANAGEMENT CORP.
Argued for plaintiff cross appellant and cross defendant cross appellant. With him on the brief were Jon E. Argued for defendant/cross claimant appellant. With him on the brief was Jeffrey G. 188 ( the 188 patent ) is unenforceable and expired because Lex falsely claimed status (and paid maintenance fees) as a small entity. Lex also appeals the district court s award of attorneys fees under 35 U.S.C. § . A Taiwan corporation ( U
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Board of Directors of City Trusts [Board] appeals the district court's order finding that the Board and Girard College [College] were included in a certified class involving a nationwide class action suit against Uniroyal and numerous other defendants in regard to the presence of asbestos in public and private schools. Because the district court found the appellants were members of the class. The Board was enjoined from pursuing its own state asbestos lawsuit against Uniroyal. Was bound by the Uniroyal settlement. It was necessary in aid of the court's jurisdiction to enjoin the appellant's state court action. I. The Board was created by a Pennsylvania statute in June 1869 to act as a trustee in administering a number of estates and trusts for the benefit of the City of Philadelphia.[fn1] The estate involved here is the Estate of Stephen Girard. The Girard Estate is the largest estate and trust owned and administered by the Board. Girard College was established as an institution for orphan children in Philadelphia.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
V. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Because the district court did not have the opportunity to consider Appellants' First Amendment claim in light of Phillips. One of the most significant is loyalty to the client. Lawyers have long been required to place their clients' money in bank accounts separate from their own. Lawyers in all fifty states are held to that same high standard of professional conduct.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
V. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Because the district court did not have the opportunity to consider Appellants' First Amendment claim in light of Phillips. One of the most significant is loyalty to the client. Lawyers have long been required to place their clients' money in bank accounts separate from their own. Lawyers in all fifty states are held to that same high standard of professional conduct.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
At issue is the ownership of certain real property in Camden. The district court held that Plaintiff Scotts African Union Methodist Protestant Church (
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
The general question presented by the relatively bizarre factual background of this case is whether or not a core function of municipal government the provision of firefighting services impacts interstate commerce such that an individual can be indicted under a federal anti arson statute for destroying a fire station. Is whether the Henning. Tennessee Fire Station was used in an activity affecting interstate commerce such that the person charged with setting it ablaze can be indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 844(i). We hold that this particular fire station was used in an activity affecting interstate commerce and accordingly REVERSE the judgment of the district court dismissing the indictment and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURE Prometheus may have thought twice before handing down the gift of fire to humans had he imagined that those whom the mere mortals chose to steward the precious flame would use it to decimate the very mechanisms employed to control 1 No. 02 5185 United States v.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The district court's grant of summary judgment was based on its conclusion that the FHC lacked standing under Article III of the United States Constitution to maintain this suit. Because we are convinced by the unique set of facts surrounding the section 3604(c) claims that the FHC has failed to satisfy the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Hafetz were on brief. Kornspan were on brief. Were on brief. They argue that there was a constructive amendment of the indictment. That there was insufficient evidence to convict them. That the jury instructions were defective. We affirm.
|
|
02-4037 -- SHELTER MORTGAGE CORP. V. CASTLE MORTGAGE CO. -- 09/15/2004
Circuit Judges.
|
|
96-1245 -- U.S. V. SMITH -- 12/31/1997
Circuit Judge.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Both LSS and WHO are non profit organizations which provide community services to residents of Westmoreland County in western Pennsylvania. LSS was selected by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to receive grant moneys under the federal Supportive Housing Program. Because WHO was one of LSS's largest creditors. WHO defended on the ground that LSS's interest in the Supportive Housing Program grant relationship was not property of LSS's bankruptcy estate and thus did not trigger a fiduciary duty on WHO's part. We hold that LSS's interest in the grant r elationship with HUD is excluded from the definition of
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
National Voting Rights Institute were on brief. Were on brief. Suit was brought in anticipation of the debates to be staged by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) before the November 2000 Presidential Election. That we have Article III jurisdiction and. Concluding that Nader and the Green Party had standing to challenge the FEC's debate regulations
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The question presented is whether California Assembly Bill 1889. Is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act.1 As we explain. The California statute chills employers from exercising their free speech rights that are explicitly protected by Congress under the National Labor Relations Act. That the use of the state spending power is rarely a defense to state interference with the National Labor Relations Act. 290 91 (1986) (emphasizing that Congress would not have intended to allow states to interfere with the NLRA
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Because this construction is consistent with the plain meaning of the language employed by Congress. Which is defined as
|
|
COVINGTON DARRYL V. DC
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Foundation argues that it does meet the requisite test and is therefore a supporting organization. Claims that the Tax Court was correct in holding that the Foundation did not meet the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We conclude that its grant of summary judgment was premature. I As is common with FCA cases. CMC is a nonprofit corporation established to provide information technology (IT) consulting services to small and medium sized manufacturing enterprises in the Chicago area. CMC is sponsored by the Manufacturing Extension Plan (MEP). She was
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1291 and reverse and remand. The following facts are undisputed. The Department has prohibited the receipt of bulk mail into Oregon prisons under the rationales that bulk mail is voluminous and generally of little value to prisoners. Substantial staff is required to sort. 86 of which were nonprofit organization mail. Mail that was previously designated as third or fourth class mail (bulk mail) is now classified as Standard A mail and Standard B mail. Standard A mail is further subdivided into two classes:
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1291 and reverse and remand. The following facts are undisputed. The Department has prohibited the receipt of bulk mail into Oregon prisons under the rationales that bulk mail is voluminous and generally of little value to prisoners. Substantial staff is required to sort. 86 of which were nonprofit organization mail. Mail that was previously designated as third or fourth class mail (bulk mail) is now classified as Standard A mail and Standard B mail. Standard A mail is further subdivided into two classes:
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Homeowners who live across from a Roman Catholic school which is constructing improvements and additions to the school without obtaining a
|
|
ONE WORLD ONE FAMILY NOW V. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH (5/20/1999, NO. 98-4091)
Vending from streets and sidewalks is prohibited. The only exception to this general prohibition is that full service restaurants operating from an enclosed structure may serve food on outdoor tables.
|
|
ONE WORLD ONE FAMILY NOW V. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH (5/20/1999, NO. 98-4091)
Vending from streets and sidewalks is prohibited. The only exception to this general prohibition is that full service restaurants operating from an enclosed structure may serve food on outdoor tables.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Even though the only possible basis for federal jurisdiction was diversity of citizenship. They have done so. The supplemental briefs reveal that Hoagland is a citizen of Illinois. It is his citizenship rather than Midwest's that is germane to diversity. Because there is no suggestion that he was appointed receiver in order to create diversity jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1359. That while the Sandberg firm is a professional corporation incorporated and having its principal place of business in Missouri. Three of the twenty two members of the firm (the shareholders in the professional corporation) are citizens of Illinois. If the citizenship of the members is what counts for purposes of determining diversity. As would be the case if the law firm were a partnership. A number of subsequent cases are in accord. There are no contrary decisions. Made clear that Coté stands for a rule that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict in a personal injury action. Kuntz was severely injured when a metal rod he was removing from a billboard came in contact with an electric transmission line operated by defendant Kootenai Electric Cooperative. Because some of its members are citizens of Washington. As is Kuntz. The Cooperative claims that complete diversity of citizenship is lacking. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm the judgment of the district court in all respects. Kuntz was an independent contractor in the business of removing and replacing advertising placards on billboards. This billboard had a vinyl sign that was secured by 14 metal rods. The Cooperative is a cooperative marketing association organized to generate and distribute electric power to its members. The Cooperative is incorporated in the State of Idaho and has its principal place of business there. After the reconstruction project was completed. The conductor nearest to the billboard was eight feet from the billboard.1 The Cooperative did not warn Lamar or Kuntz that a conductor was closer to the billboard than before the reconAnother.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The evidence shows that the College president had a list of available positions she offered to help Hall obtain if Hall would have agreed to resign her position as a Student Services Specialist. Hall declined this reasonable accommodation and was terminated. The judgment of the district court granting defendant's motion for summary judgment is AFFIRMED. I. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation (
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
We are asked to decide if a
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
I. NCRL is a nonprofit corporation operating in the State of North Carolina. NCRL is not associated with any political candidate. Nor is one of NCRL's major purposes to nominate. Does have as a primary purpose supporting or opposing specific candidates and political parties. Holt is also a registered lobbyist in the State of North Carolina. NCRL worried that it might be considered a
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Marsh Citizens for a Strong Ohio (
|
|
FTC V. HOSPITAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS FTC V. THE DISTRICT COURT FOUND THAT ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT WAS FORESEEABLE AND GRANTED STATE ACTION IMMUNITY TO THE BOARD. THE BOARD'S FIRST ACT WAS BUILDING A NEW FACILITY ADJACENT TO THE ONLY HOSPITAL THEN IN EXISTENCE IN LEE COUNTY. ONCE THE NEW FACILITY WAS COMPLETED. LEE MEMORIAL IS A PUBLIC. THE BOARD WAS ALSO GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO BE A VOTING MEMBER OF. OR CORPORATION IS VIOLATING. OR IS ABOUT TO VIOLATE. AND (2) THAT THE ENJOINING THEREOF PENDING THE ISSUANCE OF A COMPLAINT BY THE COMMISSION AND UNTIL SUCH COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED BY THE COMMISSION OR SET ASIDE BY THE COURT ON REVIEW. THE BOARD FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS THE CASE ON THE GROUND THAT THE CHALLENGED ACQUISITION WAS IMMUNIZED UNDER THE STATE ACTION DOCTRINE. THE REQUEST FOR AN INJUNCTION WAS DENIED BY THE DISTRICT COURT ON MAY 17. STANDARD OF REVIEW THE APPLICATION OF THE STATE ACTION DOCTRINE IS A QUESTION OF LAW. THE DISTRICT COURT'S GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS THEREFORE SUBJECT TO DE NOVO REVIEW BY THE CIRCUIT. SEE BOLT V.">
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Because Shaliehsabou is employed in a ministerial role by a religiously affiliated employer and thus not entitled to overtime under the Act. Worked at the Hebrew Home of Greater Washington (the Hebrew Home) as a mashgiach.1 The term mashgiach is defined as
|
|
FTC V. HOSPITAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS FTC V. THE DISTRICT COURT FOUND THAT ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT WAS FORESEEABLE AND GRANTED STATE ACTION IMMUNITY TO THE BOARD. THE BOARD'S FIRST ACT WAS BUILDING A NEW FACILITY ADJACENT TO THE ONLY HOSPITAL THEN IN EXISTENCE IN LEE COUNTY. ONCE THE NEW FACILITY WAS COMPLETED. LEE MEMORIAL IS A PUBLIC. THE BOARD WAS ALSO GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO BE A VOTING MEMBER OF. OR CORPORATION IS VIOLATING. OR IS ABOUT TO VIOLATE. AND (2) THAT THE ENJOINING THEREOF PENDING THE ISSUANCE OF A COMPLAINT BY THE COMMISSION AND UNTIL SUCH COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED BY THE COMMISSION OR SET ASIDE BY THE COURT ON REVIEW. THE BOARD FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS THE CASE ON THE GROUND THAT THE CHALLENGED ACQUISITION WAS IMMUNIZED UNDER THE STATE ACTION DOCTRINE. THE REQUEST FOR AN INJUNCTION WAS DENIED BY THE DISTRICT COURT ON MAY 17. STANDARD OF REVIEW THE APPLICATION OF THE STATE ACTION DOCTRINE IS A QUESTION OF LAW. THE DISTRICT COURT'S GRANT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS THEREFORE SUBJECT TO DE NOVO REVIEW BY THE CIRCUIT. SEE BOLT V.">
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the briefs were Stephen J. With him on the brief were Irvin B. Schaeffer were on the brief for amici curiae Americans United for Separation of Church and State in support of affirmance. The issue in this appeal from an order granting summary judgment in favor of the American Jewish Congress (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Permitted brochures are either made available for students to pick up or placed in teachers' in house mailboxes and then distributed by the teachers to their students. Material from community organizations or of a general nature that is not of a commercial.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Levinson LLP was on brief. P.C. were on brief. Because the charitable organization was still functioning as such at the time its entitlement to the bequest vested. BACKGROUND
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This appeal is the latest chapter in a protracted saga centered around a 43 foot high Latin cross that stands atop Mt. A 170 acre parcel of land that was dedicated to public use in 1916 as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
MSN is a division of Microsoft offering Internet access services. Odom alleged that if the customer was paying by debit or credit card the Best Buy employee would scan the Trial CD. The Best Buy employee would claim it was for
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The question before us is whether a state's exercise of its sovereign power to control the use of its funds conflicts with national labor policy as expressed in the National Labor Relations Act (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Paige is substituted for his predecessor. We are asked to interpret a difficult contract and attempt to devine what the Congress meant in portions of the Higher Education Act (Act). We suppose the complexity of the case is demonstrated by the fact that both parties appeal from the judgment of the district court. Secretary) argue that the district court erred both in holding that the Secretary was in breach of his obligations to the Student Loan Fund of Idaho. We have jurisdiction of the timely filed appeal and cross appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. SLFI is a private non profit corporation that began in the late 1970s to function as a guaranty agency under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (Loan Program). The ultimate insurer of the loans is. A State or private nonprofit organization is first required to contract with the Secretary. Four of the five agreements entered into between SLFI and the Secretary provide that SLFI is to comply with the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. All of the agreements state that they are to be interpreted in the light of the Act and the regulations.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Paige is substituted for his predecessor. We are asked to interpret a difficult contract and attempt to devine what the Congress meant in portions of the Higher Education Act (Act). We suppose the complexity of the case is demonstrated by the fact that both parties appeal from the judgment of the district court. Secretary) argue that the district court erred both in holding that the Secretary was in breach of his obligations to the Student Loan Fund of Idaho. We have jurisdiction of the timely filed appeal and cross appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. SLFI is a private non profit corporation that began in the late 1970s to function as a guaranty agency under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (Loan Program). The ultimate insurer of the loans is. A State or private nonprofit organization is first required to contract with the Secretary. Four of the five agreements entered into between SLFI and the Secretary provide that SLFI is to comply with the Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. All of the agreements state that they are to be interpreted in the light of the Act and the regulations.
|
|
CHAMBER CMERC US V. FEC
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Paige is substituted for his predecessor. Is hereby amended as follows: Page 16395. That the regulations were contrary to Congress's intent and that these funds from a separate. Are federal reserve fund assets. Was inconsistent with Congressional intent and the underlying purposes of the HEA and that these funds from a 5565 separate. The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. We are asked to interpret a difficult contract and attempt to devine what the Congress meant in portions of the Higher Education Act (Act). We suppose the complexity of the case is demonstrated by the fact that both parties appeal from the judgment of the district court. Secretary) argue that the district court erred both in holding that the Secretary was in breach of his obligations to the Student Loan Fund of Idaho. We have jurisdiction of the timely filed appeal and cross appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. SLFI is a private non profit corporation that began in the late 1970s to function as a guaranty agency under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (Loan Program).
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Which made a notable ruling that defendant appellant Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
In this case we are required to decide the constitutionality of Tennessee's statute making available the purchase of automobile license plates with a
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: When one of the cases of this consolidated appeal was before us seven years ago. Such forgetfulness is understandable because we know that even Homer nodded.1 We have before us an appeal and several cross appeals from a preliminary injunction entered in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Block. Defendant LSC is a 1 A reference to the reappearance in Homer's famous
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
1 were engaged in an anticompetitive conspiracy with medical doctors and medical associations whose purpose was to harm chiropractors. Claiming that Trigon and the medical doctors and associations were engaged in a conspiracy that used Trigon's reimbursement policies and treatment guidelines to limit severely the flow of insurance dollars to chiropractors and steer those monies toward medical doctors. Trigon Healthcare was recently purchased by Anthem Healthcare. Trigon is a for profit. These healthcare benefit plans list the benefits and services covered by Trigon under the plan and describe any services that are excluded from the plan or are the subject of coverage limitations. Trigon creates this network of healthcare providers by entering into contracts with providers who are willing to abide by Trigon's terms and conditions.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
JOSEPH is
|
|
00-2050 -- NEW MEXICO CATTLE GROWERS ASSOCIATION V. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE -- 05/11/2001
Is one of four sub species of the willow flycatcher. The known population of the flycatcher was between 300 and 500 nesting pairs spread across seven states and parts of Mexico. In order to determine what the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Because the interests at stake in the litigation were not germane to the Trades Council's organizational purpose. The Trades Council lacked standing to assert its Clean Water Act claim because the alleged violation upon which the claim was premised had been rectified by the time the Trades Council filed its amended complaint. BACKGROUND The
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Because the interests at stake in the litigation were not germane to the Trades Council's organizational purpose. The Trades Council lacked standing to assert its Clean Water Act claim because the alleged violation upon which the claim was premised had been rectified by the time the Trades Council filed its amended complaint. BACKGROUND The
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
It is sufficiently within the statutory zone of interest to have prudential standing to bring an action under § 1981. Inc. (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
It is sufficiently within the statutory zone of interest to have prudential standing to bring an action under § 1981. Inc. (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center argues that the district court erred in instructing the jury that the Center's right to recover was contingent upon a finding that the defendants unlawfully discriminated against the individual plaintiffs. I. The individual plaintiffs are six African Americans who sought to purchase homes in Montgomery. This action was the only case to be tried during the term. After the venire was sworn by the clerk. After voir dire was completed. One of which was granted. Both of whom were struck by the court. Of the prospective jurors the first fourteen remaining on the venire eleven were white and three were black. The district court found that a prima facie case was established because
|
|
CENT. ALABAMA FAIR HOUS. CTR. V. LOWDER REALTY CO. (12/21/2000, NO. 99-6133)
The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center argues that the district court erred in instructing the jury that the Center's right to recover was contingent upon a finding that the defendants unlawfully discriminated against the individual plaintiffs. Remand for a new trial.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center argues that the district court erred in instructing the jury that the Center's right to recover was contingent upon a finding that the defendants unlawfully discriminated against the individual plaintiffs. I. The individual plaintiffs are six African Americans who sought to purchase homes in Montgomery. This action was the only case to be tried during the term. After the venire was sworn by the clerk. After voir dire was completed. One of which was granted. Both of whom were struck by the court. Of the prospective jurors the first fourteen remaining on the venire eleven were white and three were black. The district court found that a prima facie case was established because
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
CV 03 06386 JKS *Nancy Ruthenbeck is substituted for Del A. P. 43(c)(2). ** Mike Johanns is substituted for Ann M. Chief Judge Schroeder and Judge Graber have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are DENIED. Plaintiffs Appellees' motion for clarification with regard to the applicability of the opinion to both 36 C.F.R. §§ 215.12(f) and 215.4(a) and inapplicability of the opinion to 36 C.F.R. § 215.18(b)(1) is GRANTED. Is amended and. The attached amended opinion is substituted in its place. Overview This is a government appeal from a district court judgment enjoining Forest Service regulations that govern review of decisions implementing forest plans. On the ground that the regulations were manifestly contrary to the governing statute. The environmentalist plaintiffs Earth Island Institute et al. challenge the four regulations the district court held were valid. We agree with the district court that plaintiffs have established standing. 36 C.F.R. §§ 215.12(f) and 215.4(a) have actually been applied to a proposed project.
|
|
CENT. ALABAMA FAIR HOUS. CTR. V. LOWDER REALTY CO. (12/21/2000, NO. 99-6133)
The Central Alabama Fair Housing Center argues that the district court erred in instructing the jury that the Center's right to recover was contingent upon a finding that the defendants unlawfully discriminated against the individual plaintiffs. Remand for a new trial.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
(2) Moog is liable for TSS's breach of contract under a veil piercing theory. (3) Moog is liable for tortious interference with the contract between TSS and SKI. This is an action in diversity. The breach of contract claim is governed by Japanese law. The other claims are governed by Michigan law. All three companies were involved in the business of servo valves. A servo valve is an electro hydraulically controlled mechanism used in such products as flight simulators. Moog is a large international distributor of servo valves. Moog servo valves were a substitute for TSS servo valves. Moog learned that SKI was TSS's largest foreign customer. Which were renewed automatically unless the other party gave notice to the contrary. The Agreement was dated February 8. Inc is the parent of a wholly owned subsidiary. Which is incorporated in Japan. Inc. and Moog Japan are collectively referred to as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief. Pelesh were on brief for the Advertising Mail Marketing Association. Miles were on brief for the Association of Priority Mail Users.
|
|
UNITED PARCEL SVC V. USPS
Were on brief. Dana T. Pelesh were on brief for the Advertising Mail Marketing Association. Miles were on brief for the Association of Priority Mail Users.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs have frequently sought damages from affiliated corporations. Plaintiffs with claims arising from non WARN Act sources of law against debt laden or bankrupt corporations have occasionally attempted to sue the corporations' major secured lenders. On the theory that the lenders have exercised such control over the corporations that veil piercing is appr opriate. The question before us is whether the for mer employees of Component Technology (CompTech). Have set forth sufficient evidence to cr eate a genuine issue of material fact as to whether . Requires us to consider not only the prerequisites for parent/subsidiary liability in the WARN Act context (as will be shown. That 2 jurisprudence is apposite here). Courts have been extr emely reluctant to hold lenders liable for their borrowers' actions. Some version of the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Rick: I was misinformed. It was not Rick Blaine. The permit was required. The desert washes are considered navigable waters. It was not. I At the center of this controversy is a 608 acre parcel of undeveloped land (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Harris and Schwentker were romantically involved. Owners who were loyal to him.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Are withdrawn and replaced by the amended opinion. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A majority of the nonrecused active judges failed to vote in favor of en banc rehearing.* The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. *Judge Rawlinson was recused. 6460 SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. What makes CU's ratings particularly useful is the thorough explanation of the testing procedures employed. Is no exception. The explanation is not written for morons. It is geared to an intelligent. Yet the careful reader will not fail to understand the central facts that undergird Suzuki's claim in this lawsuit. This is the death of consumer ratings: It will be impossible to issue a meaningful consumer review that a band of determined lawyers can't pick apart in front of a SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. The ultimate losers will be American consumers denied access to independent information about the safety and usefulness of products they buy with their hard earned dollars. The majority's analysis is tainted throughout by its failure to articulate.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The gravamen of its complaint was that the managed health care organizations impaired the quality of health care provided by psychiatrists to their patients by refusing to authorize necessary psychiatric treatment. The principal issue on appeal is whether the Pennsylvania Psychiatric Society has properly pleaded associational and third party standing. P. 12(b)(6) was premature. We will vacate and remand for further proceedings. 1. SS 1001 1461.2 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. The case was removed from state court under ERISA's civil enforcement provision. To discern which claims are preempted.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
INTRODUCTION: The revolutionary changes in the health care field over the past decade have spawned many novel market arrangements. Perhaps the most significant development is the ascendency of managed care driven health maintenance organizations (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm the order of August 12. The Parties ASTM is a Pennsylvania non profit corporation whose mission is to provide a forum for volunteer technical experts to 2 develop and publish standards for materials. These committees are broken down further into 2. Has a six member Executive Committee that acts on its behalf when the full Board is not in session. Defendant Corrpro is in the business of providing corrosion control and cathodic protection (i.e. Defendant Baach was the Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Corrpro. Defendant WRA is primarily in the business of providing mathematical and statistical consulting services. Rogers was President of WRA. Rogers was a member of Corrpro's Board of Directors from sometime in the mid 1990s until 2001 or 2002. Guidelines do not prohibit an individual from participating in a standard setting activity by reason of his association with or employment by a company with a financial interest in the technical standard on which he is working. Under ASTM Bylaw No. 10.1: 3 Any person who was or is a party.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
At issue is whether an amendment to a Minnesota statute. Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Minnesota. The Association is a nonprofit Minnesota corporation created pursuant to the Minnesota Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association Act (the Act). The Investment Plus Plan of Honeywell the Honeywell plans is First Trust National Association. App. 1987). business in Minnesota are To provide this protection. Who was a Minnesota resident (as is the current trustee). GICs are unallocated annuity contracts. Or Id. annuity contracts
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Is incarcerated. Which states that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Is incarcerated. Which states that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
A Missouri based chapter of a non profit corporation that was chartered in Arkansas in 1994. After the State notified Unit 188 that its application was denied because it did not meet the AAH program's eligibility requirements that were set forth in state regulations. Holding that the State's reasons for denying Unit 188's application were unconstitutional. It argues first that the district court erroneously concluded that it is collaterally estopped from litigating the constitutionality of its denial of Unit 188's application based on Unit 188's racially discriminatory membership criteria. It maintains that the district court erred in holding that the State's application of a regulation barring participation in the AAH program by organizations for which courts have taken judicial notice of a history of violence violated Unit 188's first The Honorable Catherine D. I. This is the third appeal to this court arising out of the State's ongoing efforts to keep Missouri Klan groups out of the AAH program. Filed an action seeking a declaratory judgment that it was not required to approve the application.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Was convicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio of mail fraud. In concluding the embezzled funds were the funds of a labor organization. Would have questioned the judge's impartiality.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Tustumena Lake is located in Alaska. Because it is not
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
It instead should have applied the rule of reason. Pre Litigation Background The factual background is fairly extensive. We will not reiterate it in full here. Craftsmen is a Missouri corporation engaged in the business of stretching standard base vehicles into limousines and buses. While Craftsmen was actively engaged in the business of building stretched limousines. There were limits upon the total weight of the resulting limousines and the length to which they could be stretched (no more than 120 additional inches). Craftsmen was one of a minority of American coachbuilding companies that chose not to participate in either program. Joining the QVM program would have required Craftsmen to abandon its practice of building specialty limousines or to seek costly independent safety analysis. Craftsmen was already using techniques described in the QVM guidelines. Craftsmen's owners had no reason to believe that the company's converted vehicles were unsafe. Ford was also a nonvoting member of LIMO. American Coach was a voting member.
|
|
AKINS JAMES V. FEC
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
This case is before us en banc upon remand from the United States Supreme Court. Believing that it will be helpful in analyzing the issues presented. At issue were the so called
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Must have an interest in actually purchasing or renting a particular property or dwelling in order to allege a discriminatory violation. We also face a related question: whether Plaintiff Appellant Disabled Rights Action Committee (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We must also decide whether Appellants' claim of false advertising pursuant to the Lanham Act was properly dismissed for lack of standing after trial. Which provides that JRTCA affiliates and members will recognize only the JRTCA registry of Jack Russell Terriers. Will not register their dogs with conflicting organizations such as the American Kennel Club (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
CU's motion for summary judgment was granted by the district court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. BACKGROUND CU is a nonprofit corporation that engages in comparative testing and evaluation of consumer products and services. The results of which are published in the magazine Consumer Reports. Was introduced in the United States in 1985. The petition was denied. Although the NHTSA emphasized that the denial was not an endorsement of the safety performance of a vehicle. A double lane change avoidance maneuver test course that CU had used since 1973.2 The long course was designed to replicate an emergency situation in which a driver suddenly steers a vehicle left into the opposing lane. Several CU personnel were in attendance during the April 20 testing. CU driver Kevin Sheehan reported that the Samurai was
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The pivotal question in this case is whether a city may. Between Tucson and recipients of Civic Events Fund support is such that Tucson was correct in concluding that the requested funding would have fallen on the Establishment Clause side of that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The pivotal question in this case is whether a city may. Between Tucson and recipients of Civic Events Fund support is such that Tucson was correct in concluding that the requested funding would have fallen on the Establishment Clause side of that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The four defendants are Healthchoice. The and Orlando Regional hospital's parent The incidents giving rise to the lawsuit are Dr. attempt to gain provider membership in unsuccessful Healthchoice and CFMA. Because we conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact about Dr. That the defendants are accordingly entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The following is a summary of the facts as viewed in the light most favorable to Dr. Levine is an internist. completing his residency in California. Was granted. Provisional staff privileges at the ORHS hospitals.2 ORHS is a nonprofit organization that owns and operates five Orlando area hospitals: Orlando Regional Medical Center (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm. The EPA concluded remedial action was necessary to protect human health. Was responsible for the lead contamination. Was long 3 since out of business. Alleging it was responsible for Price Battery's CERCLA liability as a successor in interest. Exide is General Battery's successor. The disputed issue is whether General Battery. Was a successor to Price Battery. The relevant aspects of the Price/General transaction are as follows. Price Battery was owned by a single shareholder. A seat on General's board of directors.1 At The only Price Battery asset nominally excluded from the transaction was its real property. When the deed was transferred to General for $1.00. 000 General Battery shares were valued at approximately $1 million and represented 4.537% of General's outstanding equity. William Price Sr.'s resulting stake in General Battery was comparable to that of the company's cofounders. Was required under the agreement to immediately change its name to Price Investment Company and to retain $150.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
USFWS 3229 ORDER Defendant appellee's Petition for Rehearing En Banc Regarding Remedy is GRANTED. Is amended as follows: In Section IV of the en banc court's opinion. After the paragraph concluding
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
By offending its mandate to preserve the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This is the fourth installment in this lengthy and tortuous insurance saga. We will affirm in part and reverse in part. I. The Lake Erie Employers' Association (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
When the substance of the manuscript was relevant to the issues in the child custody proceeding and the defendants' use of the manuscript was solely for its content and not for its mode of expression. BLUM were represented by a member of the firm and thus were acting pro se. Bond's manuscript was entitled Self Portrait of a Patricide: How I Got Away with Murder. Who was formerly known as William Rovtar. Was 17. After Rovtar was arrested and detained in a juvenile detention facility in Ohio. He entered into a guilty plea agreement in juvenile court with the result that in September 1981 he was transferred to the Sheppard & Enoch Pratt Hospital in Baltimore. Rovtar was released in 1982. Although verifiable facts of the murder are consistent with the details provided in the manuscript. Bond has now stated in an affidavit that the manuscript is
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to Forsythe.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Which are used to repay educational debt. Are non dischargeable within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8). The Bankruptcy Court concluded that they are dischargeable. Because we do not believe that such loans are educational in nature and are therefore not subject to the non dischargeability exception set forth in section 523(a)(8). We will affirm. Segal
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
872 imposed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
He was sentenced to 293 months in prison for the continuing financial crimes enterprise violation. Lefkowitz argues that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of any crime. Lefkowitz was President of Citi Equity Group. Or acquire buildings in which a prescribed percentage of the apartment units are occupied by low income tenants. Money raised from limited partners was the project's equity. Remaining debts to the builder were paid. While CEG obtained permanent financing to replace the construction loan once a building was completed. 000 were unbuilt. Funds from limited partners and FSM investors were first deposited in an operating account for each particular investment. 000 was used to pay Lefkowitz's personal expenses. The black hole was $3. IRS agents traced new partnership deposits that cleared negative balances in the central CEG account and then were used to meet Lefkowitz's personal needs and to fund older projects. This practice was not disclosed to CEG investors. Lefkowitz denies that this was fraudulent.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Were on the briefs. Was on the brief. Circuit Judge: We are called upon to interpret a corporation's articles of organization to decide whether it has an obligation to redeem certain shares of its stock. The Series B Stock is redeemable at the option of the holder upon a
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Popp was known as LDB International Corporation. I. FACTS AND BACKGROUND We recognize that this case has been before assorted state and federal courts since 1992 and the chronology of events is thus well documented. A. The Business Relationship and the Merger The Dissenters are former stockholders in American Sharecom. King were the President. Every shareholder with the exception of Simon and
|
|
LARRY RANEY V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
On the brief was Martin . O
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Which was established to provide a network of doctors in Hawaii for a managed care health plan developed by IHM. Certain of their officers who were also named as defendants.1 We sometimes refer to these parties collectively as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The issue before us in this appeal is whether Canon 5 of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct. Were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest in maintaining the independence and impartiality of Minnesota's judiciary. Were not impermissibly vague. I. The Minnesota Constitution provides that judges
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Profession or trade
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Was on the briefs. Was on the brief. Was on the brief. Appellants are residents who presently live in this housing property. We affirm the district court's denial of appellants' motion to intervene in the quiet title lawsuit because their interests are sufficiently protected by their APA lawsuit. Kimberly merely held that certain defenses were not available to the government in a quiet title action brought by Section 515 borrowers to enforce their contractual right to prepay their loans. Ours is an APA case brought by residents challenging the agency's noncompliance with the Emergency Low Income Housing Protection Act. Kimberly did not hold that ELIHPA was invalid or that the Department of Agriculture was free to violate it. I. Background The facts are not disputed. Section 515 of the National Housing Act of 1949 was enacted by Congress to encourage private investment in housing for elderly and low income individuals in rural areas. Which was later subsumed into RHS. UNITED STATES the housing owners agreed to rent to qualified low income tenants at affordable rates for as long as the loans were outstanding.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Rez were on brief.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Sidley & Austin (as it then was) demoted 32 of its equity partners to
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
AKRTL was informed by the Alaska Public Offices Commission that if it wished to engage in
|
|
96-8083 -- PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL V. BABBITT -- 02/09/1999
Public Lands Council concedes that the statutory citation is incorrect but contends that we should cite a different statutory provision rather than remove the highlighted portion of the sentence. Upon consideration. The court grants the limited petition for rehearing and orders the highlighted portion of the sentence removed from the court's opinion so that the sentence will read:
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Allege that they were subject to a racially hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Is not the employer of Washington's Law Against Discrimination tracks federal law. Thus our analysis will cite only federal law. PMA is a non profit association of the stevedoring and shipping companies that do employ the Plaintiffs. Holding that PMA could not be liable for discrimination because PMA was not the Plaintiffs' employer. I A The Plaintiffs are all African American. They allege that they were subjected to a racially hostile work environment while employed on the waterfront in Seattle and Tacoma. The Plaintiffs allege that they have been referred to as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Lambert challenges the district court's application of a twolevel enhancement under United States Sentencing Guideline (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
At issue here is whether an individual involved in a Massachusetts
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The DOC's ban on non subscription bulk mail and catalogs is not rationally related to a legitimate penological interest and is therefore unconstitutional. The prison officials are entitled to qualified immunity because their actions did not violate clearly established law. The prison officials are not entitled to qualified immunity because they violated clearly established law. I Prison Legal News is a Washington nonprofit corporation that publishes and distributes publications regarding legal issues of interest to inmates. Including 120 who are inmates in Washington's state correctional facilities. Is an inmate in a Washington state correctional facility. The prison officials are policymaking employees in the DOC. This is the fourth case since 1996 brought by PLN against the DOC. The previous cases are Miniken v. The directive prohibits inmates from receiving
|
 |
OPINION/ORDER
The issue on appeal is whether a board of education exceeded its authority by implementing a consensual program to distribute condoms in public schools in order to prevent disease. We will affirm. HIV infection are epidemic among school age youth . . . . Have an obligation to promote a healthy lifestyle for all adolescents.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Defendants submit that the district court's ruling as to antitrust standing was correct and that dismissal was further warranted for lack of personal jurisdiction and venue. Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs appellants are licensed physicians who practice or had practiced emergency medicine throughout the United States although they did not complete formal residency training programs in that specialty. Defendants insist that the case was properly dismissed not only for lack of antitrust standing but also for lack of personal jurisdiction and venue in the Western District of New York. We conclude that such a transfer is not in the interests of justice in this case because the plaintiffs lack antitrust standing to pursue their claims. American Board of Emergency Medicine Defendant ABEM is a Michigan not for profit corporation that was established in 6 1976 to certify physicians in emergency medicine. Staff are located in East Lansing. ABEM is a member of the American Board of Medical Specialties (
|
|
01-4009 -- SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE V. NORTON -- 08/29/2002
The district court reasoned that as long as an agency is taking some action toward fulfilling mandatory. The court concluded that the BLM did not abuse its discretion in determining that a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) was not necessary based on new information about increased ORV use. Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Nearly 200 petitions for review of the various FERC orders have been filed in our Court. Were the proper subject of the refund proceedings instituted by FERC. The net effect of our decision is to preserve the scope of the existing FERC refund proceedings. (2) FERC's denial of relief for energy sales in which CERS was the purchaser. Tucson Electric Power Company. 22 3 Also before us in this case are the Public Entities'4 and the Bonneville Power Administration's petitions for review of FERC's determination that it had authority to order relief for certain transactions known as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Whose address is 808 Moorefield Park Drive. Whose address is 808 Moorefield Park Drive. Colonial was formerly the wholly owned nonbanking subsidiary of CorEast. Which is now under the receivership of the Resolution Trust Corporation (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The issue on appeal is whether the Fair Labor Standards Act applies to a non profit corporation pr oviding residential human services programs for mentally ill and mentally retarded adults. We will vacate the judgment and remand for further findings. I. Background Plaintiffs are current and for mer employees of Defendant Resources for Human Development. RHD is a Pennsylvania non profit corporation that pr ovides its clients mentally ill and mentally retar ded adults with human services programs such as community health 2 centers. Overtime pay is equal to 1.5 times an employee's regular pay rate. Both programs are
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The central issue in this interlocutory appeal is the proper reach of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
WILL & EMERY. WILL & EMERY. Was enacted in 1998 and proscribes the sale of products that may be used to
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
McDermott Will & Emery. Nearly 200 petitions for review of the various FERC orders have been filed in our Court. Were the proper subject of the refund proceedings instituted by FERC. The net effect of our decision is to preserve the scope of the existing FERC refund proceedings. (2) FERC's denial of relief for energy sales in which CERS was the purchaser. Also before us in this case are the Public Entities'4 and the Bonneville Power Administration's petitions for review of FERC's determination that it had authority to order relief for certain transactions known as
|
|
JOHNSON V. K MART CORP. (11/21/2001, NO. 99-14563)
We consider the question whether a former employee as against a current employee or an applicant is eligible to file suit under 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a).
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With her on the briefs were Bruce J. With him on the brief were Loretta C. A tax exempt organization that en gages in lobbying activities and is funded in part by member ship dues and other contributions may either pay a tax on its lobbying activities (the so called
|
|
JOHNSON V. K MART CORP. (11/21/2001, NO. 99-14563)
We consider the question whether a former employee as against a current employee or an applicant is eligible to file suit under 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a).
|
|
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVES V. USA
With her on the briefs were Bruce J. With him on the brief were Loretta C. A tax exempt organization that en gages in lobbying activities and is funded in part by member ship dues and other contributions may either pay a tax on its lobbying activities (the so called ". Falls on all lobbying expenses as defined in s 162(e)(1) and is imposed at the highest marginal rate of the corporate income tax under I.R.C. s 11. It is required to provide donors. Of the portion of the dues or contributions that is allocable to s 162(e)(1) expenditures. . Donors are not allowed to take a deduction for the portion of their dues and contributions allocable to such expenditures. This provision dic tates that lobbying expenditures will be considered paid out of membership dues or ". Thereby artificially increasing the deductions for which its members are eligible). Provision dictates that any lobbying expenditures in excess of the dues or other amounts paid to the organization in one year will be treated as expenditures incurred during the following year and payable out of dues received during that year.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
O'Brien. This case is the latest in a long running dispute between Moshe Tal. The powers of an urban renewal authority are exercised by commissioners. 11 Okla. One statutory requirement is that the plan allow private developers the opportunity to obtain redevelopment contracts. 11 Okla. The Bricktown redevelopment plan was amended in 1997 as the MAPS
Sports Entertainment Parking Support Redevelopment Plan. The City's intended use was public parking. Which was modified on October 2. The final decision was made by the City Council only after two years of public meetings. Inc.'s land had been impermissibly taken for private use and the redevelopment contract was awarded amid
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The issue is whether plaintiffs should have obtained a stay under S 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code before appealing an assumption and an assignment under S 365. This appeal arises from the District Court's affirmance of the Bankruptcy Court's order approving the assumption of eight physician employment contracts by the Chapter 11 Trustee of a bankrupt health care system and their assignment to another hospital.1 Contending their employment contracts were not assignable. Our review of its decision is plenary. The other plaintiffs are Bonnie K. The defendants appellees are AHERF 's Chapter 11 trustee and the Western Pennsylvania Healthcare Alliance along with Allegheny General Hospital. 3. The acquisition of a nonprofit corporation's membership interest is comparable to the purchase of stock in a business. AHERF was the sole member of its affiliates and the sale of its memberships interests to the Western Pennsylvania Healthcare Alliance effected a complete change of control. 5. AUHS is substituted for MCP HU in their contracts. 5 contesting Western Pennsylvania Healthcare Alliance's financial viability.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs tell a compelling story and are not the first to tell it. Similar allegations have appeared in a separate class action. In complaints filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs tell a compelling story and are not the first to tell it. Similar allegations have appeared in a separate class action. In complaints filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
& the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Craftsmen is a closely held corporation owned by Robert Haswell and Marc Haswell. Is one of Craftsmen's direct competitors. It manufactures base vehicles that are later converted into limousines by independent coachbuilders like American Coach and Craftsmen. Approximately sixty percent of the six thousand limousines produced each year were converted from Ford's Lincoln Town Cars. The limousine industry is regulated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Coachbuilders are responsible for self certifying that their vehicles meet the federal safety standards. It claimed its vehicles were safe based on the construction techniques employed and the fact that none of its customers ever returned a limousine out of a concern for safety.2 At the time. Craftsmen complied with the recall orders and was not fined by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. A wedding party in New York was killed when its limousine was hit and split in half as it crossed an intersection.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Senior Circuit Judge: This is a challenge. The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and should have dismissed the complaint on that ground alone. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2 Fleck is a for profit corporation that operates Flex. The club limits access to adults who have purchased
|
|
JONES JOSEPH L. REV V. FRS
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
A third subpoena was served on yet another entity. Which is also engaged in the direct mail business and operates from the same premises. The three companies (hereinafter referred to collectively as
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
A comparable plate with a pro choice message is not available. (PPSC) and Renee Carter have sued three South Caro PLANNED PARENTHOOD v. Sale of the Choose Life plate is expected to generate additional revenue for the State. The fee for the special plate is seventy dollars every two years in addition to the regular fee. Proceeds from the sale of the Choose Life plate are to be placed in a special account administered by the Department of Social Services (DSS). A marketing plan for its sale that is subject to DPS approval. The plate is available only to certified members of the organization. 4 PLANNED PARENTHOOD v. Are authorized for issuance to any vehicle owner. When a bill to authorize the Choose Life plate was being considered at a subcommittee hearing in the South Carolina House of Representatives. A bill to authorize the Choose Life plate was also introduced in the South Carolina Senate in 2001. Consideration of the bill was blocked by parliamentary objections. A bill authorizing a NASCAR specialty license plate was amended to provide for the Choose Life plate.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Concerned that
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: The last sentence of the penultimate paragraph of the slip opinion on page 4631 is deleted. The following sentence is substituted in its place:
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The Rehabilitation Services for the Blind (RSB) is a Missouri state agency which receives federal funding and which developed a policy prohibiting its employees from distributing literature or discussing services offered by consumer groups such as the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and its local affiliate. I. RSB is a vocational rehabilitation agency serving blind Missourians. It is administered by the Missouri Division of Family Services and receives funding under the Rehabilitation Act. United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 2 1 Denise Cross is the Director of the Division of Family Services of the State of Missouri and in this capacity supervises the RSB. Howard is the Deputy Director and Supervisor of RSB and is responsible for managing the agency's seven district offices throughout Missouri. NFB and NFB Mo are not for profit membership organizations which aim to promote integration of the blind into society on equal terms with the sighted. Their aggressive advocacy and support programs are built on the philosophy that blindness is a characteristic.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
To conduct certain scientific studies and determine whether or not the tuna fishery is affecting the dolphin population. Only if the Secretary found that the fishery was not having a significant adverse impact on already depleted dolphin stocks. That the fishery was not having an adverse impact on the dolphin population. The district court held the agency's finding of no adverse impact was arbitrary and capricious in light of the inconclusive evidence. Because the agency was required. We held the agency should not have made what amounted to a default finding of no adverse impact in the absence of conclusive scientific data. The case is before us again to review District Court Judge Henderson's decision in round two that the Secretary's Final Finding is again arbitrary and capricious. I. Background Because the history of this dispute is so important. This method of fishing is known as
|
|
UNIVERSITY OF GREAT FALLS V. NLRB
In
support of petitioner.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were James D. With him on the brief were Arthur F. Strom were on the brief for intervenor. The University argues that it is exempt from NLRB jurisdiction under the doctrine of NLRB v. Concluded that the University did not
|
|
GREENBERG V. NAT'L GEOGRAPHIC SOC'Y (3/22/2001, NO. 00-10510)
Holding that the allegedly infringing work was a revision of a prior collective work that fell within the defendants' privilege under § 201(c). Because we find that the defendants' product is not merely a revision of the prior collective work but instead constitutes a new collective work that lies beyond the scope of § 201(c). Is responsible for the publication of National Geographic Magazine (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: We are asked to consider once again the proper allocation of burdens in cases involving allegations of discriminatory employment actions. Which is rarely available. The issue in the specific matter before us concerns the elements of a prima facie case under the familiar McDonnell Douglas scheme in a case in which the plaintiff employee was terminated. There is little in this case about which the parties agree. Was hired by one of the appellees. That she was laid off on October 5. Much is in dispute: who Ms. Marzano's employer was at any one time. Whoever it was. Was doing financially. What the jobs of people hired after she was laid off entailed. What qualifications were required to perform those respective jobs. Why she was laid off. Who needs to establish the reason and what is necessary to do so. Of one thing we are certain: on September 5. Marzano was hired by Computer Science Corporation (
|
|
GREENBERG V. NAT'L GEOGRAPHIC SOC'Y (3/22/2001, NO. 00-10510)
Holding that the allegedly infringing work was a revision of a prior collective work that fell within the defendants' privilege under § 201(c). Because we find that the defendants' product is not merely a revision of the prior collective work but instead constitutes a new collective work that lies beyond the scope of § 201(c). Is responsible for the publication of National Geographic Magazine (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With whom Michael Gottfried and Burns & Levinson LLP were on brief for appellants. P.C. were on brief for appellee. At 8.1 (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Appellant Alabama Tombigbee Rivers Coalition is an Alabama non profit corporation consisting of sixteen industries. Appellant Parker Towing Company (
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The District Court held that the Defendants are not entitled to assert qualified immunity because they are non governmental officials subject to the constraints of market forces. Under the provisions of (1) The Defendants also argue that we should grant them qualified immunity once we determine that they are entitled to assert it. Because we conclude that these Defendants are not entitled to assert qualified immunity. Which are private. Hammond was approached by parents and guardians of Sunflower's clients who apparently were dissatisfied with the service they were receiving. Hammond was asked if she would consider opening her own provider agency. Because Sunflower was also the area's CDDO. It was in charge of overseeing the distribution of funds to both Rosewood and itself. This potential conflict of interest is the root of the problems between Rosewood and Sunflower that are the basis of this suit. A CDDO that was not a service provider as well). That they were entitled to qualified immunity. Because the Defendants are private parties.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This is a trade secret case filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey by BP Chemicals Ltd. The undisputed facts are as follows. FCFC is a publicly traded Taiwanese corporation with its principal place of business in Taipei. FCFC is a subsidiary of a Taiwanese conglomerate known as the Formosa Plastics Group (FPG). Which is owned by Y.C. FCFC has a contract with JOC under which JOC will fabricate vessels in New Jersey for delivery to FCFC in Taiwan. It is performance of this contract that the instant action seeks to enjoin. The process for soliciting bids was that 4 FCFC's engineering team would prepare a bid package and send it to a purchasing group. That the purchasing group was actually the purchasing group of FPG. There is no evidence that any U.S. vendor received bid packages directly from FCFC. FCFC also has business contacts with the United States that are unrelated to its acetic acid plant project. Lummus is receiving daily faxes from FCFC in Taiwan. These sales were normally made in Taiwan through Taiwanese agents.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Bush
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The District Court held that one aspect of the pricing system the
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Cherry Point Marine Terminal Cherry Point is an approximately ten mile stretch of coastline located in the Strait of Georgia in northeast Puget Sound. The Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) was the original party to this suit. Physical adjustments enabled the southern platform both to unload crude oil and to load refined product so that the dock could function as it would have with both platforms. BP sought to have the 1969 permit reopened in 1977 so that it could complete the original design of the pier by building the northern platform. Before the permit was issued.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Appearing at 361 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2004) is amended as follows: OCEAN ADVOCATES v. The New platform facilitates an increase in tanker traffic and is a
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
The issues we address are whether the companies in the Bethlehem Steel corporate family and their agents were legally capable of engaging in an antitrust conspiracy with each other. We hold that the defendants were legally incapable of conspiring with one another or with their agents. We conclude that the defendants are not liable for breach of contract. We will affirm the judgment of the district court. Joruss Trucking were owned by Russell Siegel and his wife. Were based in Sparrows Point. It hoped to capture at least a portion of the revenue it was paying to outside truckers. Section 11343(e) authorizes the Commission to exempt an acquisition from regulatory oversight if it finds that regulation is not necessary to carry out the transportation policy of the Act. [fn3] and the acquisition is limited in scope or unlikely to result in an abuse of market power. 49 U.S.C. § 11343(e). Once the acquisition was finalized. Non exclusive agents in different parts of the country to make arrangements with owner operators or with other carriers who had access to trucks and drivers to carry the freight it was under contract to transport.
|
|
JOHN M.J. MADEY V. DUKE UNIVERSITY
Argued for plaintiff appellant.
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lawrence E. With him on the briefs were John A. With him on the briefs were J.G. Circuit Judge: The United States Telecom Asso ciation (USTA) challenges a Federal Communications Com mission (FCC) order finding that the Iowa Communications Network (ICN) is a common carrier. I ICN was established by the Iowa legislature to provide subsidized high speed telecommunications services through out Iowa. ICN's cus tomers are
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
I. NCRL is a non profit. Its major purpose is not the nomination or election of candidates. NCRLPAC is an internal political committee established by NCRL to engage in express advocacy consistent with the views of NCRL. NCRLPAC's primary purpose is to support or oppose specific candidates and political parties. NCRLC FIPE is also an internal political action committee created by NCRL. Its sole purpose is to make independent expenditures and it may not make monetary or inkind contributions to candidates. This action is the sequel to litigation that was commenced in 1996. Is unconstitutional because it
|
|
OPINION/ORDER
Maher Jr. argued the cause for petitioner.
|
|
99-4112 -- U.S. V. KOVACH -- 04/04/2000
The check was issued out of the Salt Lake City IHC office. The check was made payable to Michael S. The USPIS also determined that Kovach's fingerprints were on three of the four counterfeit checks. A criminal complaint was filed in federal district court charging Kovach in one count with knowingly uttering and possessing four counterfeit securities of an organization. Kovach was subsequently indicted on the same charge. Kovach moved to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction. (2) IHC Health Plan was a
|
|
LITTLE V. BRELAND
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/952791P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is required to pay federal income tax on certain payments it received through its sponsorship of group insurance plans. affirm. The Academy is a national association of family physicians that was organized to represent the interests of family physicians and to promote quality health care. The Academy is exempt from federal income tax as a The Academy created the business league under 26 U.S.C. § 501(a). We conclude the payments are not taxable. American Academy of Family Physicians Foundation (Foundation) to serve as The Foundation is exempt from federal income See id. § 501(a). Life insurance plans that are available to Academy members and their employees. The policies were initially administered by an individual. ISI is a for profit corporation that pays federal The ISI when he died. Principal controls the investment of The group policies require Principal to turn over to the In the Academy any reserve funds remaining after the policies have been terminated and all the claims have been paid. Whether the insurance plans are profitable for Principal or not.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/94-6668.opa.html">LITTLE V. BRELAND<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-8100.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND The Rendezvous is a historical reenactment held each Labor Day weekend at the Fort Bridger Historical Site in Wyoming in which participants reenact an annual rendezvous held by local fur traders from 1825 to 1840. 000 visitors and is the largest of its kind in the region. Some of the members of the FBRA's fourteen person Board of Directors are also traders. As fewer than half of the traders are members of the FBRA. <hr> Among other things. Priority is given to traders who participated in the previous year's Rendezvous. He generally will receive the same space he occupied the year before. Or by traders who were at the previous Rendezvous but filed their applications after the deadline. Are accepted on a first come. The Gregorys were long time and large volume Rendezvous traders who offered a wide selection of goods at low prices as compared to most other traders including traders who were members and directors of the FBRA. Their trading post sales of goods were governed by a contract with the State of Wyoming rather than by the FBRA.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200612/05-5185a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Elliot J. With her on the brief were Kenneth L. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Circuit Judge: This Freedom of Information Act appeal is a footnote to the long trade dispute in which the United States and American softwood lumber companies have raised complaints about alleged unfair trade practices by the Canadian Government and Canadian softwood lumber exporters. The Department of Commerce imposed duties on imports of Canadian softwood lumber to the United States (duties that have since been rescinded as a result of the recent bilateral settlement). At issue in this appeal are 17 third party letters that the Department had received from American lumber companies. Also at issue are 51 sets of internal Department notes. The Department has provided Baker Hostetler numerous other softwood lumber related documents that are not at issue on appeal. The firm argues it is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19986241.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The church which the Defendants were convicted of burning. Contending that the indictment insufficiently defined the elements of the offense and the jury's verdict was inconsistent. Which was just down the road. (2) natural gas used to heat the church was purchased in Alabama. (4) the church was a dues paying member of the First Eastern Shore Missionary Baptist Church Association. There was no evidence that any member of St. There was no evidence that any interstate traveler had ever visited St. Defense counsel moved to set aside the jury's verdict with respect to the § 844(h)(1) conspiracy conviction on the ground that the verdict was inconsistent. This principle requires that a decision on a constitutional question is appropriate only after addressing the statutory questions. Rather § 844(i) is limited to buildings used in interstate commerce. Joseph's Church was used in interstate commerce or an activity affecting interstate commerce. The Jones court set forth the method to determine whether damage or destruction of a building is properly prosecutable under § 844(i).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19986241.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The church which the Defendants were convicted of burning. Contending that the indictment insufficiently defined the elements of the offense and the jury's verdict was inconsistent. Which was just down the road. (2) natural gas used to heat the church was purchased in Alabama. (4) the church was a dues paying member of the First Eastern Shore Missionary Baptist Church Association. There was no evidence that any member of St. There was no evidence that any interstate traveler had ever visited St. Defense counsel moved to set aside the jury's verdict with respect to the § 844(h)(1) conspiracy conviction on the ground that the verdict was inconsistent. This principle requires that a decision on a constitutional question is appropriate only after addressing the statutory questions. Rather § 844(i) is limited to buildings used in interstate commerce. § 844(i) requires the government to prove that St. 6 Joseph's Church was used in interstate commerce or an activity affecting interstate commerce. The Jones court set forth the method to determine whether damage or destruction of a building is properly prosecutable under § 844(i).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may2001/98-6241.man.html">UNITED STATES V. ODOM (5/31/2001, NO. 98-6241)<BR></A><BR>
The church which the Defendants were convicted of burning. Contending that the indictment insufficiently defined the elements of the offense and the jury's verdict was inconsistent. Which was just down the road. (2) natural gas used to heat the church was purchased in Alabama. (4) the church was a dues paying member of the First Eastern Shore Missionary Baptist Church Association. There was no evidence that any member of St. There was no evidence that any interstate traveler had ever visited St. Defense counsel moved to set aside the jury's verdict with respect to the § 844(h)(1) conspiracy conviction on the ground that the verdict was inconsistent. This principle requires that a decision on a constitutional question is appropriate only after addressing the statutory questions. </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="365"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may2001/98-6241.man.html">UNITED STATES V. ODOM (5/31/2001, NO. 98-6241)<BR></A><BR>
The church which the Defendants were convicted of burning. Contending that the indictment insufficiently defined the elements of the offense and the jury's verdict was inconsistent. Which was just down the road. (2) natural gas used to heat the church was purchased in Alabama. (4) the church was a dues paying member of the First Eastern Shore Missionary Baptist Church Association. There was no evidence that any member of St. There was no evidence that any interstate traveler had ever visited St. Defense counsel moved to set aside the jury's verdict with respect to the § 844(h)(1) conspiracy conviction on the ground that the verdict was inconsistent. This principle requires that a decision on a constitutional question is appropriate only after addressing the statutory questions. </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="363"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Sept2003/003424p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As will be seen. We summarily will resolve the substantive issue before us which we find not to be difficult. Have sought indemnification from the approximately 50 appellees (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="362"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991861.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Raleigh C & T is a corporation located in Raleigh. The plans were amended and restated in 1986. RCV Tech was a corporation formed by Drs. These two doctors were the sole shareholders and officers of RCV Tech. The two corporations were separate corporate entities. Davis and Chaudhry began employment discussions with Lopriore in October 1987 because they were interested in his perfusion services.2 Lopriore was hired to work for RCV Tech at a salary of $36. Inc. is not a party to this appeal. No contributions were made to the Raleigh C & T plans on Lopriore's behalf until 1991. Contributions were then made by Raleigh C & T on Lopriore's behalf for the years 1991. The following terms from the 1986 Master Plan were in force at Raleigh C & T: Section 18.1 Multiple Employers. (a) General. If the employers sponsoring the Plan are all corporations that are members of the same
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="361"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/088BB88B1148119288256E5A00707CF9/$file/9916468.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is owned and operated by the appellees. Which was disposed of by the magistrate judge through summary judgment. Argue that their Nevada state law damages claim should have survived summary judgment. The Orleans cross appeals the one instance of noncompliance found by the magistrate judge and argues that appellants' appeal is not timely. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This suit was brought under the ADA's enforcement provision. (2) two of the four slot change kiosks3 in the 1 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 contains a citizen suit provision at 42 U.S.C. § 2000a 3(a): Whenever any person has engaged or there are reasonable grounds to believe that any person is about to engage in any act or practice prohibited by section 2000a 2 of this title. May be instituted by the person aggrieved . . . . 2 The Guidelines are created by the United States Department of Justice (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="361"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5285a.html">NATL TAXPAYERS UNION V. USA<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="361"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1555.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Honegger and Gadsby & Hannah LLP were on brief for appellant. Licht & Semonoff were on brief for appellees. Is a Rhode Island company that for many years has been engaged in the production of reagents. Which are substances used in the testing or synthesis of other products. The defendants in the district court were two organizations: the College of American Pathologists (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="361"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2098.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BACKGROUND Forest Guardians is a New Mexico nonprofit organization that seeks to increase public awareness of land management issues confronting federal agencies with responsibility over public land. Forest Guardians' mission is to acquire. (3) when (3) Base property is defined as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="361"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/141D34660EA69F9788256ADA005A0778/$file/9916468.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is owned and operated by the appellees. Which was disposed of by the magistrate judge through summary judgment. Argue that their Nevada state law damages claim should have survived summary judgment. The Orleans cross appeals the one instance of noncompliance found by the magistrate judge and argues that appellants' appeal is not timely. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This suit was brought under the ADA's enforcement provision. (2) two of the four slot change kiosks3 in the 1 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 contains a citizen suit provision at 42 U.S.C. § 2000a 3(a): Whenever any person has engaged or there are reasonable grounds to believe that any person is about to engage in any act or practice prohibited by section 2000a 2 of this title. May be instituted by the person aggrieved . . . . 2 The Guidelines are created by the United States Department of Justice (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="359"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1775.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: Page 4. Jr. were on brief. Goodwin Procter & Hoar were on brief. Clients' funds which lawyers held for a short term or in nominal amounts were deposited into non interest bearing pooled trust accounts. Banking laws and the ethical obligation of lawyers to maintain clients' funds so that they were immediately available for reimbursement prevented such pooled trust accounts from accruing interest. The Massachusetts IOLTA program was established by amendment to Canon 9. The deposits were nominal in amount or to be held for only a short period of time. The designated charities were Massachusetts Legal Assistance. The parties have not briefed or argued any issues in the context of the 1993 amendment to the IOLTA Rule.3 Although the amendment of the IOLTA Rule affects the process of funds disbursement. The changes are not material to this decision. Was significant. The funds are still disbursed primarily to Massachusetts Legal Assistance with the remainder to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="359"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200312820.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are satisfied that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict beyond a reasonable doubt on all counts. All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) (Count 14).1 Paragraphs 2 and 3 The unlawful activities whose proceeds were concealed or promoted were mail fraud. Also charged with conspiracy in the indictment were John Mamone. That charge was dismissed before trial. Is not relevant to this appeal. 2 1 of Count 14 explained that the purposes and objects of the conspiracy were: (a) to conduct financial transactions involving the proceeds of mail and wire fraud. Silvestri was charged in 30 substantive counts with money laundering. The essential facts in this complex fraud case are these. Buccinna and Weiss were also charged in the same substantive counts. Was sentenced to 30 months' imprisonment. 3 3 2 opportunities. Tang was left with a small clerical staff.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="358"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6936F682B950808788256B96005AEA87/$file/0015925.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Fair Housing of Marin is a non profit community organization in San Rafael. Conducts tests of housing facilities to determine whether equal opportunity in housing is provided. Fair Housing received complaints that Combs was racially discriminating against black tenants and black potential tenants. Fair Housing conducted two sets of controlled tests where a black tester was shown a unit at Waters Edge followed by a white tester. Whether a community fair housing organization has standing to sue a private party for violations of the Fair Housing Act is a question of first impression for this circuit. Racial steering is the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="358"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/57987D956468797888256EE800581847/$file/0335279.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This is a record review case in which the Appellants. This case will bear on how the USFWS conducts its duties under the ESA in light of the comprehensive Northwest Forest Plan (NFP) that was implemented. The agency contemplating the action (the action agency) must consult with the consulting agency1 to ensure that the federal action is not likely to jeopardize
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="358"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001006.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The question presented on appeal in this breach of contract action is whether Humility of Mary Health Partners (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="357"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0170p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will deny enforcement of the Board's bargaining order and remand the case to the Board to conduct an evidentiary hearing on St. Francis's objection to the second election. possible that the Board's determination that the Biddle letter does not constitute a violation of the Act is correct. Francis is favored on the question of timing. The timing of the letter and some of the other circumstances of this case are not unlike those in Dayton Hudson Department Store Co. v. A letter with substantial misrepresentations was mailed to employees three days before the election. The writers of the letter were known to be allied with the union. It may have had a sufficient opportunity to do so. Was able to effectively respond). The extent of the misrepresentation in this case is disputed. Francis alleges it was significant. Whether employees were affected by the alleged misrepresentation is unclear. Francis has provided scant evidence that employees were affected by the letter. Mindful that no set of factors governs whether or not an evidentiary hearing is necessary.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="356"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971339.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Norton Baskin (Baskin) is the personal representative of the estate of his late wife. (Seajay) physical possession of certain documents which appellants assert are assets of the Rawlings estate. Did not render a decision on the counterclaim.2 1 It is important to note the distinction between the physical ownership of documents. The physical document and the copyright are subject to separate transfer. That decision is now before this Court on appeal. She was the noted author of books such as Sojourner. In her will. Bigham was the daughter of publisher Charles Scribner. 1961.3 Rawlings' will left immediate custody of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/sept97/95-9014.wpd.html">LDL RESEARCH & DEV. II V. COMMISSIONER<BR></A><BR>
Section 174(a) of the Internal Revenue Code allows
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="353"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec98/94-3324.man.html">JOHNSON ENTERPRISES OF JACKSONVILLE, INC. V. FPL GROUP, INC. (12/18/1998, NO. 94-3324)<BR></A><BR>
The structure of the opinion is as follows: Part I provides the factual background to the dispute. Part VII offers some concluding thoughts.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P> The legislative backdrop against which this controversy arose was the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="353"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec98/94-3324.man.html">JOHNSON ENTERPRISES OF JACKSONVILLE, INC. V. FPL GROUP, INC. (12/18/1998, NO. 94-3324)<BR></A><BR>
The structure of the opinion is as follows: Part I provides the factual background to the dispute. Part VII offers some concluding thoughts.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P> The legislative backdrop against which this controversy arose was the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="353"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1057a.html">COMSAT CORP V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="352"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-7040.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Covington filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that he was a federal employee under the Federal Tort Claims Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="352"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-5212a.html">U.S. V. MICROSOFT<BR></A><BR>
Holley argued the causes for appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="352"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-5212a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With them on the briefs were John L. Prabhu were on the brief of amici curiae The Association for Competitive Technology and Computing Technology Industry Association in support of appellant. Burton was on the brief for amicus curiae Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism in support of appellant. Getman was on the brief for amicus curiae Association for Objective Law in support of appellant. With them on the brief were A. Naughton were on the brief for amici curiae America Online. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Lee A. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Carl Lundgren. There are three principal aspects of this appeal. Because the substantive provisions of the order are flawed. Microsoft asserts that the trial judge committed ethical violations by engaging in impermissible ex parte contacts and making inappropriate public comments on the merits of the case while it was pending. The oral arguments before this court we find that some but not all of Microsoft's liability challenges have merit. There are several reasons supporting this conclusion.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200204/01-7071a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Peter J. With him on the brief were Roscoe C. Mitchell were on the brief for appellee Envirovac. The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-7071a.html">USA V. BOMBARDIER CORPORATION AND ENVIROVAC<BR></A><BR>
Vincent McKnight Jr. argued the cause for appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-7055a.html">INTL BNK RECONST V. DC GOVT<BR></A><BR>
With her on the briefs were <i><p> John M. With <p> him on the brief was <i>Lloyd H. Corwin</i> <p> were on the brief for amici curiae The Inter American Devel <p> opment Bank. Are <p> immune from federal. The question <p> in this appeal is whether a private contractor. Has derivative immunity from District of Columbia <p> taxes on the contractor's sales of food and beverages.<p> <p> I <p> <p> The World Bank is an international. The Bank is corpo <p> rate in form. The Bank is empowered to provide <p> financial assistance for the development of member countries. The vendor is responsible for paying the <p> tax to the District. (The District's compensating use tax <p> on retail sales of food and beverages is inapplicable when the <p> sales tax is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199904/98-7055a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the briefs were John M. With him on the brief was Lloyd H. Corwin were on the brief for amici curiae The Inter American Devel opment Bank. Are immune from federal. The question in this appeal is whether a private contractor. I The World Bank is an international. The Bank is corpo rate in form. The Bank is empowered to provide financial assistance for the development of member countries. The vendor is responsible for paying the tax to the District. (The District's compensating use tax on retail sales of food and beverages is inapplicable when the sales tax is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="349"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/01/98-4158.htm">98-4158 -- AMERICAN TARGET ADVERTISING, INC. V. GIANI -- 01/13/2000<BR></A><BR>
Background</strong> <p> American Target is a Virginia corporation that provides fundraising services to nonprofit organizations. The corporation is under contract to provide such services to Judicial Watch. American Target is classified as a professional fundraising consultant under the Utah Charitable Solicitations Act. 13 22 9. <p> American Target has not complied with the registration requirements and is therefore barred from assisting Judicial Watch with its mailing in Utah. Because nothing in the record indicates that the Act will have any different impact upon interests not before this court. We analyze both prongs of the First Amendment challenge as they are presented under the facts of this case. <u>City Council of L.A. v. We will then decide if the provision is unconstitutional on its face. Where expressive activity is arguably protected by the First Amendment. We conclude that all but three of the challenged provisions are consistent with the First Amendment. <p> Charitable solicitations qualify as protected speech for First Amendment purposes. <u>Village of Schaumburg v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/03/051565P.pdf">N:\DOCS\CATHY\05-1565,1566 CHRONISTER V. UNUM OPN CIRC 3.20.WPD<BR></A><BR>
Chronister was injured in a car accident in 1995. Baptist Health's plan was insured by a group insurance policy from Unum. Unum determined that Chronister was entitled to long term disability benefits effective October 16. United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 21 Chronister's disability benefits on the basis of a policy provision that limited benefits to twenty four months if the disability was primarily based on self reported symptoms (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1637.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellees. Grumman's most intriguing argument presented below as both a defense and a counterclaim is that DG illegally maintained its monopoly in the market for service of DG computers by unilaterally refusing to license ADEX to Grumman and other competitors. The antitrust claims are intriguing because they present a curious conflict. Must tolerate short term harm to the competitive process when such harm is caused by the otherwise lawful exercise of an economically potent
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199711/97-5006a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Philip W. With him on the briefs were Mary Lou Leary. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Geestelijke en Maatschappelijke Belangen (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199712/97-5006b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Philip W. With him on the briefs were Mary Lou Leary. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Geestelijke en Maatschappelijke Belangen (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2718.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With whom <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/01/042604P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The other defendants then settled with Goss and are no longer parties to this lawsuit. Goss's claims against TKS were tried to a jury. (5) sufficient evidence does not support the jury's verdict that TKS dumped products onto the United States printing press market that were comparable to the products TKS sold in Japan. Because Goss's claims against TKS were pending at the time Congress repealed the 1916 Act. A typical large printing press system is over 100 feet long. Once a large printing press is installed. It oftentimes is referred to as an installed base. Is so large and expensive. This is often referred to as the installed base advantage. Price is the primary factor. The United States market for large printing press equipment is rather small. Because the market is so compact. Goss was the only domestic manufacturer of large printing presses in the United States. Goss noticed TKS was a major foreign competitor in the United States market. All of these sales were dumped. They were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/591DAF74D57F7E4C88256E5A00707CC3/$file/0055122.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: It has been said that bad credit is like a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D06EED7E97A7520388256AC5005C2482/$file/0055122.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: It has been said that bad credit is like a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUzMzMtYmtfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5333-bk_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The loan was guaranteed by defendant appellee creditor The Education Resources Institute (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="345"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C2FA43604F5CB31A8825723A005ACAC0/$file/0315955.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With whom Judge CLIFTON joins as to Part II A and II B: The question before us is whether a provision to submit to arbitration in a written franchise agreement is valid and enforceable. A three judge panel of our court held that the unconscionability of an arbitration provision contained in the franchise agreement is a question for the arbitrator to decide. It was error to hold that consideration of the unconscionability of the arbitration provision was to be determined by the arbitrator. Is unconscionable must be referred to the arbitrator. When the crux of the complaint is not the invalidity of the contract as a whole. Then the federal courts must decide whether the arbitration provision is invalid and unenforceable under 9 U.S.C. § 2 of the FAA.1 The federal courts cannot shirk their statutory obligation to do so simply because controlling substantive state law requires the court to consider. No cause of action in the complaint alleges that the franchise agreement is invalid because it is a contract of adhesion.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="343"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-2197.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Murphy with whom Murphy & O'Connell was on brief for appellants. Were on brief for appellee. This copyright infringement case revolves around a dispute over who owns the copyrights in insurance licensing texts and manuals that were created in 1986. Durkin contends that the district court wrongly concluded that Saenger was entitled to judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Summary judgment is appropriate where there are no genuine disputes as to material 2 2 facts and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. During which time he was an officer and vice president of the corporation. Durkin maintains that the alleged oral agreement contained the following terms: Durkin was to begin immediately to develop. Durkin promptly began to work part time (nights and weekends) on the manuals as he and Saenger had agreed even though he was still employed by Educational Training Systems (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200707/04-1414a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Cynthia S. With him on the briefs was Wallace F. With him on the briefs were Noel H. With them on the brief was Robert H. With him on the brief were Ilia Levitine and Stephen G. Roby were on the brief for intervenors Wisconsin Public Power Inc. Jr. were on the brief for intervenor Duke Energy Shared Services. Is a nonprofit corporation that controls the transmission of electricity over a grid spanning 15 Midwestern states. Its original tariff was approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and went into effect in 2002. Who are electricity sellers in MISO's markets subject to the new tariff's rules and liabilities. Who are electricity buyers under contracts predating the establishment of MISO. Any such rate or charge that is not just and reasonable is hereby declared to be unlawful.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="341"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1995.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Were on brief. Ropes & Gray were on brief. Thacher & Bartlett were on brief. Both complaints assert that there were misleading statements and nondisclosures in the registration statement and prospectus prepared in connection with a public offering of stock. Background Digital Equipment Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="340"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011242.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Dep't of Veterans Affairs is corrected to begin
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="339"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/95-8187.opa.html">CROSBY V. HOSPITAL AUTH. OF VALDOSTA AND LOWNDES CTY.<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Crosby v. Who was denied staff privileges by the Hospital Authority of Valdosta and Lowndes County (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="339"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/232C1110A538E12588256C4500807D46/$file/0116092.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Center for Biological Diversity was named the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity. It was subsequently re named the Center for Biological Diversity. 1 8 SOUTHWEST CENTER v. Are non profit corporations actively involved in species protection issues throughout the southwestern United States. Defendant/appellee United States Forest Service is a federal agency within the United States Department of Agriculture which has responsibility for administering and protecting public lands. In this matter it is the action agency. The Secretary has delegated primary responsibility to defendant/appellee United States Fish and Wildlife Service to assist the Forest Service in determining whether any proposed action by the Forest Service is likely to impact the loach minnow. 50 C.F.R. § 402.13. Intervenor appellee New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association and intervenor/cross appellant Arizona Cattle Growers' Association are non profit. The district court was required to issue an injunction halting grazing until the consultation process was completed.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="339"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1D53AD205FCE6B7188256E5A00707D5B/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Judges Silverman and Paez have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Footnote 4 on page 12030 of the slip opinion is deleted. 2. Are deleted and replaced with the following two new sentences:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="339"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept96/95-8187.opa.html">CROSBY V. HOSPITAL AUTH. OF VALDOSTA AND LOWNDES CTY.<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Crosby v. Who was denied staff privileges by the Hospital Authority of Valdosta and Lowndes County (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="339"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9EF875B746412C0188256B0E00047B7A/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Judges Silverman and Paez have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Footnote 4 on page 12030 of the slip opinion is deleted. 2. Are deleted and replaced with the following two new sentences:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="338"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1994/94a0795p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The appellants cross appellees are California Smoothie International. We sometimes will refer to CSI and CSLC singularly as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="338"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/003348P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The elusive and evasive entity which is doing business as Petro Pete's Park Rapids. The Northern Herald is a periodical containing political reporting. Plaintiffs publish the Northern Herald and have three means of distribution: for profit sales through existing retailers. Steele was distributing papers near a mall. Felix explained that a section 10.31 permit was conditioned upon the provision of adequate insurance and bond. The City was concerned with his ability to provide adequate financial security. Felix pointed out that a violation of either ordinance was a misdemeanor and suggested that Steele find
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="338"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/10B30B019A9B51118825711E00825DE2/$file/0435402.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The interest organizations have in not being compelled to communicate messages not of their choosing. Plaintiff Edward Gathright is an evangelical Christian who preaches outdoors to the general public. Gathright himself has observed that it is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="336"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/March2003/991324.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Enough is Enough. In which the Court held that our decision affirming the District Court's grant of a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="336"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/90A6027D7FCE4E0C8825734C0057DA4E/$file/0535627.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Will & Emery. I A McKenzie and PeaceHealth are the only two providers of hospital care in Lane County. That the relevant market in this case is the market for primary and secondary acute care hospital services in Lane County. Primary and secondary acute care hospital services are common medical services like setting a broken bone and performing a tonsillectomy. McKenzie's sole endeavor is McKenzie Willamette Hospital. The largest of PeaceHealth's three facilities is Sacred Heart Hospital. It is necessary to appreciate the structure of the market in which this case arises. The market for hospital services and medical care is complex. Insurers are usually commercial health insurance companies that seek to buy medical services from hospitals on the best terms possible. The price agreed upon is often referred to as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="333"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C6EC39A8729D908E88256CB0000D4B35/$file/0215576.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that jurisdiction was not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="333"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/95opinions/95-1354.html">HOUSTON OIL V. U.S.F.E.R.C.<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="333"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/97-9535.htm">97-9535 -- ARAMARK CORP. V. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD -- 09/22/1998<BR></A><BR>
The Unions have intervened to support the Board's application for enforcement. <p> Aramark argues the Board is without jurisdiction to order Aramark to engage in collective bargaining because Aramark's operations fall within the political subdivision exemption of the Act. Aramark also argues the Board is without jurisdiction because under its government contracts. This court rejects Aramark's claim the Board erred in concluding it was not an exempt political subdivision. BACKGROUND</center> </strong> <p> Aramark is a Delaware corporation providing food services nationwide. These employees accordingly retained civil service status and the employees were in a public sector collective bargaining unit represented by Council 79. 1990 were Aramark employees and were not represented in the public sector collective bargaining unit. <p> The original contract was renewed yearly until June 30. Aramark was awarded a one year contract. This contract was renewable for additional one year periods. <p> In December 1996.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200012/99-1440a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Lloyd Benton Miller. With her on the brief were Leonard R. The Board properly rejected the employer's claim to be exempt pursuant to s 2(2) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) on the ground that it is an Indian tribe acting in a governmental capacity. To consider the employer's argument that it is entitled to exemption under s 2(2) because the Indian Self Determination Act (ISDA) authorizes it to act as an arm of. Yukon is controlled by a board of directors elected by the tribal councils of the 58 tribes in the region. Yukon argued that it qualified for exemption under s 2(2) both as a political subdivision (because it is an Indian tribe acting in a governmental capacity) and as an arm of the United States (because it operates a federal hospital pursuant to the ISDA). Analysis Yukon advances two arguments for the proposition that its hospital is not subject to the NLRA. Yukon argues that it qualifies under s 2(2) as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/02/96-1549.htm">96-1549 -- LENON V. ST. PAUL MERCURY INSURANCE CO. -- 02/18/1998<BR></A><BR>
Plaintiffs' claims are based on a judgment in their favor in a separate action they brought against Wilkinson (the Wilkinson action or case) seeking fringe benefit contributions and other damages under collective bargaining agreements applicable to Wilkinson's work at the Denver International Airport. We conclude it is appropriate to resolve this appeal now rather than wait for proceedings to conclude in the Wilkinson action. <p> On the merits. Agree that the type of damages plaintiffs seek are not covered under the surety bond. Was required to use union labor on work it performed under subcontract at the Denver International Airport in Colorado. Plaintiffs are the same in both this case and the Wilkinson action. Plaintiff trustees are the named fiduciaries of four multiemployer welfare and pension benefit plans as defined by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/06/981557P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The ASA was organized in 1968 as a non profit corporation for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1CB92EF5AD825DA188256CCA0011916F/$file/0215416.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
AT&T appeals on the ground that the application of California's consumer protection laws is preempted by the Federal Communications Act and the Federal Arbitration Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The 1934 Act was intended to address the unique problems inherent in a monopolistic environment.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0447p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Soccer City is a for profit corporation engaged in the The Honorable William H. While we find that Plaintiff did in fact have standing. Factual History The facts in this case are largely undisputed. The first site Soccer City tested was found to be unsuitable for construction. So a second site was tested. After determining that the second site was suitable. The Board required any interested parties to submit their bids within the following three weeks in order to have them considered. The Board further required a guarantee from any new bidders that whomever was awarded the contract would reimburse Soccer City for the environmental testing it had conducted. Plaintiff was unable. The day the bids were due. Which was the one from Soccer City. Summary judgment is proper where there is no genuine No. 05 2360 Club Italia Soccer v. Page 3 issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The basis for constitutional standing is derived from Article III's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1197.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Kleger</U> was on brief for appellant.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-3274.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
HISTORY Ottawa Medical Center (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200413575.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They are not entitled to such immunity in this case because Weissman's complaint relates to private commercial conduct not mandated by the Act. Weissman's motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction was granted in part by prior order dated October 13. Over which we have jurisdiction. If Appellants' immunity claim is meritorious. They will necessarily be insulated from pre trial discovery. 2 1 * BACKGROUND Between December 2000 and June 2002. Weissman's complaint was initially dismissed for failure to allege diversity of citizenship. 2 emphasizing that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-2243.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
<U>Senior Circuit Judges</U>.</FONT></P> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2000/991324.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Enough is Enough. At issue is COPA's constitutionality. A statute designed to protect minors from
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/85E12F7AAC2A420688256FB70000CDB6/$file/0315695.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We further conclude that NASD rules approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission have preemptive force over conflicting state law. Section 6 of the California Constitution requires the [California Judicial Council] to improve the administration of justice by . . . [a]dopting rules for court administration and rules of practice and procedure that are not inconsistent with statute . . . .
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="330"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1966_040.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Wisconsin Community Services was formerly Wisconsin Correctional Foundation. The name was changed while this action was pending in the district court. 1 2 No. 04 1966 Disabilities Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="329"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0347n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He truthfully noted that a misdemeanor charge of interfering with a police officer in Bloomfield Township was still pending against him. His application for admission to the state bar was not immediately processed. The district committee referral should be delayed until the pending proceeding is concluded. The request should be granted provided that a district committee report and recommendation does not issue until the criminal matter is concluded. The matter was scheduled for trial. The charge is dismissed. Bloomfield Hills District Judge Edward Avadenka was present. Lawrence was not present. Lawrence was found guilty of the charge of interfering with a township officer. Judge Avadenka explained the actual content of the plea negotiations to Armbrustmacher and stated that while he
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="328"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/65701F9CCDE2CA3F88256AB90050FE7B/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Fair Housing Foundation of Long Beach's claims should have survived summary judgment. Alleging that the Park Apartments management company was engaged in racial discrimination and harassment. The FHF advised the City that the residents of the Park Apartments were going to file a lawsuit against the owners and managers of the complex and that a press conference was going to be held at the FHF's offices on the following day. About the alleged discrimination at the Park Apartments: This case illustrates why it is critical for apartment owners and managers to receive training in how to 12017 provide fair housing. It only took one ignorant and biased manager a few months to uproot and displace at least eight or nine such families and to send the message to yet another generation of young African Americans that they are still not welcome in middle class cities like Lakewood. The underlying action was resolved by a consent decree approved by then District Judge Wardlaw on April 2.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="328"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3BCC4AF232AB8B5F88256E5A00707C92/$file/0055060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Fair Housing Foundation of Long Beach's claims should have survived summary judgment. Alleging that the Park Apartments management company was engaged in racial discrimination and harassment. The FHF advised the City that the residents of the Park Apartments were going to file a lawsuit against the owners and managers of the complex and that a press conference was going to be held at the FHF's offices on the following day. About the alleged discrimination at the Park Apartments: This case illustrates why it is critical for apartment owners and managers to receive training in how to 12017 provide fair housing. It only took one ignorant and biased manager a few months to uproot and displace at least eight or nine such families and to send the message to yet another generation of young African Americans that they are still not welcome in middle class cities like Lakewood. The underlying action was resolved by a consent decree approved by then District Judge Wardlaw on April 2.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="328"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1760.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C.</U> were on brief. Knight LLP</U> were on brief. It is brought by a group of residents of Belmont. We affirm.</FONT></P> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/031101p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Finding that Child Evangelism was likely to succeed in showing that Stafford was engaging in viewpoint discrimination and that this discrimination was not required by the Establishment Clause. The principal is authorized to duplicate scheduled memos and send the m home with the children. The following non profit organizations are permitted to distribute 3 See
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTAwNjQtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-0064-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Assessed $62 million in additional taxes based on a finding that the foreign banks to which the income was allocated were not bona fide equity partners. J.) ruled that the banks were bona fide equity partners. For which the taxpayer was the tax matters partner. Was drastically reduced by huge depreciation deductions which the IRS would not recognize. The effects of the ostensible allocation of the majority of the partnership's income to the non taxpaying Dutch banks were to shelter most of the partnership's income from taxation and to redirect that income tax free to the taxpayer. What the Dutch banks were in fact to receive from the partnership was dictated by provisions of the partnership agreement calling for the reimbursement of their initial investment at an annual rate of return of 9.03587% (or. The banks' reimbursement at the agreed rate of return was formidably secured by a variety of contractual undertakings by the taxpayer and its parent GECC. The effect of the reallocation was to assign a far greater percentage of Castle Harbour's income to the taxpayer.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/01/984160P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BACKGROUND RWS #1 is a nonprofit corporation organized under chapter 504A2 of the Iowa Code that provides water to rural customers. It furnishes service in an area that is eighteen miles by thirty six miles surrounding Sioux Center.3 RWS #1 brought suit against Sioux Center under section 1983 and the Declaratory Judgment Act alleging a violation of 7 U.S.C. § 1926(b). Section 1926(b) prevents municipalities from curtailing the service area of rural water service providers who are indebted to the United States. The district court also held that the applicable test for a section 1926(b) violation is whether the water provider has
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov2001/00-14140.opn.html">FLORIDA RIGHT TO LIFE, INC. V. LAMAR (11/28/2001, NO. 00-14140)<BR></A><BR>
The district court ruled that the provision was constitutional on its face under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because of its susceptibility to a narrowing construction. BACKGROUND</STRONG></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov2001/00-14140.opn.html">FLORIDA RIGHT TO LIFE, INC. V. LAMAR (11/28/2001, NO. 00-14140)<BR></A><BR>
The district court ruled that the provision was constitutional on its face under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because of its susceptibility to a narrowing construction. BACKGROUND</STRONG></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043707p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Order and Opinion of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was initially made a party to this action but was subsequently removed as a party. 2 1 granting the Township's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. Which is located in Allegheny County. The subject property was located in a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="325"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1096.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. ) were convicted of various counts of conspiracy. Was sentenced to 168 months imprisonment. Sotomayor was sentenced to 46 months imprisonment. Borel was sentenced to a year and a day of imprisonment and ordered to pay $18. ACHS was a non profit organization eligible for federal funding. Was an employee of the Harvard Institute for International Development (HIID). Was not officially an employee of ACHS. The evidence showed that he was essentially the director. Appellant Sotomayor was employed as the Operations Manager of ACHS. Appellant Borel was employed by ACHS as a property custodian. He was also the incorporator and purchasing agent of Octagon Corporation (Octagon). One of the outside entities used to divert funds from ACHS.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0184p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
File Name: 00a0184p.06 University's affirmative action procedures and occurred while he was acting in his official position and consisted only of a letter and memos addressed to the president and other members of the Board of Trustees (of which plaintiff was a member as Vice President of Human Relations). I think that the University had a significant interest in regulating the speech to make certain that it was presented in the most informative and helpful manner. I believe that in this situation the plaintiff's speech is not entitled to First Amendment protections. Who is African American. Was employed by the University of Cincinnati (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/004856.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
North Carolina was sufficiently
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/02/03-1429.htm">03-1429 -- MAINSTREAM MARKETING SERVICES INC. V. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION -- 02/17/2004<BR></A><BR>
The primary issue in this case is whether the First Amendment prevents the government from establishing an opt in telemarketing regulation that provides a mechanism for consumers to restrict commercial sales calls but does not provide a similar mechanism to limit charitable or political calls.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011175.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Line 15 the citation is corrected to read
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="321"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19954519.OP2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That is the issue we must decide in this case. We have jurisdiction over interlocutory orders denying claims of immunity under the FSIA. It is appropriate that we construe the complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiffs. We will accept as true the complaint's well pleaded facts. Is a Honduran subsidiary corporation. Fifty one percent of which is owned by Hondurans. The subsidiary company was incorporated in Honduras in May 1992. Plaintiff companies' contract proposal was to upgrade and establish a modern civil aeronautics program for Honduras. This contract was modified and reaffirmed by the parties in a separate agreement on December 16. Development of necessary programs for the establishment of the data base with the information related with the aircraft to be inspected and that will be under Honduran registry. The equipment will be that which is necessary to manage the data of 100 aircraft and must provide additional equipment each time that the necessities of expansion require it. It is understood that this equipment will be permanently in communication with the principal data base managed in the Offices of the Inspector located in Miami.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="321"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug97/honduras.amn.html">HONDURAS AIRCRAFT REGISTRY V. HONDURAS<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Honduras Aircraft Registry v. That is the issue we must decide in this case. Honduras appeals. <p> We have jurisdiction over interlocutory orders denying claims of immunity under the FSIA. It is appropriate that we construe the complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiffs. We will accept as true the complaint
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="321"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031534.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Worldwide organization composed of born again believers whose purpose is to evangelize boys and girls with the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and to establish (disciple) them in the local church for Christian living.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="321"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19954519.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That is the issue we must decide in this case. We have jurisdiction over interlocutory orders denying claims of immunity under the FSIA. It is appropriate that we construe the complaint in the light most favorable to plaintiffs. We will accept as true the complaint's well pleaded facts. Is a Honduran corporation. Fifty one percent of which is owned by Hondurans. The parent company was incorporated in Honduras in May 1992. Plaintiff companies' contract proposal was to upgrade and establish a modern civil aeronautics program for Honduras. This contract was modified and reaffirmed by the parties in a separate agreement on December 16. Development of necessary Omega Air S de RL is an air carrier intervenor. Omega Air generally supports the position of plaintiffs and claims to be a third party beneficiary of the contract in question. 2 1 programs for the establishment of the data base with the information related with the aircraft to be inspected and that will be under Honduran registry. The equipment will be that which is necessary to manage the data of 100 aircraft and must provide additional equipment each time that the necessities of expansion require it.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="320"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200416091.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Inc. (collectively the health care agencies will be referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="320"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/12/02-6101.htm">02-6101 -- FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V. KUYKENDALL -- 12/11/2002<BR></A><BR>
(d) the award of $39 million for consumer redress is contrary to undisputed record evidence. <strong><u></strong></u> <p> In addition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="320"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/612890D3944707D088257299004F7654/$file/0516132.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended by inserting the following after
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="319"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTA3MTgtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0718-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Held that: (1) joinder of the City to preexisting action was proper. Are certified to the New York Court of Appeals. The District Court interpreted certain state laws and Onondaga County Administrative Code provisions concerning whether or not the approval of the Syracuse Common Council was required before the Commissioner of Drainage and Sanitation could condemn City land for sewer district purposes. The City argues that not only was the District Court precluded from joining it as a party to the litigation. Is located at the southern end of Onondaga Lake. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="319"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034220p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs are persons who borrowed from the two banks and signed second mortgages. Appellees in this case are the settling parties. Appellants are a number of law firms and plaintiff class members who challenge the District Court's jurisdiction. The alleged mastermind of the scheme was the Shumway Organization (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="317"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1998/98a1810p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The issue we must address on this appeal is whether Pennsylvania's Workers' Compensation Act. The purpose of Act 44 was to contain the spiraling costs of medical treatment for work related injuries. It is these provisions of Act 44 which create the utilization review process and the corresponding supersedeas that are challenged in this action. Utilization review is a process whereby medical providers assess the reasonableness or necessity of current. Section 531(5) provides the mechanism by which utilization review is invoked. The decision to invoke utilization review is made independently by the employer or insurer. 7 A. Utilization review is invoked when an employee. The Bureau reviews the Initial Request to ensure that it is properly completed i.e. That all information required by the form is provided. If the Initial Request is improperly completed (i.e. If the Initial Request is completed properly. The request is approved and the party requesting review must serve a copy of the Initial Request upon the remaining interested parties.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="316"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/June1995/95a1067p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from an order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants in an action brought by the Secretary of Labor (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="316"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/340E07618AF6F116882570740058195B/$file/0270262.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The California energy crisis of 2000 and 2001 is a subject that is well known to this court and to the public.1 Following 1 See California ex rel. Various non public utilities which somewhat confusingly are public. Are not classified by federal statute as public utilities challenge the refund orders. Are not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="312"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B67C07DCC082AC598825701A007626F4/$file/0315208.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We are faced here with the question whether claims for losses allegedly suffered at the hands of a Nazi puppet regime during World War II are cognizable in our courts today. It is tempting to jump to the conclusion that such claims are barred by the political question doctrine. That
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="312"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199902/98-3080b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were David G. With them on the brief were Laura S. Owen moved in the district court to dismiss an indictment charging tax evasion and related crimes on the ground that the indictment was beyond the prosecutorial jurisdiction of Independent Counsel Kenneth W. It gave Indepen dent Counsel Starr jurisdiction to investigate whether any individuals or entities have committed a violation of any federal criminal law. Who are reasonably believed to have committed a violation of any federal criminal law arising out of such matters. Including persons or entities who have engaged in an unlawful conspiracy or who have aided or abetted any federal offense. The Special Division ordered that the Independent Counsel have prosecutorial jurisdiction to fully investigate and prose cute the subject matter with respect to which the Attor ney General requested the appointment of independent counsel. These grants of authority were under 28 U.S.C. s 593(b)(1). Secret Service records indicate that James Riady had made several visits to the White House in the days before the payment to Hubbell was made.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="312"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/03/012255P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I ASPA is a non profit corporation generally recognized as exempt from federal income tax under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(5) (labor organization). Both agreements were entitled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="310"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTk0NTEgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/02-9451%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The primary issue is whether the work for hire doctrine applies to works created by the principal employee of a corporation that was. The Court's principal ruling was that copyrights in most of the 70 dances in dispute belong to DefendantsAppellees Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance. Who is Graham's sole beneficiary under her will. We agree with the District Court that the work for hire doctrine was properly applied to dances created after 1966. On certain other aspects of the Court's judgment we conclude that a partial reversal or remand is required. That title is appropriate for the task this litigation presented to the District Court and now presents to this Court. The earliest account of this classic Greek myth is from Pherecydes. Many of the pertinent facts are obscured by inadequate record keeping. Graham was very successful. The Center was incorporated in Initially known as the Martha Graham Foundation for Contemporary Dance. The corporation was renamed the Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="310"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTk0NTEgdyAybmQgRXJyYXRhLnBkZg==/02-9451%20w%202nd%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The primary issue is whether the work for hire doctrine applies to works created by the principal employee of a corporation that was. The Court's principal ruling was that copyrights in most of the 70 dances in dispute belong to Defendants Appellees Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance. Who is Graham's sole beneficiary under her will. We agree with the District Court that the work for hire doctrine was properly applied to dances created after 1966. On certain other aspects of the Court's judgment we conclude that a partial reversal or remand is required. That title is appropriate for the task this litigation presented to the District Court and now presents to this Court. The earliest account of this classic Greek myth is from Pherecydes. Many of the pertinent facts are obscured by inadequate record keeping. Graham was very successful. Initially known as the The Center was incorporated Graham Foundation for Martha Contemporary Dance. The corporation was renamed the Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="309"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2D63E625B2C358DF882569EC0069E419/$file/0016163.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Low is substituted for his predecessor as Commissioner of Insurance for the State of California. Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are three insurance companies and one trade organization of insurance companies who do business in California. To persons in Europe to file certain information about those policies with the Commissioner.1 Cal. 1 The information that the insurance companies must provide is: (1) the number of insurance policies. The reporting requirement also applies to insurance companies that do business in California and are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="309"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/957FBD7CF1F5989B88256CDB000B2C44/$file/0016660.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The current action is a challenge to provisions of the Agency's 1987 Regional Plan (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="309"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/15FBB3688F2009AF88256E5A00707A3A/$file/0016163.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Low is substituted for his predecessor as Commissioner of Insurance for the State of California. Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are three insurance companies and one trade organization of insurance companies who do business in California. To persons in Europe to file certain information about those policies with the Commissioner.1 Cal. 1 The information that the insurance companies must provide is: (1) the number of insurance policies. The reporting requirement also applies to insurance companies that do business in California and are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="308"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0BFF2CFAE79835FD88256FE7005BEA8C/$file/0315208.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We are faced here with the question whether claims for losses allegedly suffered at the hands of a Nazi puppet regime during World War II are cognizable in our courts today. It is tempting to jump to the conclusion that such claims are barred by the political question doctrine. That
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/96-8083.htm">96-8083 -- PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL V. BABBITT -- 09/01/1998<BR></A><BR>
</strong>Chief Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FFD0CB543718A429882572480051DDAF/$file/0455732o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are aware of the California Supreme Court's demanding caseload and recognize that our request adds to that load. The campground and the Aquatic Center are public facilities. The plaintiffs are users of the two Parks who are. Are the leases
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052378np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. Anthony DePaul and Donna DePaul Bartynski are directors and officers of the St. Inc. and will be referred to collectively as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-1048.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C. were on brief for plaintiff. Learned that she was being paid less than the male heads of the organization's other departments. Defendant MSPCA is a charitable. Was its chief of staff from 1966 until 1989. Marjorie McMillan was first employed by Angell in 1969 and thereafter was employed in various capacities until she left in 1977 to work in private practice. All of the departments were headed by veterinarians. Thornton was responsible for negotiating veterinarians' initial salaries and for setting discretionary annual increases from a fixed amount of funds. Although the department directors were responsible for such tasks as purchasing equipment. When she learned that the salary of a newly hired radiologist was $38. Whose salary at that time was $41. Her salary was $58. Were earning $73. He began by creating job descriptions for each of the department heads in which the list of duties for the head of radiology was substantially the same as those for the other department head positions. Which was substantially larger than that received by any of the other department heads.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2304.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Dwyer & Collora were on brief. We affirm the district court's finding that the law interferes with the foreign affairs power of the federal government and is thus unconstitutional. We further find that the Massachusetts Burma Law violates the Supremacy Clause because it is preempted by federal sanctions against Burma. There is one matter on which the parties are agreed: human rights conditions in Burma are deplorable. Final determination as to whether a company is in fact
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1176.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. LLP</U> were on brief. There are two. Asseverate that the virtual shares were part of a fantasy investment game created for the personal entertainment of Internet users. 3 (1st Cir. 1996).</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2260.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Were on brief. Was on brief. BACKGROUND</STRONG></CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="305"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4F954E01537B6E7588256DE600044C42/$file/0235536.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because we conclude that PMA was not the employer of Jones for purposes of the sexual harassment claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Our task here appears to track the narrow compass of deciding only whether PMA was a joint employer with MTC for purposes of Title VII. We are persuaded that our decision in Anderson v. We will reverse. We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. As a casual were (a) barred by the 300 day statute of limitations in Title VII. Which contended that PMA was entitled to an offset in damages equal to the amount paid in settlement by MTC and one of Jones's co workers. 16564 EEOC v. The dispatch hall is operated jointly by PMA. Jones worked as a casual employee for several months before she was allowed to register as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001252.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is unconstitutional. Holding that the regulation is unconstitutional and enjoining the FEC from enforcing the regulation against VSHL or any other party in the United States. We hold that the regulation is unconstitutional because it is not limited to communications that contain express words of advocacy as required by Buckley v. Is too broad. The injunction will be limited to barring the FEC from proceeding against VA. Our holding that the regulation is unconstitutional and the injunction that we have authorized give VSHL complete relief. I. VSHL is a Virginia based nonprofit corporation established
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200611/04-1183a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Joan Dreskin. With him on the briefs were Anne K. With him on the briefs was Brett A. With him on the brief were John S. The Act's fundamental purpose is to protect natural gas consumers from the monopoly power of natural gas pipelines. (Marketing affiliates are the separate affiliates of pipelines that sell natural gas. (ii) a factual record consisting of complaints by other sellers who were competing with pipelines' marketing affiliates and of documented abuses by pipelines and their marketing affiliates. Traders) that are affiliated with pipelines. Indicated that abuse by pipelines and non marketing affiliates was a real problem in the 4 industry. That the factual record on which FERC relied was barren and did not contain a single example of abuse involving non marketing affiliates. We therefore hold that the Order is arbitrary and capricious as applied to natural gas pipelines. We will grant the petition. Processors distill
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/09/01-4109.htm">01-4109 -- LANTEC INC. V. NOVELL INC. -- 09/19/2002<BR></A><BR>
This antitrust case is just as important to the computer program developers involved. The facts and legal issues in this case are complex and will be discussed at length. The Lantec companies' basic argument is Novell drove them out of business. <p> We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021137.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Carefirst asks that we vacate the dismissal on the ground that Carefirst has made the requisite prima facie showing that CPC is subject to personal jurisdiction in Maryland. Is one of the nation's largest healthcare insurance companies. It is a non profit BlueCross BlueShield licensee. BlueCross BlueShield is an association of independent health plans. Have been chartered to operate in geographically distinct terri CAREFIRST OF MARYLAND v. Among the services covered by Carefirst's trademark and service mark in the CAREFIRST name are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/03/991388P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Patrick Shea died of a heart attack at the age of 40 after being assured by his family doctors that a referral to a cardiologist was unnecessary given his age and symptoms. The Secretary of Labor is charged with interpreting and enforcing all provisions of Title I of ERISA. Shea's physicians were designed to minimize referrals to specialists. He would not have trusted his physicians' medical advice so completely but would have sought out the life saving opinion of a specialist at his own expense. Shea's tort claims were preempted by ERISA. Shea's state tort claims against Medica as the plan administrator were preempted by ERISA and that the amended complaint asserting a breach of fiduciary duty failed to state a claim. It is not at issue in this appeal. After this appeal was filed. Shea's medical negligence claim of count I was brought to trial in state court where a jury resolved the claim in favor of the defendants. Shea would not be able to prove that her husband was denied appropriate care. Which they assert is an essential element of Mrs.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0279n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The convictions are affirmed. Madison's sentence is affirmed. Madison's sentence is reversed and remanded. Was selfemployed as a minister. Madison's principal employment from 1996 1999 was as the executive director for Cherokee Children and Family Services. Was run under the umbrella of Cherokee Children and Family Services. The organizations collectively are referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/597156B35555B768882571C600522C7A/$file/0516975.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendants Appellees. *Nancy Ruthenbeck is substituted for Del A. Overview This is a government appeal from a district court judgment enjoining Forest Service regulations that govern review of decisions implementing forest plans. On the ground that the regulations were manifestly contrary to the governing statute. RUTHENBECK held were valid. We agree with the district court that plaintiffs have established standing. We hold that only that regulation is ripe for review. The Sierra Club (collectively
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982565.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I VSHL is a non profit organization whose stated purpose is to educate the general public about pro life issues. VSHL and Andrea Sexton (hereinafter both parties are simply referred to as VSHL) filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. Which are part of Vir3 ginia's Campaign Finance Disclosure Act. Were unconstitutional on their face and as applied to VSHL. A Statement of Organization was required to include. Virginia Code Annotated § 24.2 901(A) (Michie 1995) defined
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan2002/00-12310.ord.html">TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTH. V. U.S. E.P.A.(1/8/2002, NO. 00-12310)<BR></A><BR>
Petitions for review of three orders issued to it by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAwNTYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0056-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We remand the case for consideration of plaintiff's application for prejudgment interest. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 BACKGROUND Plaintiff is a nondenominational multi faith ministry providing religious services and other assistance to migrant farm workers in eastern New York State. Defendant is a national food service provider headquartered in Connecticut that provides food and related services for. Plaintiff was to receive between seven and eight percent of the gross sales of the food booths its volunteers managed. The parties dispute how many volunteers plaintiff was to provide under the contract. Plaintiff alleges that it was a maximum of twenty volunteers per booth per day. While defendant claims that it was a maximum of twenty volunteers per booth per shift (with several shifts each day). The individuals managing the festival were incapable of dealing with the severe weather and unruly crowds. Jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship. To their worth is their own private cause of action.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19948485.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
2 were convicted pursuant to a 133 count indictment charging them with various offenses arising out of the operation of the concessions at the Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport. Ira Jackson was the first black person elected to the Atlanta City Council and served from 1970 to 1990. Will be referred to herein as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan2002/00-12310.ord.html">TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTH. V. U.S. E.P.A.(1/8/2002, NO. 00-12310)<BR></A><BR>
Petitions for review of three orders issued to it by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1932_011.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Claims that he was transferred to a less desirable position because of his speech in opposition to actions taken by then Chief of Police Arthur L. Defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that no material facts were in dispute and that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Jones appeals the district 2 No. 05 1932 court's refusal to grant him qualified immunity arguing that Miller's speech was not protected because it did not address a matter of public concern. I. BACKGROUND The facts of this case are not in dispute. James Miller is a former officer with the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) who was transferred from the Community Services Division (CSD) to patrol duty on May 27. Miller was assigned to the Community Services Division in 1992 and spent eleven years working with the Police Athletic League (PAL). These activities are staffed by Milwaukee police officers. PAL receives no funding from the Police Department and is organized as a non profit corporation under Wisconsin state law.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/03/061922P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is carried out by city police on behalf of Salute. Arguing that it is not liable as a state actor for its speech restrictions and that the injunction violates its own First Amendment right to be free from compelled speech. Although the airport is owned by the city. The two day event is free and open to the public. During the noontime hour each day there is a ceremony to honor fallen veterans at which the national anthem is played. The names of fallen Boone County service members are read aloud. The air show's honored guests are introduced to the crowd. The stated purpose of the air show is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-2181.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The principal obligation at issue in this case is encompassed within 7(a)(2) of the ESA. That section requires an acting agency (allegedly the Forest Service) to consult with FWS to ensure the former's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="302"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1999/983641.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are asked to construe 18 U.S.C.S 666. We conclude that the District Court erred in interpreting the statute in this respect and will therefore remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We will vacate this aspect of the sentencing order and direct the District Court on remand to award the additional one point reduction if it determines that Zwick timely provided complete information to the government or timely notified the government of his intent to plead guilty to enable the government and court to conserve their resources.1 I. Zwick was an elected member of the Ross Township Board of Commissioners. Which would have preserved Zwick's legal challenge to the application of S 666 when there is no connection between a defendant's conduct and federal funds or programming. Zwick was willing to plead guilty to the bank fraud and mail fraud counts. Further plea negotiations were derailed. So the case was tried to a jury. Zwick was convicted on counts one. We will review the relevant facts adduced at trial regarding the alleged bribes.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1998/98a1966p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The refusal to deal is said to have become a group boycott. Is said to have become a co conspirator. 1998. 5 siding distributors were concerned that the entrance of a new price cutting competitor could destabilize the market and substantially cut into their profit margins. The principal players in this drama are plaintiffs Joseph Rossi. Minor roles were played by defendants Wood Fiber Industries. We believe that the record is sufficient to enable Rossi to survive summary judgment on the antitrust claims as to Standard. The Supreme Court's jurisprudence in the area of concerted refusals to deal teaches that not every situation in which a distributor is cut off at the behest of his competitors constitutes a group boycott entitled to per se treatment. Legitimate efforts by manufacturers to impose reasonable rules limiting intra brand competition would be outlawed and the beneficial effects such actions have on inter brand competition would be lost. Are not implicated here. Typically because it is difficult for the plaintiff to demonstrate that what the manufacturer or supplier did was inconsistent with independent action or that the claimed conspiracy makes economic sense.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May2000/996020.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are asked to determine whether certain costs incurred by banks for marketing. Researching and originating loans are deductible as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Sept2001/996020.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are asked to determine whether certain costs incurred by banks for marketing. Researching and originating loans are deductible as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1F10A6EAA9146DD28825711400802A52/$file/0510060.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was indicted for mail and wire fraud. On the ground that the corporation's assets would be subject to criminal forfeiture if Rutledge were convicted. We conclude that the corporation's assets would not be subject to criminal forfeiture if Rutledge were convicted. Because those assets do not qualify as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19955258.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Blanch would have Llampallas fired. Told Kaylie that she was quitting because she could not work with Llampallas anymore. Claiming that she was unlawfully terminated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974075.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Harry Seidman was convicted on September 26. (2) that the district court's instructions on 18 U.S.C.A. § 2 were improper. I. Seidman was employed by the International Organization of Masters. Seidman was personally authorized to sign checks on the Union's behalf. Was the chief financial officer of the Union. The Union office was located in New York City. The Union office was moved to Maryland sometime in 1984 or 1985. 2 major portion of the Secretary/Treasurer's time was devoted to handling contract grievances for Union members. The Union was in poor financial condition. Were incurred by the Union published monthly newspaper. Ronald Schoop was an independent contractor who provided printing services to the Union through the corporate entity
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/12/97-4078.htm">97-4078 -- MOUNT OLIVET CEMETERY ASSOCIATION V. SALT LAKE CITY -- 12/15/1998<BR></A><BR>
Plaintiffs contend the district court erred in finding the Association was the owner of the Mount Olivet Cemetery property. The City's local zoning ordinance was not preempted by federal law. All revenues generated by the sale of burial plots were to be retained by the cemetery and no funds were to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200214131.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issue is whether Siemens's refusal to sell or license patented or copyrighted goods to the appellants is an illegal use of monopoly power in a secondary market.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114780.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Presented in this appeal is the question of liability for fraud and related allegations under the Commodities Exchange Act. We will reverse as to Raymond Fitzgerald. Alleging that they were involved in fraudulent solicitations to attract potential customers throughout the United States to invest in commodity options. In violation of the Act and related federal regulations.1 This Complaint was dismissed essentially for failure to plead fraud with particularity. Defendant Raymond Fitzgerald was charged with
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct2002/01-14780.opn.html">COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMM'N V. FITZGERALD & CO. (10/29/2002, NO. 01-14780)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200702/06-5225a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With her on the brief were Martina E. Brown was on the brief for amici curiae Population Council. Circuit Judge: The official position of the United States is that eradicating prostitution and sex trafficking is an integral part of the worldwide fight against HIV/AIDS. Congress found that funding the relief efforts of private organizations was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct2002/01-14780.opn.html">COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMM'N V. FITZGERALD & CO. (10/29/2002, NO. 01-14780)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1053.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Sherman and Sullivan & Worcester were on brief for Bernardo Nadal Ginard. Were on brief for Boston Children's Heart Foundation. Bernardo Nadal Ginard was alleged to have misappropriated the funds of the corporation of which he had served as both an officer and director. BACKGROUND Plaintiff appellee BCHF is a non profit corporation organized for the purposes of conducting medical research in the field of cardiology and providing medical services to patients at Boston Children's Hospital (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1428.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was James Caffentzis. With him on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel was Maria Pagan. McDermott Will & Emery LLP. With him on the brief was Raymond Paretzky. Of counsel was David J. Motions Systems was one of three domestic producers of pedestal actuators. The ITC promptly investigated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-2246.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lougee</U> were on brief. Pease LLP</U> were on brief. That the rules and regulations of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) grant them a right to arbitrate the claims that the respondents have asserted against them in parallel state court litigation. The Paul Revere Variable Annuity Insurance Company (Variable) and The Paul Revere Protective Life Insurance Company (Protective) are wholly owned subsidiaries of The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company (Revere Life). Revere Life is. A is a wholly owned subsidiary of a Delaware corporation. Both are headquartered in Tennessee.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0245n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Venue was proper in the Western District of Michigan under the FCA. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Summary judgment is proper where no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The central issue is whether the evidence presents sufficient disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="297"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-9016.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant.</P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="297"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DA1BA54F49B327A788256B5300003E66/$file/0055009.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. Background Terri Welles was on the cover of Playboy in 1981 and was chosen to be the Playboy Playmate of the Year for 1981.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="297"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961814A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is an authority constrained by no less a power than that of the People themselves. The constitution is written.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="296"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/08/041884P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The housing units at issue were the Charleston Apartments. Forty seven of the fifty units were occupied. The Housing Authority was required to use the Charleston Apartments as public housing. The USDA characterized the payment as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="296"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/08/022366P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was added to the South Dakota Constitution as the result of a 1998 referendum. I. Amendment E was codified as four sections of Article XVII of the South Dakota Constitution. Five of which are relevant to the issues raised on appeal. 6 The first of these relevant exemptions is for a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="295"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001185.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Line 4 the name
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="295"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/sept97/96-6140.wpd.html">UNITED STATES CELLULAR INV. CO. V. SOUTHWESTERN BELL MOBILE SYS.<BR></A><BR>
Background The Oklahoma City SMSA Limited Partnership (OKC Partnership) was formed among competing applicants to operate a cellular telephone system within the five county area of the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Statistical Area (Oklahoma City MSA). SBMS was the sole and managing general partner with a 40% interest as a general partner and a 22% interest as a limited partner. The remaining 38% interest was held by three other limited partners. The primary issue in this lawsuit is whether SBMS could expand into these rural areas on its own behalf. Or whether instead it was obligated to do so on behalf of the limited partnership. The central sections of the Agreement in dispute are 8.8 and 7.2(f).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="294"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/03/976097P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BACKGROUND Johnson is a former student at Missouri Baptist College. The bankruptcy court determined that Johnson's debt to the College was a nondischargeable student loan under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8). Since we agree with the bankruptcy court that Johnson's debt to the College is a loan as that word is used in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8). The outstanding principal balance on the note was $4. Since the parties stipulate that the College is a non profit institution and that the credit was extended for educational purposes under a program. The only issue presently on appeal is whether the College's extension of credit was a loan. The popular portrayal of the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="291"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/03-5369a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Cooney was on brief. Were on brief. Peter Buscemi was on brief. Is before us on appeal. I. STATUTORY BACKGROUND After the decision to close or realign a military base is finalized. The distribution of the base's real and personal property and facilities to private or local government entities is controlled by the Base Closure Act. Once the LRA is recognized. Representatives of the homeless (ROHs) are given a semiprivileged status under the Base Closure Act.1 The LRA is obligated to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="291"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/12/99-1414.htm">99-1414 -- CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT STATE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE V. DAVIDSON -- 12/26/2000<BR></A><BR>
1 45 107 (Independent Expenditures).<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="291"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/94-8485.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. PARADIES<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. <a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="291"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept96/94-8485.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. PARADIES<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. <a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="290"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/573F49D885A9D4B188257060004C1F40/$file/0455888.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
GMA contends that the definitions of the terms
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="290"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/11/003998P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Bear Robe was convicted in federal court of voluntary manslaughter in 1975. Because Bear Robe was 20 years old at the time. The conviction was later set aside under the Federal Youth Corrections Act (FYCA). Loneman School is a nonprofit corporation chartered by the Oglala Sioux Tribal Council and administered by the Loneman School Board. The Act requires each Indian tribal organization that receives funding under the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988 to conduct investigations of each individual who is employed in a position that involves regular The Honorable Richard H. Those standards must include a provision prohibiting the employment of the following described persons: The minimum standards of character that are to be prescribed under this section shall ensure that none of the individuals appointed to positions [that involve regular contact with or control over Indian children] have been found guilty of. Bear Robe was suspended and given a hearing before the school board. Bear Robe was terminated in April 1999.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="290"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0178n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting the defendant/appellee's motion for summary judgment and denying plaintiffs/appellants' motion for partial summary judgment. Sitting by designation. * (Case No. 03 2396) Zion Christian Church (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="290"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A893E056B32B153882571EE00794928/$file/0516132.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are called upon to navigate between two equally important interests: the church's right to access a government building that is open to other groups. We conclude that the district court erred when it found that the church was likely to succeed on the merits of its First Amendment claim and therefore abused its discretion in granting preliminary injunctive relief. We have FAITH CENTER CHURCH v. I. The relevant facts are not disputed. The County's goal in making these meeting rooms available is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="289"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1951.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Remmel & Zimmerman were on brief for plaintiffs. Were on brief for defendant. Agency or association.1 Violations of the Act are declared to contravene the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act. Is intended to tangibly benefit or is represented to be for the tangible benefit of any law enforcement officer. Chamberlain all of whom are officers of law enforcement associations. Seeking to enjoin the Act and to have it declared unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. While declaring that the provision for injunctive enforcement was an unconstitutional prior restraint. As the Act was originally enacted in 1977. Its sole exception was for solicitations by or on behalf of law enforcement officers campaigning for election to public office an exception still in existence. The Act was amended to allow game wardens to sell historical publications describing state parks.3 Me. Is intended to benefit or is represented to be for the benefit of any law enforcement officer.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="289"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/04/01-4170.htm">01-4170 -- U.S. V. WELCH -- 04/22/2003<BR></A><BR>
Johnson were the President and . SLBC's primary purpose was to secure. Utah.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="288"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1661.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellee. Whereupon other charges were dismissed and Williams was sentenced to seven months' imprisonment. The SERVESS CSI management contract was executed by Polis on behalf of SERVESS. Williams and Alexander were all residual beneficiaries under the real estate trusts. Massachusetts law requires that any not for profit corporation submitting expense reimbursement requests to the Commonwealth disclose whether the expense was incurred with a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="285"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313858.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq.1 We first hold that the SZO's provision excluding churches and synagogues from locations where private clubs and lodges are permitted violates the equal terms provision of RLUIPA. We must decide whether RLUIPA is a constitutional exercise of Congress's authority under the First. Finding that it is. Midrash and Young Israel (collectively the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="283"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/09/974057P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Argues that the NLRB lacks jurisdiction over it because the federal government maintains such pervasive control over the terms and conditions of the employment of its Head Start employees that the YWCA is prevented from engaging in meaningful collective bargaining. The purpose of the Head Start program is to provide the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="283"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4C2FE62749488A3E8825720C006FB770/$file/0515667.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Have since dismissed their claims. 1 17676 ACLU v. The ordinances that are the focus of Plaintiffs' complaint were adopted as part of the City's effort to revitalize the downtown area of Las Vegas: In the early 1990s. Downtown Las Vegas was suffering from an economic downturn. The area was seen as sleazy and unsafe. Downtown casinos were unable to compete with the glitzy Las Vegas Strip. Key economic factors showed that the area was in decline. Were closed off to automotive traffic. The street and sidewalk were torn up. Various underground infrastructure eleFSELLC is a private company charged with operating the Fremont Street Experience in downtown Las Vegas. The Fremont Street Experience is described in detail below. 2 ACLU v. CITY OF LAS VEGAS 17677 ments were installed. The street was decoratively repaved as one large promenade. As the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962412.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Line 29 the cross reference is corrected to read
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/03opinions/03-1304.html">UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER V. G.D. SEARLE & CO.,INC., ET AL.<BR></A><BR>
Argued for plaintiff appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Emily A. Olson</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel on the brief was <u>Jeanine Arden Ornt</u>. Argued for defendants appellees.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Richard G. Reisner</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Robert L. Et al.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Susan M. For amicus curiae Eli Lilly and Company.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>Steven P. 850 is invalid.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span><u>Univ. of Rochester v. Naproxen are believed to function by inhibiting the activity of enzymes called cyclooxygenases.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Cyclooxygenases catalyze the production of a molecule called prostaglandin H<sub>2</sub>. Which is a precursor for other prostaglandins that perform various functions in the human body.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span><u>Id.</u> at 219.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span></p> <p class=MsoBodyT
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/11/034077P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="280"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0424p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
WILL & EMERY. We conclude that the district court's implicit grant of summary judgment to DFA on that claim was in error. Is a milk marketing organization and the largest dairy farmer cooperative in the nation. DFA's primary purpose is marketing the raw. Southern Belle Southern Belle is a limited liability company formed in February 2002. Fifty percent of the voting interests in Southern Belle was owned by the Allen Family Limited Partnership (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="280"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/03/994021P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We remand to the district court for consideration of whether its disposition of the plaintiffs' claims based on restriction of partisan activities is consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion. Except to say that Wersal was a candidate for election to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Asking whether the restrictions were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. We held that the state had shown the required quantum of evidence that each of those interests was threatened by the Other plaintiffs associated with Wersal were his campaign committee and Republican Party members Cheryl Wersal. Who was also a member of the Minnesota Republican Party. Who was another candidate for judicial office. The affiliated organizations were the Indian Asian American Republicans. The Minnesota African American Republican Council and the Muslim Republicans were later added as plaintiffs. Named as defendants were the Director of the Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility and the Chair of the Minnesota Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="279"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb2000/986368.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
F&D asserts that the district court's ruling on the discovery issue is correct. It is entitled to summary judgment because the loss City Federal sustained is not covered by the bond. We will reverse the district court's order of summary judgment. In view of the circumstance that all of the relevant deposition testimony is not in the record before this court. We have relied on those factual statements and other portions of the record in deciding this appeal. To the extent that the parties' briefs indicate that there are disputed facts. We will refer to the RTC's version because we must view the facts in the light most favorable to it. Because this appeal is intensely fact driven. It is necessary to set forth the factual background in some detail. City Collateral was City Federal's mortgage warehouse lending operation.3 Among other things. Lyndon Merkle (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="279"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961297.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
His employment was terminated as part of Interfaith Impact's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="279"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/11/01-4252.htm">01-4252 -- BELL V. FUR BREEDERS AGRICULURAL COOPERATIVE -- 11/07/2003<BR></A><BR>
The Bells allege that while they were members of the cooperative. Insurance. <p> If a member whose ranch is located beyond the established feed route still requests delivery. One of the cooperative's written objectives is to ensure members do not subsidize one another. The discounted price was one penny less per pound than the delivered price. <p> Jack Bell became a Fur Breeders member in 1955 and continued as a member until 2000. Is more than seventy miles from both the Logan plant and the nearest point of the established delivery route. 049.51. <p> <center>PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND</center> <p> It is against this backdrop and the costs associated with hauling their own feed that the Bells brought their antitrust litigation against Fur Breeders. Determining their antitrust claims were sufficient to withstand such a motion. <em>Id. </em>at 1244 45. <p> Thereafter. A different district court judge was assigned to the case. Determining
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="279"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-4009.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiff Appellant Utah Shared Access Alliance (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="278"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D375A00ECC19178C882572F30082443E/$file/0536195.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
ORDER The Opinion in this case was filed November 9. A timely petition for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc was filed. Is deleted. A substituted footnote 2 is inserted in its place. The question of whether the FHA generally applies to homeless shelters was not at issue because the parties did not dispute that the FHA applied. We have never squarely addressed the issue of whether all temporary shelters fit within the Act's definition of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="278"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0D7A8B3C1A68E5538825722100018A28/$file/0536195.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which was managed by CHI and provided housing to men. The women and families were removed from Community House. The plaintiffs assert that the district court abused its discretion by denying a preliminary injunction that (1) would have COMMUNITY HOUSE v. (2) would have voided the City's lease with the BRM. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). We reverse the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction that would have required reinstatement of all former residents. Because the City's men only policy is facially discriminatory. We conclude that the district court abused its discretion by determining that only a limited injunction was necessary to avoid an Establishment Clause violation. A broader preliminary injunction is required. Which they have raised for the first time in this appeal. I. BACKGROUND CHI is a non profit corporation that provides housing services to homeless and low income persons. About seventy five percent of its residents were disabled. The BRM is a Christian non profit organization that has served the homeless population of Boise.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="278"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C25E6A7250B675AA88256CDE005F0872/$file/0255201.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
(4) Appellants were not permitted to assert affirmative defenses to the Commission's Application in district court. NASD disciplinary orders are subject to review by the Commission. Commission decisions are appealable to the United States Courts of Appeals. 15 U.S.C. § 78y(a)(1). B. McCarthy and Blodgett McCarthy and Blodgett were officers of Atlanta One. McCarthy served as its president and was registered as a general securities principal. Blodgett was the company's vice president and was registered as a securities principal and an options principal. The commissions charged by Appellants were so excessive that it was virtually impossible for their clients to break even. Only 24 percent of Appellants' options were ever sold at a profit. The NASD District Committee found that Atlanta One's commissions were excessive and unfair. They were held to be in violation of Article III. McCarthy and Blodgett were fined $75. They were also suspended for thirty days and ordered to requalify before acting again in any capacity requiring qualification within the securities industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="277"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200416650.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Asserts that it was not doing so as a fiduciary and thus had no obligation to pay interest on those funds. BONY contends that they were inappropriate on several grounds. We are unpersuaded by BONY's arguments and therefore affirm. Part III addresses BONY's claim that it was an Indenture Trustee with contractual duties. The purpose of the Agreement was to establish an efficient method for paying the Debtor's general unsecured creditors (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="276"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DAEEE3BDCD66FF5388256D40007BA5FC/$file/0235361.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because MPC's lobbying efforts were not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="276"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200014140.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court ruled that the provision was constitutional on its face under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because of its susceptibility to a narrowing construction. I. BACKGROUND FRL is a non profit Florida corporation that has as its primary purpose the dissemination of information concerning fetal development. At issue here and consequently is not a party to this appeal. 2 1 * organizations established primarily for the public good.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="276"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034700p5.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We must determine what role likelihood of confusion plays in a trademark infringement case where the defendant claims that its use was nominative and fair. LT contends that its use was nominative and fair.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="276"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034700p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We must determine what role likelihood of confusion plays in a trademark infringement case where the defendant claims that its use was nominative and fair. LT contends that its use was nominative and fair.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="275"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/32EAEE29F5DC76ED8825733300553778/$file/0555710.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Then promptly moved to dismiss the action on the basis that Cedars Sinai's claims were preempted. Finding that Cedars Sinai's claims were preempted by the Federal Employee Health Benefits Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="275"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/07/022769P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appellants argue that the district court erred in its analysis because the advertising conducted pursuant to the Beef Act is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="275"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1999/991222.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A. The Parties Plaintiff Tai Kwan Cureton is an African American who graduated from Simon Gratz High School in Philadelphia in June 1996 ranking 27th in a class of 305 students. Cureton was a member of the track team and earned both academic and athletic honors as a high school student. The SAT is a nationally recognized standardized test. Have emphasized the SAT in this action so we discuss only that test. 5 Plaintiff Leatrice Shaw is an African American who also graduated from Simon Gratz High School and was ranked 5th in a class of 305 students. Shaw was a member of the track team and earned both academic and athletic honors and was selected for membership in the National Honor Society. She was unable to compete on the track team during her freshman year because of the NCAA regulations at issue here. Plaintiffs Andrea Gardner and Alexander Wesby are African American student athletes who exceeded the NCAA minimum GPA requirement for freshman year athletic participation. Though they originally were not parties.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july99/98-4818.man.html">HARRIS V. IVAX CORP. (7/27/1999, NO. 98-4818)<BR></A><BR>
Background</CENTER> </P> <P> According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-30533.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. We decline to consider the issues raised by the defendants in their letter submitted under Rule 28(j) that were neither raised in the district court or argued in their initial brief. 2 1 I. John and Martha Herring were charged and convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 (conspiracy). Martha Herring was charged and convicted of two additional counts of bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 157(1) and (2). Were also charged with conspiracy. HCC served as the Agencies' home office and was owned by and employed the Herrings. A cost report was prepared by each Agency and submitted to Medicare. All costs associated with running the Agencies are included on the reports. Medicare reimburses only those costs that are reasonable. Certain employee appreciation expenditures are costs allowed by Medicare. The cost reports are used to derive pay rates for different care services.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july99/98-4818.man.html">HARRIS V. IVAX CORP. (7/27/1999, NO. 98-4818)<BR></A><BR>
Background</CENTER> </P> <P> According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct2000/991803.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Have brought this RICO class action on behalf of all individuals who played NHL professional hockey during the time in which defendant R. Count II of the complaint alleges that Eagleson and certain companies with which he was affiliated conspired to pilfer NHLPA funds over the course of many years. The principal issue on this appeal is whether the district court correctly granted Eagleson and the NHL defendants summary judgment on Count I on statute of limitations grounds. Thus is not at issue on appeal. We nevertheless have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Alan Eagleson was executive director of the NHLPA. Which would otherwise have been prohibited by the players' contracts. The participation of the best NHL players was essential to the success of the tournaments. Hockey Canada was to be paid the first $600. All other net revenues were to be split equally between the NHL clubs and the NHLPA. The NHL players earned little additional pay for playing in the tournaments and were induced to participate on the understanding that they would be benefitting their pension fund.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU5MTItYWdfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5912-ag_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Recommendations concerning remedies are adopted and affirmed. Both the Board and Local 3 have filed objections to the Special Master's findings of fact. We presume the parties are familiar with the facts. Background2 Local 3 is a labor union whose organizing activities have been oft reviewed by this Court. Section 8(b)(4) is commonly referred to as the Act's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19984818.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. The full text of the release is found in Appendix I to this opinion. The full text of such a release would not be part of the record under review for a dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) unless it was attached to the complaint. A document central to the complaint that the defense appends to its motion to dismiss is also properly considered. Provided that its contents are not in dispute. $104 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. moreover. Which are [sic ] not subject to material dispute. The usual rules for considering 12(b)(6) motions are thus bent to permit consideration of an allegedly fraudulent statement in its context. 3 Appendix II contains the full text of this release. 15 U.S.C. § 78u 5(c). 15 U.S.C. § 78u 4(b). 4 5 Both the defendants' motion to dismiss.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="273"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19984818.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint our only source of the facts the defendant Ivax Corporation is a manufacturer of generic drugs. Ivax was profitable in 1995. The full text of the release is found in Appendix I to this opinion. P. 12(b)(6) unless it was attached to the complaint. A document central to the complaint that the defense appends to its motion to dismiss is also properly considered. Provided that its contents are not in dispute. Which are [sic] not subject to material dispute. The usual rules for considering 12(b)(6) motions are thus bent to permit consideration of an allegedly fraudulent statement in its context. 3 2 Appendix II contains the full text of this release. 2 million of which was a reduction in the carrying value of the goodwill ascribed to certain of Ivax's businesses. There are two theories of liability: first. That Ivax's economic projections were fraudulent. The plaintiffs argue that the district court should have granted them leave to amend the complaint. Corporations and individual defendants may avoid liability for forward looking statements that prove false if the statement is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="272"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/033229P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
MLP is a modest sized Minneapolis based publisher of fiction. Eventually dissolved and the assets were transferred to a Minnesota company of the same name incorporated as a nonprofit corporation in 1993. Both of whom were corporate officers and members of the board of directors. Have the book printed for 2 publication. Nora submitted the book and it was accepted for publication through MLP's First Series Award for Poetry program.3 MLP told Dr. Was not a published poet. 3 3 sale. Nora contends he could not have violated the Lanham Act when he used MLP's trade name to market his book because he had authority to act on behalf of MLP as its president and was in fact acting on MLP's behalf when he published his book of poetry. The book actually is an MLP product and there can be no claim for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act. Nora was MLP's president is insufficient to show his actions were MLP's actions. Such transactions are presumptively fraudulent and to overcome this presumption the executive must show by clear proof he acted with impartiality and fairness to the corporation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="271"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/feb96/94-1467.wpd.html">LANCASTER V. AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOC. INT'L<BR></A><BR>
That he pay an assessment to support ALPA members working at Eastern Airlines (hereafter
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="271"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/09/021684P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We consider whether three Minnesota nonprofit health maintenance organizations (HMOs) have presented sufficient evidence of causation of harm and damages to recoup certain health care costs of their members that resulted from tobacco use. We have the advantage of some recent guidance from the Minnesota Supreme Court on the question. Only the second question is currently relevant. The Minnesota Supreme Court responded that although proof of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="271"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2E057485A6713B9E88256B6D0060425A/$file/0070753.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The IRS explained that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="270"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0101p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As the issues raised in this appeal are matters of first impression among the courts of appeals.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="269"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1585a.html">GOODMAN DANIEL R. V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
With them on </p> <p>the joint briefs were <i>Russell H. With her on the </p> <p>brief were <i>Joel I. The peti </p> <p>tioners contend the later decision was arbitrary and capri </p> <p>cious. SMR licenses have increas </p> <p>ingly been used to provide cellular and data transmission </p> <p>services over a wide area. <i>See Fresno Mobile Radio. Few if any of the individuals </p> <p>who obtained SMR licenses with the help of an application </p> <p>mill intended to build transmission facilities or were even </p> <p>capable of doing so. Many of the application mills' customers lost </p> <p>their licenses and others were in jeopardy of losing them.</p> <p>In January 1994 the Federal Trade Commission sued four </p> <p>application mills for fraud. <i>See FTC v. He also took the </p> <p>position that receivership licensees who had voluntarily can </p> <p>celed their licenses were entitled to the benefit of an extended </p> <p>build out period. He did </p> <p>not have standing on behalf of the receivership licensees to </p> <p>challenge the agency's decisions. <i>See id.</i> at 28 34 (apply </p> <p>ing 47 C.F.R. 1.106).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="269"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199907/95-1585a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With them on the joint briefs were Russell H. With her on the brief were Joel I. The peti tioners contend the later decision was arbitrary and capri cious. SMR licenses have increas ingly been used to provide cellular and data transmission services over a wide area. Few if any of the individuals who obtained SMR licenses with the help of an application mill intended to build transmission facilities or were even capable of doing so. Many of the application mills' customers lost their licenses and others were in jeopardy of losing them. He also took the position that receivership licensees who had voluntarily can celed their licenses were entitled to the benefit of an extended build out period. He did not have standing on behalf of the receivership licensees to challenge the agency's decisions. The agency then turned to the question whether licensees defrauded by application mills other than the four the FTC had sued (the so called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="268"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2755_043.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This case is satellite litigation emanating from the long running legal battle over the remapping of Chicago's aldermanic wards following the 1990 census. It is dressed up in constitutional clothing. The plaintiffs are Chicago aldermen who challenged the City's ward map in court and then claimed that the City's refusal to finance their legal expenses in that litigation violated their equal protection and free speech rights. Chicago's aldermen were divided (with a few exceptions) into two opposing camps during the political struggle over the new ward boundaries the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="268"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct1998/98a1980x.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which are amply supported by the record. ACM invested $175 million of its cash in private placement Citicorp notes paying just three basis points more than the cash was earning on deposit. Which is evident from the Tax Court's well supported factual findings. Is essential to assessing whether the transaction's tax consequences may be disregarded and lends significant support to the court's ultimate finding that ACM's transactions did not have sufficient substance to be recognized for tax purposes. The consideration consisted of $140 million in cash and LIBOR notes whose present value was $34. Reduced by the transaction costs established by Merrill Lynch. 38 acquire an amount of LIBOR notes that was identical. To the amount of such notes that ACM could have acquired by investing its $35 million in cash directly into such assets. Just as the Gregory Court found that the intervening creation and dissolution of a corporation and transfer of stock thereto and therefrom was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="267"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-1408a.html">PANAMSAT CORP. V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
With him </P> <P>on the briefs were Joseph A. With him on the </P> <P>brief were Christopher J. The decisions it </P> <P>complains of are identical to the formulations reached by the </P> <P>Commission in its 1997 Order. </P> <P>PanAmSat's petition is timely for the 1998 Order but not for </P> <P>that of 1997. Because the exceptions are different. We address the </P> <P>jurisdictional issue separately for each substantive challenge.</P> <P> Space Station Fees for Comsat</P> <P> Comsat is a private corporation formed pursuant to the </P> <P>Communications Satellite Act of 1962. Cir. 1997). </P> <P>These organizations own satellites that are used by signato </P> <P>ries. Comsat provides such services as a common carrier </P> <P>and is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="267"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199912/98-1408a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Joseph A. With him on the brief were Christopher J. The decisions it complains of are identical to the formulations reached by the Commission in its 1997 Order. PanAmSat's petition is timely for the 1998 Order but not for that of 1997. Because the exceptions are different. Space Station Fees for Comsat Comsat is a private corporation formed pursuant to the Communications Satellite Act of 1962. These organizations own satellites that are used by signato ries. Comsat provides such services as a common carrier and is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="267"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/003698.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The District Court found that neither plan was governed by ERISA and therefore dismissed the suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. As both plans were covered by ERISA. The Profit Sharing Trust was funded through a rollover of William's assets from profit sharing and pension plans from two prior jobs. The Profit Sharing Plan provided that distributions from the plan were to be made as a joint and survivor annuity. Distributions from the Pension Trust were to be made as joint and survivor annuities. The assets from these IRAs were distributed to the Insurance Trust. As well as an order compelling the trustees of the Insurance Trust to obtain a refund of inheritance taxes paid on the assets that were transferred to William's IRAs. The District Court held that neither the Profit Sharing Plan nor the Pension Plan was governed by ERISA and dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction by order entered August 15. Plaintiffs' motion to alter or amend this order was denied on October 3. Was substituted for Evelyn as a plaintiff. 2.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="265"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200512114.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The key issue is whether. Did not resolve it because all but one of the claims for relief in that appeal were rendered moot by a repeal of the challenged ordinance. CAMP was unable to apply for a permit because Atlanta imposed a moratorium on the issuance of permits from November 27. That other provisions were constitutional. (2) whether the challenge by CAMP to the moratorium on festival permits is moot because the moratorium has expired. Our review of these issues involving these parties is familiar territory. We also conclude that the complaint of CAMP regarding the denial of its application for a permit during the moratorium is not moot. A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="265"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2004/024372p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are obliged to interpret some of the contours of the tort of interference with contractual relations under Pennsylvania law. Jurisdiction in the District Court was based on 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. As this is an appeal from a final order of the District Court. We will affirm in part and reverse in part. The relevant facts are somewhat in dispute. Appellee is entitled to have all reasonable inferences drawn in its favor. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="265"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/07/01-5098.htm">01-5098 -- DUBBS V. HEAD START INC. -- 07/21/2003<BR></A><BR>
Complain that their children were subjected to intrusive physical examinations. Including reconsideration of the assessment of costs against the parents. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="265"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/08/99-1344.htm">99-1344 -- WEINMAN V. FIDELITY CAPITAL APPRECIATION FUND -- 08/21/2001<BR></A><BR>
Any and all additional parties who either have joined or will join the said Committee. Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="263"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-6342.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. OSSAA is Oklahoma's state organized school activities association. Christian Heritage is a private religious school in Del City. Since it is not an OSSAA member. Twelve of its members are nonpublic <hr> schools (ten of which are private schools and two are Indian schools). Eight are located in suburban areas. While two are in rural areas. Any secondary school desiring to become a member of the Association is to file with the Executive Secretary a resolution. OSSAA members are provided with. Are subject to. The ballot simply describes the geographic area where students are immediately eligible for athletics in the nonpublic applicant school by reason of residence.(1) (1) Whenever a nonpublic school applies for membership. A student may attend a school district in which a student is not a resident. If a student transfers to a school district in which he is not a resident. Unless the transfer is due to a bona fide change of residence by his parents. At 72. <hr> OSSAA's Rule 8 lists the geographic areas for nonpublic schools that are admitted.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="263"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011664.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Defendants are NationsBank Corp. (bank). Was sporadically conducted between August 6. Cecala was represented by counsel in 34 of the 36 sessions. Plaintiff claims to have suffered from major depression. They are collectively referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216163.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Gumson who are visually impaired and use the Internet through a special software program called a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1610.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. & Lichten and Craig Becker were on brief. Brown & Joy were on brief. Provident argues that its refusal to bargain was not an unfair labor practice because the district and charge nurses are supervisors. As that term is defined in 2(11) of the Act. The nurses as such are precluded from participating in collective bargaining. Whether mid level care providers such as Provident's district and charge nurses are supervisors under 2(11) is a significant legal issue that has divided the circuits. It is also an issue of some societal significance. Affecting increasing numbers of people who will need nursing home care as the post World War II baby boomer generation ages. The issue is significant in part because labor costs in the healthcare industry comprise a large portion of overall costs (estimated to be roughly 60% of hospital costs). The issue is important both to management. More hostile test than that used for other professions to determine whether nurses were supervisors. Nurses were not considered to be exercising authority
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="262"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1393.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Arroyo Alejandro</SPAN> was on consolidated brief for appellant Waldemar Pé. With whom <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="260"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4F7778C44FE40B548825706D0056C41A/$file/0316791.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that we have appellate jurisdiction and affirm. Who were officers and/or directors of Boston Chicken. Inc. are the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="259"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1662p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) and Friends of the Earth (FOE) have sued Magnesium Elektron. We will reverse the district court and vacate its permanent injunction and judgment against MEI. Because no new permit was issued. The terms of the 1984 permit remained in effect. (1) against any person . . . who is alleged to be in violation of (A) an effluent standard or limitation under this chapter or (B) an order issued by the Administrator or a State with respect to such a standard or limitation . . . . 33 U.S.C. § 1365 (1986). 4 Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey and Friends of the Earth are non profit environmental organizations.2 Pursuant to the citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act. The affiants' enjoyment of these activities is lessened to the extent that they
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="259"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTMyOTItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-3292-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Town is located in Orange County. Meyers was Town Supervisor. Was chairman of its governing body. The Ambulance Corps is a New York not for profit corporation organized to. Many of the events prior to February 2004 are not in dispute and are set forth below as found by the district court in its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law dated April 20. The Ambulance Corps was initially funded through contributions from members of the community. The contract covering calendar year 1974 also stated that the Town
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="259"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981938.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Have standing to sue. The focus of federal efforts to abate water pollution was measurement of the quality of receiving waters. The use of water quality standards as a control mechanism was found to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/97-1715a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With them on the briefs were William R. With them on the brief was Jay L. With him on the briefs were J. Open access is the essence of Orders 888 and 889. Open access transmission is expected to increase competition from alternative power suppliers. Are intended to create a market in which customers may purchase power from any of a number of suppliers. Will no longer have to purchase power from its local utility but instead may seek cheaper power anywhere in the country. All key players in the electricity market have challenged various provisions of Orders 888 and 889. Utili ties have been heavily regulated at both the federal and state levels. Economies of scale have justified the construction of large (greater than 500 MW) generation facilities. Techno logical advances in the 1970s and 1980s have permitted small plants to operate efficiently as well. These alternative suppliers have created a wholesale market for low cost power. They have and will continue to exercise that market power in order to maintain and increase market share.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cpub%5C01/01-20861-CV0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The jury concluded that any copying by Compaq was de minimis and constituted fair use according to 17 U.S.C. § 107. (4) Brown and Mowrey are not the alter egos of Ergonome and should not be held jointly and severally liable for the attorneys' fee award. Ergonome would have to persuade this court that each of the four independent bases for finding in Compaq's favor (de minimis. Equitable estoppel) is legally erroneous. Because no such sanction was imposed on Mowrey. Including THB was formally published in 1994. market the book. the copyright. Compaq decided to update a booklet entitled Creating a Comfortable Work Environment that was packaged with each Compaq computer. Contained four illustrations and seven phrases that were similar to photographs and phrases in THB.1 Like its predecessor. The SCG was packaged and included with every Compaq computer. Which was transferred and consolidated with Compaq's declaratory judgment action in Houston. The district court concluded as a matter of law that the portions of THB at issue were copyrightable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042255p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A house leased and used by CSG to provide caretaker services to three mentally retarded women residing there on the basis that the house was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct05/01-20861-CV0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The jury concluded that any copying by Compaq was de minimis and constituted fair use according to 17 U.S.C. § 107. (4) Brown and Mowrey are not the alter egos of Ergonome and should not be held jointly and severally liable for the attorneys' fee award. Ergonome would have to persuade this court that each of the four independent bases for finding in Compaq's favor (de minimis. Equitable estoppel) is legally erroneous. Because no such sanction was imposed on Mowrey. Including THB was formally published in 1994. market the book. the copyright. Compaq decided to update a booklet entitled Creating a Comfortable Work Environment that was packaged with each Compaq computer. Contained four illustrations and seven phrases that were similar to photographs and phrases in THB.1 Like its predecessor. The SCG was packaged and included with every Compaq computer. Which was transferred and consolidated with Compaq's declaratory judgment action in Houston. The district court concluded as a matter of law that the portions of THB at issue were copyrightable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/96opinions/96-1040a.html">ALLEGHENY LUDLUM COR V. NLRB<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200404/03-5117a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="258"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200011/97-1715b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With them on the briefs were William R. With them on the brief was Jay L. With him on the briefs were J. Open access is the essence of Orders 888 and 889. Open access transmission is expected to increase competition from alternative power suppliers. Are intended to create a market in which customers may purchase power from any of a number of suppliers. Will no longer have to purchase power from its local utility but instead may seek cheaper power anywhere in the country. All key players in the electricity market have challenged various provisions of Orders 888 and 889. Utili ties have been heavily regulated at both the federal and state levels. Economies of scale have justified the construction of large (greater than 500 MW) generation facilities. Techno logical advances in the 1970s and 1980s have permitted small plants to operate efficiently as well. These alternative suppliers have created a wholesale market for low cost power. They have and will continue to exercise that market power in order to maintain and increase market share.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="257"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2003/02-13876.opn.html">SEC V. VITTOR (3/7/2003, NO. 02-13876)<BR></A><BR>
Is a self regulatory organization. The NASD is registered as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="257"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2003/02-13876.opn.html">SEC V. VITTOR (3/7/2003, NO. 02-13876)<BR></A><BR>
Is a self regulatory organization. The NASD is registered as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="257"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0579n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Norton Audubon Hospital is a not for profit hospital located in Louisville. The NLRB conducted an election among the Norton Audubon employees that year in which the Union was unsuccessful. Norton Audubon was purchased by Columbia Healthcare Corporation in 1993. Another election was held in 1994. The Union was again unsuccessful. Was in the process of purchasing Norton Audubon and urged Alliant to recognize and bargain with the Union in a letter sent to the CEO of Alliant and signed by Gentry. Gentry was generally viewed as a very well qualified nurse.2 Gentry joined the Union in the 1980s and served as a trustee and legislative director. Gentry was a self described
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="257"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/July2003/022666.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The plaintiffs are five former employees of the nowbankrupt Allegheny Health Education and Research Foundation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="257"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/07/013002P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Missouri argues that the district court erred in concluding that the requested records were not agency records within the purview of the FOIA. Jurisdiction Jurisdiction in the district court was proper based upon 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). Jurisdiction on appeal is proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. Background The MRNRC is a non profit corporation formed in 1988 by the Missouri River Basin States to promote and facilitate the preservation. Its official members are the fish and wildlife conservation agencies of the states of Montana. The MRNRC's ex officio members are the United States Army Corps of Engineers (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="256"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1997/97a1530p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that this practice is illegal. We will reverse. I. The facts are stated comprehensively in the district court's opinion. Its Local 786 and Caterpillar have been parties to a collective bargaining agreement since 1954. The agreement contained a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="256"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/031876P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Kenneth Royer was the president of three related not for profit organizations located in Oak Grove. Is a non profit corporation established for the City's benefit in the early 1980's to serve as a vehicle for financing new public buildings. Is a non profit corporation that provides services for senior citizens in Oak Grove. The relationship between these 1 Kenneth Royer died after this suit was filed and his wife. Her salary is at least partly reimbursed by the foundations. Which may have some authority over her working conditions. An attorney who was also handling the City's investigation of the foundations. This state court suit was dismissed because it had not been properly authorized by the City's board of aldermen. Are considered in turn. If the plaintiff has identified an associational right that is impacted by the state action. The Court inquires whether the burden on that right is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="255"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991348.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which was not a party to the arbitration agreement. (2) when the government is not a party to the underlying action. I. Appellant NSF is the government agency charged with supporting much of this nation's federally funded basic science and engineering research. Incorporated (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="255"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1371.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Snyder LLP</SPAN> were on brief for appellants. </SPAN> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="254"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5B3A94A35A2BD0FB8825725F00770C62/$file/0450082.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: On slip Opinion page 7868. 386 (9th Cir. 2006): The argument that the district court should have imposed a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="254"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/47C7DE7A7FD2FDA5882571AE005857B3/$file/0450082.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Rare is the person who relishes getting calls from those great patrons of the telephone. Telemarketers.1 Yet many charOne oft repeated expression of the collective view of telemarketers is Jerry Seinfeld's response to a telemarketer's call: [TELEMARKETER]: Hi. Most donors would probably be shocked or surprised to learn that most of their contributions were going to for profit telemarketers instead of charitable activities. Support a fraud prosecution when
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="254"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=09&date=01&year=03">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="253"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/August2003/022497p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is an approximately two minute segment of a movie. Video Pipeline challenges the injunction on the ground that its internet use of the clip previews is protected by the fair use doctrine and. Inc. and Miramax Film Corp.1 may not receive the benefits of copyright protection because they have engaged in copyright misuse. The requested trailer is then
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="253"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan98/95-9361.man.html">UNITED STATES V. GARRISON (1/22/1998, NO. 95-9361)<BR></A><BR>
We determine whether the owner and chief executive officer of a home healthcare provider properly was accorded a two level enhancement in her sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3 for abusing a position of public trust by submitting falsified Medicare claims to a fiscal intermediary. Because the two level enhancement for abuse of a position of public trust was improper. Was the owner. Health Care Financing Administration.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="253"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan98/95-9361.man.html">UNITED STATES V. GARRISON (1/22/1998, NO. 95-9361)<BR></A><BR>
We determine whether the owner and chief executive officer of a home healthcare provider properly was accorded a two level enhancement in her sentence under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3 for abusing a position of public trust by submitting falsified Medicare claims to a fiscal intermediary. Because the two level enhancement for abuse of a position of public trust was improper. Was the owner. Health Care Financing Administration.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="252"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0340p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Park or public area of the city of Dearborn unless such activity is granted approval by resolution by the City Council. No permit shall be issued for a special event unless application is made not less than 30 days before the date the special event is sought to be held. If the City Council finds that the special event is to be held for a lawful purpose and will not in any manner act so as to breach the peace or unnecessarily interfere with the public use of the streets. Place and manner restrictions as a condition to granting such permit if said restrictions are reasonable and necessary for the protection of the public health. There is no exception to the thirty day advance notice requirement contained in the Ordinance itself. Although Chammout claimed that he did not organize the march and was not aware that it lacked a permit. Was labeled simply as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/06/02-4174.htm">02-4174 -- UTAH ANIMAL RIGHTS COALITION V. SALT LAKE CITY CORP. -- 06/16/2004<BR></A><BR>
One of those groups was Appellant. Are Salt Lake City and certain officials who had the responsibility of determining when and where various groups would be permitted to demonstrate. The question is whether the slow pace of the permit process violated the First Amendment. <p> Almost a year before the Olympics
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/60edaec33213417188256a2d005af072/$FILE/0015006.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended the quarterly payments were exempt from claims of their creditors. This appeal followed.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Hold that the quarterly payments are not exempt as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1256.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Alleges that he was discriminated against in the terms and conditions of his employment because of his race. He claims that he was constructively discharged and denied various promotions and appointments because he is African American. Plaintiff's relationship with USOC management was less than harmonious. Although he was responsible for any failures in doping control. He was not given adequate authority to solve drug use problems in amateur sports. [he] was criticized for not being a `team player.'
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/4ff6a0ed1f31de3188256e5a00707ae8/$FILE/0015006.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended the quarterly payments were exempt from claims of their creditors. This appeal followed.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Hold that the quarterly payments are not exempt as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4FF6A0ED1F31DE3188256E5A00707AE8/$file/0015006.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended the quarterly payments were exempt from claims of their creditors. This appeal followed.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Hold that the quarterly payments are not exempt as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/01/96-1403.htm">96-1403 -- LINDBERG V. U.S. -- 01/13/1999<BR></A><BR>
The Estate argues that it is entitled to a deduction for payments of $2.27 million made to settle Buell's descendants' tort claims for interference with inheritance. (2) the payments were an administrative expense under I.R.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct96/95-4056.wpd.html">WILSON V. GLENWOOD INTERMOUNTAIN PROPS., INC.<BR></A><BR>
We conclude they do not have standing. All of the defendant landlords have been certified by BYU to provide BYU off campus housing to unmarried BYU students. (2) to segregate students from non students by buildings or wings of buildings if they are certified to rent to both students and non students. (3) to rent only to unmarried male or unmarried female students or to separate unmarried male students from unmarried female students by buildings or wings of buildings if the landlords are certified to rent to both male and female BYU students. Apartments in those buildings and wings are rented only to students. An unmarried man under 25 years old who was not a BYU student. Was denied apartments in off campus BYU approved student housing that was reserved for women. An unmarried woman under 25 years old who was not a BYU student. Was denied apartments in off campus BYU approved student housing that was reserved for men. They were not otherwise qualified for apartments reserved for students. The court also ruled that in any case defendants' practices were permitted under Title IX.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="251"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/60EDAEC33213417188256A2D005AF072/$file/0015006.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended the quarterly payments were exempt from claims of their creditors. This appeal followed.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). Hold that the quarterly payments are not exempt as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="250"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1618.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Comey Boyd & Luskin were on brief. Were on brief. Slomovits was accepting millions of dollars in cash each week from Duvan Arboleda. The transactions were accomplished without documentation. The bills were usually in small denominations. These purchases were made at various banks by underlings (e.g. The money received in New York was transported to Rhode Island by armored car and then deposited in an account standing in the name of a controlled corporation. See 31 U.S.C.A. 5324 (West Supp. 1995) is called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="250"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022068.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CLIENT CENTERED LEGAL SERVICES Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. CCLS was required to agree to a series of conditions. [i]f this grant is terminated before its expiration date. Applicant hereby gives assurance that it will follow the Corporation's directions with respect to the use or disposition of fund balances. LSC's consent was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="249"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AD487A9FD8C5185788256EE00080826E/$file/0315545.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was able to perform his ministerial duties with minor accommodations. Werft claims he was forced to resign from his position and the Church's actions amounted to a breach of contract and violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="249"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/061035P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
All of Advantage's applications were denied because each proposed billboard violated multiple provisions of the Eden Prairie Sign Code. Claiming that the sign code is unconstitutionally overbroad under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and that its own constitutional rights were violated by the denial of its applications. Concluding that Advantage's overbreadth challenge to the sign code fails for lack of standing and that its own rights were not violated. I. Advantage is an outdoor advertising company. Each billboard was to contain trivision technology. The sign code's stated purpose is to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="249"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200411/03-5264a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="249"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1998/98a1976p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs are six Pennsylvania and Ohio residents and an Indiana organization committed to environmental preservation. Plaintiffs sought a declaration that approval of the projects was arbitrary. Congress authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to develop land and resource plans that are used as a guide to all resource activities in a national forest. The process is described in some depth in Ohio Forestry Association v. The statute also imposes procedural obligations on the Secretary to ensure that environmental interests will be considered in the plan. The Service concluded that they were consistent with the resource plan and would not create a significant environmental impact within the forest. A motion for leave to intervene was filed by a number of area school districts located near the Allegheny National Forest. The Commonwealth forwards these sums to counties where the forest is situated. Joining the motion for leave to intervene were Brookville Wood Products. Payne and Spilka have existing contracts to cut timber as part of the Minister Watershed Project.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="249"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0266p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
All of whom are government officials. One count is devoted to federal law and another to state law. Substantive Facts The district court stated the background facts that gave rise to this case as follows: The plaintiffs in this case are a Michigan circuit judge. Nor have plaintiffs moved yet for class certification. Plaintiffs purport to represent all active and retired Michigan judges who are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-2015.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Asserting that Apna Ghar rejected his job application because he is male. That Apna Ghar is an employer whose business affects commerce. BACKGROUND No. 01 2015 Apna Ghar is an Illinois not for profit organization that provides transitional shelter and walk in social services to victims of domestic violence who are primarily Asian women and children. One of the services it provides is assistance with legal matters. Apna Ghar reviewed his resume and informed him it was not going to interview or hire him because he is male and it
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/12/022956P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is a corollary to the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. The sole issue in this case is whether the value added payments that the Bots received from MCP were derived from a trade or business carried on by the Bots. Thus were subject to self employment tax. Richard and Phyllis Bot are a married couple who filed joint tax returns for 1994 and 1995. The Bots are retired farmers who own 700 acres of farmland in Minnesota that they have sharecropped with two of their sons since 1987. The crop share agreement effective for the years at issue provided that the Bots were entitled to onehalf of the crops grown on the farm. The Bots were members of MCP at all times relevant to this appeal. The agreement was automatically renewed for an additional year. The Grower was still obligated to supply corn for a period of four years following his or her notice of termination. The Bots agreed to a pro rata change in the number of bushels they were obligated to supply depending on MCP's total corn needs.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200516235.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He is currently in the midst of a series of corruption trials in that country. The allegations are that Montesinos committed a host of crimes while he was in office. The picture is one of a man who has never been troubled by anything resembling a moral scruple. The facts about how he was brought to justice form the stage on which this lawsuit plays. 2 For decades journalists and politicians had been leveling accusations of corruption against Montesinos. At 1.1 That alone might not have done him in. As it turned out Montesinos was like a serial killer who relishes the opportunity to relive his crimes he had videotaped many of his dirty deeds. Announced that he was dissolving the intelligence agency and that he would step down after holding new elections. The former spy chief was also something of a magician. He had one more magic act up his Because this is an appeal from a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) dismissal. The operative facts are those alleged in the complaint. Where outside sources are cited.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/27B565D1754D4E5E88256B50005F20CE/$file/0070753.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The IRS explained that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="248"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/02/991168P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jurisdiction Jurisdiction in the district court was proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1343. Jurisdiction in the court of appeals was proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. Background KWMU is a not for profit public broadcast radio station located on the campus of the University of Missouri at St. KWMU is owned and operated by The Curators of the University of Missouri. Is responsible for overseeing KWMU's operation. Contributors of such funds are referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="247"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Mar2002/003625.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lapid's primary contentions on appeal are that: (1) because the Board failed to engage in the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="247"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8D838D1B772C88DA88256F32007C8AEE/$file/0315866.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We are asked to decide whether the world's cetaceans have standing to bring suit in their own name under the Endangered CETACEAN COMMUNITY v. We hold that cetaceans do not have standing under these statutes. I. Background The sole plaintiff in this case is the Cetacean Community (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="247"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971723.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We agree that the ordinance is constitutional and affirm the judgment of the district court. Minors may participate in any activity during curfew hours if they are accompanied by a parent. The ordinance exempts minors who are engaged in interstate travel. Are on the sidewalk abutting their parents' residence. Or are involved in an emergency. The ordinance does not affect minors who are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="247"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B2F27EFF2D8F1A2988256EB5004E2AED/$file/0215762.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The face of American poverty is changing dramatically. Minimum wage workers are unable to support their families' basic needs. At A1 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="246"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2000/993856.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which have been consolidated before the district court for pretrial purposes. Which is in the business of purchasing such delinquent claims from municipalities in several states. Appendix references are to the appendix filed in Nos. 99 3858 and 99 3859. 4 September 1996. The City and the School District entered into a Purchase Agreement whereby existing claims and liens for unpaid taxes and sewer charges were assigned to NTF.2 App. at 517. Ltd. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="246"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/96opinions/96-1210.html">U.S. SHOE CORP. V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="245"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1289_021.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
(Shares) is a nonprofit corporation that trains and employs disabled individuals who perform primarily industrial tasks for customers. The NLRB concluded that Shares is Wellman's successor and is therefore obligated to bargain with the UAW under 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(5) and (1). I. Background Shares is an Indiana corporation that employs approximately 300 individuals in its Industrial Services Group. About 250 of whom are disabled. These 300 employees are divided into six subsets. Disabled employees 1 A glow plug is essentially a spark plug that warms the cylinders of a diesel engine prior to ignition and initially ignites the fuel. Once the engine is running. Shares purchased Wellman's assets that were used to produce glow plugs out of bankruptcy. Seven of those employees were Wellman employees discharged on April 25. Three others were Wellman employees who had been laid off but who held recall rights under the expiring collective bargaining agreement. A representative of the UAW sent a letter to Shares's general manager asserting that Shares was a 4 Nos. 05 1289.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="245"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0116p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs appellants in this securities fraud case are investors in the stock of Intrenet. Defendantsappellees are two Intrenet officers (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="244"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1994/94a0801p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We conclude that the district court erred and will vacate its judgment and remand the cause for further proceedings.[fn2] I. Mainframes and Upgrades The facts underlying this nine year old dispute are minutely detailed and quite voluminous. We will present only a brief summary here. IBM is the world's largest manufacturer of large scale mainframe computers. These machines have the capacity to process millions of records at a time and manage a tremendous volume of information. Mainframes are physically large machines. They are quite expensive. Mainframes are available in a wide range of computing capacities. One common measure of capacity is computing speed. In what is known as a MIPS upgrade. Many IBM mainframes are not purchased outright from IBM by their end users. Are instead leased through third party leasing companies such as CMI and Comdisco.[fn3] A mainframe will typically be leased to several end users during its life cycle. Then when obsolete will be scrapped. The computer will need to be reconfigured to meet the needs of the next lessee.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="243"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2251.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
LLP</SPAN> were on brief for appellant.</SPAN></P> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="242"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/03/022262P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND NRLC is a national. Its main objectives are to educate the public on abortion related issues and to support policies that are consistent with its pro life agenda. Expressly advocating the election or defeat of identified candidates is not its major purpose. When then Missouri Governor and United States Senate candidate Mel Carnahan was killed in an airplane crash. Was told by an MEC staff member named Mike that the kind of expenditures NRLPAC was proposing would violate Missouri law. Concluding that the thirty day limitation would also 2 The district court correctly noted that Missouri Revised Statutes sections 130.049 and 130.011 are the only two election statutes with thirty day limits and are. Most plausibly the statutes to which Mike was referring. Since these are also two of the Missouri laws that NRLPAC and NRLC are challenging. We will discuss them in greater detail later. 3 preclude it from making independent expenditures. NRLC converted its
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="242"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200117064.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Inc. were convicted of a variety of federal offenses stemming from an affirmative action fraud scheme they perpetrated regarding federally funded road construction projects. I. Because the defendants are challenging their convictions. The FDOT was contractually obligated to ensure that at least 12% of the USDOT's funds ultimately went to 2
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="242"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200305/02-5154a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="242"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/231135295B45B74088256C3D00602467/$file/0156879.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The idea animating AB 1890 was that deregulation would foster competition in electrical generation. The goal of AB 1890 was to create a deregulated market in which price would be established by competition and consumers could select their electrical power supplier. Stranded costs are those costs an electrical supplier incurs in anticipation of serving customers that later become unrecoverable because the supplier either cannot The legislation is summarized in Cal. LYNCH charge a rate that allows cost recovery or is unable to sell sufficient power. This most typically occurs when there is a shift in utility rate philosophy from a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="242"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F2C17F67DE4A8E3888256C94005C4F75/$file/0056470.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. 2002 is hereby ordered amended as follows: Slip Op. at 13984: Add a footnote on line 3 of the first full paragraph after the word
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="241"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3B0C93358B88F28D88256FD90056994B/$file/0455962.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Defendant Michael Kremer was dissatisfied with the hair restoration services provided to him by the Bosley Medical BOSLEY MEDICAL INSTITUTE v. Was uncomplimentary of the Bosley Medical Institute. The problem is that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="241"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1999/967623.TXT">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
000 Three Mile Island area residents who allege that they have developed neoplasms2 as a result of the radiation released into the environment as a result of the reactor accident. The first appeal is that of a group of ten trial plaintiffs who were selected by the parties after the District Court adopted the plaintiffs' case management order. The critical issue there is the trial plaintiffs' ability to demonstrate that they were exposed to doses of radiation sufficient to cause their neoplasms. Defendants challenged the admissibility of the experts' testimony and the District Court was therefore required to hold extensive in limine hearings pursuant to its
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="241"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200601/04-1145a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Brett A. With him on the briefs were Robert V. With her on the brief were John S. Snyder were on the brief for intervenor IDACORP Energy L.P. in support of respondent. Fagan were on the brief for intervenors California Independent System Operator Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company in support of respondent. This case is really just a billing dispute between the entity that runs the California electric grid and one of its customers. (2) should have permitted it 3 to increase the pre arranged limit on charges. We are without jurisdiction to address its cross petition. Petitioner IDACORP is one of several
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="240"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8DB030E8186C4EA388256E1A0082DB5E/$file/0056648.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. A seed company might pay to have its advertisement displayed when searchers enter terms related to gardening. NETSCAPE COMMUNICATIONS have its advertisements appear on the page listing the search results for gardening related terms: the ad would be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="239"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971808.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Chief Judge: This case is a study in the tensions that can beset the franchisorfranchisee relationship. Defendants maintain that the suit was erroneously certified as a class action and challenge several other legal rulings by the district court. Deprived defendants of a fair trial on the precise issue of contractual breach that is properly the focus of this case. I. The plaintiff class consisted of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="238"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan98/95-9408.man.html">UNITED STATES V. SUBA (1/9/1998, NO. 95-9408)<BR></A><BR>
Managed Risk were convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to commit offenses against the United States. Kelly was convicted of four additional counts of mail fraud (Counts 112 115). 30 32).<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="238"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan98/95-9408.man.html">UNITED STATES V. SUBA (1/9/1998, NO. 95-9408)<BR></A><BR>
Managed Risk were convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to commit offenses against the United States. Kelly was convicted of four additional counts of mail fraud (Counts 112 115). 30 32).<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="237"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTIyNjQtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2264-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who are unlicensed street vendors of clothing painted with grafitti. (2) its conclusion that remand is unnecessary to determine whether § 20 453 is a reasonable time. Because we hold that New York City's licensing requirement is a valid. We conclude that plaintiffs have not demonstrated a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="237"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7ACE985610E84B3188256ED900685F91/$file/0235805.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
WILL ACKLES. North Puget Sound Presbytery (together the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept2000/993245.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Alvin alleges that he was deprived of expected pay increases. That his reputation was damaged in the process. He also contends that his tenure in the UPitt Pharmacology Department was improperly severed and that 2 he was transferred to a tenured position in the Dental School without his consent. That he was never afforded a hearing in which he could defend himself and explain both the propriety of his conduct and the unjustness of the deprivations he alleges that he suffered. The gravamen of Alvin's suit is therefore that he was deprived of his Fourteenth Amendment right in the property of his tenure without due process of law. Named as defendants were UPitt. The District Court's opinion focused largely on the question whether the alleged incidents comprised such a significant erosion of the incidents of his tenure that he was deprived of a property interest. With respect to some of Alvin's claims that he was deprived of secretarial support. That 3 his yearly evaluations were conducted unfairly. That his tenure was transferred he adduced no evidence that he attempted to use the grievance procedure to resolve them.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/189C67912C778CAF882570F1007ABDB0/$file/0335306.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The question presented in this case is whether a non Indian plaintiff consents to the civil jurisdiction of a tribal court by SMITH v. SALISH KOOTENAI COLLEGE 107 filing claims against an Indian defendant arising out of activities within the reservation where the defendant is located. Who is not a member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr98/96-8594.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MILLS (4/10/1998, NO. 96-8594)<BR></A><BR>
Facts</CENTER> </P> <P> The Millses were officers and majority shareholders of a Medicare services provider. A reasonable jury could have found the following facts true based on the evidence. Some detail is necessary because of the harmless error and sufficiency of the evidence issues that are presented.</P> <P><CENTER>A. <EM>Background</EM></CENTER> </P> <P> The Medicare home health care system has three players. Are entitled only to return of their costs in exchange for their services. Aetna Life Insurance Company was First American's intermediary during most of the time period relevant here.</P> <P> Providers generally receive biweekly payments in an amount based on quarterly figures of how many patients the provider has visited and how much each visit cost. This true up for years as far back as 1990 was incomplete at the time of trial.</P> <P> Jack brought a businessman's outlook to this cost based system. Believing that Aetna was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/82A6A0146A3E3A1A88256C010055E84F/$file/0035839.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Mackie did not have a registered copyright on the work at the time of infringement and consequently could not take advantage of statutory damages for infringement. 1 nor did he have evidence to sustain a claim for the Symphony's direct profits. 17 U.S.C. § 412(2). He was left to pursue claims for indirect profits and actual damages. Held that any such computation of damages was far too speculative to survive a summary judgment motion. Mackie argues that the district court erred by failing to account for his subjective objections to the manner in which his work was used. BACKGROUND Mackie is a Seattle based artist who specializes in creating public works. These schematics are based on the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/973346.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The primary issue we must decide is whether the NCAA can be considered a recipient of federal funds. Smith initially attempted to amend her complaint to argue that the NCAA is subject to Title IX because it receives dues from its members universities. Which are recipients of federal funds. Those two theories are now before us in this appeal. I. BACKGROUND The NCAA is an unincorporated association comprised of public and private colleges and universities. It is responsible for promulgating rules governing all aspects of intercollegiate athletics. Among them is the Postbaccalaureate Bylaw. Smith was an undergraduate at St. She enrolled in a post graduate program at Hofstra University that was not offered at St. The District Court dismissed the Sherman Act claim and declined 3 the ground that it failed to allege that the NCAA is a recipient of federal financial assistance. Holding that it was moot. We held that her allegation that the NCAA receives dues from federally funded member institutions was sufficient to bring the NCAA
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Oct2000/991969.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These organizations are intended to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr98/96-8594.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MILLS (4/10/1998, NO. 96-8594)<BR></A><BR>
Facts</CENTER> </P> <P> The Millses were officers and majority shareholders of a Medicare services provider. A reasonable jury could have found the following facts true based on the evidence. Some detail is necessary because of the harmless error and sufficiency of the evidence issues that are presented.</P> <P><CENTER>A. <EM>Background</EM></CENTER> </P> <P> The Medicare home health care system has three players. Are entitled only to return of their costs in exchange for their services. Aetna Life Insurance Company was First American's intermediary during most of the time period relevant here.</P> <P> Providers generally receive biweekly payments in an amount based on quarterly figures of how many patients the provider has visited and how much each visit cost. This true up for years as far back as 1990 was incomplete at the time of trial.</P> <P> Jack brought a businessman's outlook to this cost based system. Believing that Aetna was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="234"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/March2003/001368p1.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Declining to overturn the jury's verdict for LePage's in its suit against 3M under Section 2 of the Sherman Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/05/962612P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unless the Concluding that MCCL has standing to challenge the regulation and the dispute is The HONORABLE RICHARD H. That fund is then regulated as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1126.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.A. was on brief. Perkins Thompson Hinckley & Keddy were on brief. Plaintiff appellants are parents of school age children who attend schools that have entered into exclusive contracts with MacLean Stevens Studios. Defendant appellees are MacLean Stevens Studios. BACKGROUND The facts necessary to decide this case are not in dispute and were aptly summarized by the district court. Inc. is a New Hampshire corporation that offers student portrait services in several New England states. Appellants are parents of school age children who attend schools that have entered into exclusive contracts with MacLean Stevens. These contracts provide that the school will receive a commission of twenty percent (20%) of the price of the portrait packages sold and designate MacLean Stevens as the exclusive provider of portraits on school property. The school portraits purchased by appellants are priced according to a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0359p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Sitting by designation. * The dismissed complaint was styled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/031566p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/de1c179a926eed70882569e70060bdb3/$FILE/0015416.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Regional Director contends that the district court abused its discretion in finding that (1) the Union did not have the support of a majority of the employees of Stephen Dunn & Associates (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTYxNjItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-6162-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant Appellee cross appeals the district court's finding that Plaintiff met its burden of production showing that the information at issue was in the public domain. Inner City Press/Community on the Move (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTYxNjItY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/05-6162-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant Appellee cross appeals the district court's finding that Plaintiff met its burden of production showing that the information at issue was in the public domain. Inner City Press/Community on the Move (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DE1C179A926EED70882569E70060BDB3/$file/0015416.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Regional Director contends that the district court abused its discretion in finding that (1) the Union did not have the support of a majority of the employees of Stephen Dunn & Associates (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/97opinions/97-1097.html">FANNING V. WEST<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTE4OTgtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-1898-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The HSF asserts that needy Holocaust survivors residing in the United States have received a disproportionately small allocation. When several class actions against leading Swiss banks were filed in the District Court and subsequently consolidated. They were subjected to persecution by the Nazi regime. Accepting and laundering illegally obtained Nazi loot and transacting in the 1 This appeal was consolidated with an appeal from the District Court's denial of attorney's fees brought by Sam uel J. Were negligent. While defendants' motions were pending. One or more mem bers of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so nu merous that joinder of all members is impracticable. (2) there are qu estion s of law or fact common to the class. (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class. Membership in all except the Slave Labor Class II is limited to members of groups targeted for Nazi persecution.3 Two of the classes are particularly relevant to this appeal.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTE4OTggdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-1898%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The HSF asserts that needy Holocaust survivors residing in the United States have received a disproportionately small allocation. When several class actions against leading Swiss banks were filed in the District Court and subsequently consolidated. They were subjected to persecution by the Nazi regime. Accepting and laundering illegally obtained Nazi loot and transacting in the 1 This appeal was consolidated with an appeal from the District Court's denial of attorney's fees brought by Sam uel J. Were negligent. While defendants' motions were pending. One or more mem bers of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so nu merous that joinder of all members is impracticable. (2) there are qu estion s of law or fact common to the class. (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class. Membership in all except the Slave Labor Class II is limited to members of groups targeted for Nazi persecution.3 Two of the classes are particularly relevant to this appeal.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6326D42C81E8088988256E5A00707A2A/$file/0015416.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Regional Director contends that the district court abused its discretion in finding that (1) the Union did not have the support of a majority of the employees of Stephen Dunn & Associates (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/6326d42c81e8088988256e5a00707a2a/$FILE/0015416.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Regional Director contends that the district court abused its discretion in finding that (1) the Union did not have the support of a majority of the employees of Stephen Dunn & Associates (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="233"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200512/04-5257a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the briefs were Gregory G. With him on the brief was Rhonda M. Peter Buscemi was on the brief for amici curiae State and Local Bar Associations in support of appellees. Babb were on the brief for amicus curiae The Conference of Chief Justices in support of appellee American Bar Association. The Bar Associations sought a declaratory judgment that the FTC's decision that attorneys engaged in the practice of law are covered by the Gramm Leach Bliley Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="232"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199909/98-3123c.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Donald C. With him on the briefs were Joe R. We find sufficient evidence in the record from which a reasonable juror could have concluded that Schaffer violated the Meat Inspection Act. Be cause consideration of whether the jury verdict has sufficient evidentiary underpinnings is necessarily fact intensive. When allegations of illegality were first levied against then Secretary of Agriculture Al phonso Michael Espy (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="232"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961814.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The victim alleges that these rapes were motivated by her assailants' discriminatory animus toward women and sues them pursuant to the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. Morrison immediately asked Brzonkala if she would have sexual intercourse with him.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="232"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199907/98-3123a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Donald C. With him on the briefs were Joe R. We find sufficient evidence in the record from which a reasonable juror could have concluded that Schaffer violated the Meat Inspection Act. Be cause consideration of whether the jury verdict has sufficient evidentiary underpinnings is necessarily fact intensive. When allegations of illegality were first levied against then Secretary of Agriculture Al phonso Michael Espy (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="232"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-3123a.html">USA V. SCHAFFER ARCHIBALD<BR></A><BR>
With him on the briefs <p> were <i>Donald C. With him on the briefs were <i>Joe R. <p> Caldwell. We find sufficient evidence in the <p> record from which a reasonable juror could have concluded <p> that Schaffer violated the Meat Inspection Act. Be <p> <p> <p> cause consideration of whether the jury verdict has sufficient <p> evidentiary underpinnings is necessarily fact intensive. When allegations of illegality <p> were first levied against then Secretary of Agriculture Al <p> phonso Michael Espy (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="232"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-3123c.html">USA V. SCHAFFER ARCHIBALD<BR></A><BR>
With him on the briefs </p> <p>were <i>Donald C. With him on the briefs were <i>Joe R. </p> <p>Caldwell. We find sufficient evidence in the </p> <p>record from which a reasonable juror could have concluded </p> <p>that Schaffer violated the Meat Inspection Act. Be </p> <p>cause consideration of whether the jury verdict has sufficient </p> <p>evidentiary underpinnings is necessarily fact intensive. When allegations of illegality </p> <p>were first levied against then Secretary of Agriculture Al </p> <p>phonso Michael Espy (". He was subsequently nominated to </p> <p>that position on December 24. </p> <p>the <i>E coli</i> outbreak was a matter of major importance within </p> <p>the Department.</p> <p>In response to the public concern. These policies were direct </p> <p>ed at preventing contamination and instructing the public as </p> <p>to the proper handling procedures for meat and poultry. </p> <p>Along with other affected companies. At which they </p> <p>were entertained by B.B. USDA officials were at vari </p> <p>ous stages in the process of developing and implementing </p> <p>initiatives that would seriously impact the business of Tyson </p> <p>Foods.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="231"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1271_021.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="230"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200611/05-5406a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Kathy S. With him on the brief were Peter D. With him on the brief was Benjamin W. Sr. were on the brief for amici curiae for U.S. Its substantive claims at least the ones making it to the appeal are that the amendment's alleged vagueness violates the First Amendment. The Secretary of Health and Human Services
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="230"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9563C14B4F8A0C1E882571ED0057B85B/$file/0470635.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We consider another piece of the California energy crisis puzzle.1 Before us are petitions for review from the California Independent System Operator (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/39B1A034FA2ADE3688256C3600526BAF/$file/0056470.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. Whether a television network's incorporation of that video into promotional materials was a fair use. It is frequently the image accompanying the story that leaves an event seared into the viewership's collective memory. CBS BROADCASTING Angeles in April 1992 are bookended by two such images: the footage of police officers beating motorist Rodney King. The latest installment in a series of suits by which the owners of the rights to that videotape have sought to ensure that renown translates into remuneration. Is an independent newsgathering organization that makes and licenses video and audio recordings of breaking news events. Who is LANS's co owner. Are known as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2002/001368.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court's charge to the jury was insufficiently specific and LePage's's damages proof was speculative.2 The district court granted 3M's motion for 1. The plaintiffs in this action are LePage's Incorporated and LePage's Management Company. Both are appellees and cross appellants. 679 to which interest was to be added. We will affirm the district court's order granting the motion for judgment as a matter of law with respect to the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan2001/003307.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
1993 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0C28F08F05E53FEA88256C310058FEB4/$file/0056448.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction over its timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Which is now owned by Rose Lee LLC (collectively
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr97/96-2227.opa.html">TALLAHASSEE MEM'L REG'L MED. CTR. V. COOK<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Tallahassee Mem'l Reg'l Med. Senior District Judge.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> This is a Boren Amendment challenge under 42 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2294A.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who was several months pregnant. We are issuing this revised opinion without additional oral argument. 2 No. 02 2294 ment agency and was assigned to work for ARC Community Services. She was left with the impression that ARC would not hire her while she was pregnant. She did not return ARC's calls after she left to have her baby. Incorporated (ARC) is a notfor profit corporation that serves women involved with the criminal justice system. Women who have drug problems. Women who are pregnant. Who was visibly pregnant and due to deliver in March 2000. That a temporarily assigned employee (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1898.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellee. London was sentenced to 188 months' imprisonment and fined $500. Some checks were neither made out by nor payable to the bookmakers (or bookmakers' agents) who were cashing them. Others were made out either to fictitious names or to real persons or entities who were not to receive the funds. See 31 U.S.C. 5313(a) (requiring financial institutions to report currency transactions in the manner prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury) and 31 C.F.R. 103.11(i)(3) (check casher is a financial institution) and 31 C.F.R. 103.22(a)(1) (financial institutions must report all currency transactions involving more than $10. London's operating procedures were a boon to his bookmaker customers. He also helped run one Dominic Isabella's bookmaking operation while Isabella was ill. Although London had instructed his customers to make certain that each check was for less than $10. London did cash individual checks that were in amounts greater than $10. There was testimonial evidence tending to indicate that London was aware of the statutory and regulatory reporting requirements during the period in which he failed to file any CTRs with the IRS.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr97/96-2227.opa.html">TALLAHASSEE MEM'L REG'L MED. CTR. V. COOK<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Tallahassee Mem'l Reg'l Med. Senior District Judge.<p> <p> PER CURIAM:<p> <p> This is a Boren Amendment challenge under 42 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216283.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It assumed that such organizations would be filing with the FEC under the campaign finance laws for the obvious reason that the language for both coverage by the IRS and coverage by the FEC were the same`influencing an election'. Consequently it was assumed that section 527 didn't need to require disclosure with the IRS. Since the FEC disclosure was considerably more complete. 2 howe ver. Filed this suit in federal district court seeking both a declaration that the provisions were unconstitutional and an injunctio n agains t their enfo rcemen t. Whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="228"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021005.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was not liable for post petition interest on his student loan debt. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Were mailed to Sallie Mae at a general address Banks provided. Were required under federal regulations governing federally guaranteed student loans. This was the proper allocation of payments a creditor receives on a defaulted student loan. Holding the confirmation order is res judicata. The court agreed with ECMC that post petition interest should not have been ordered discharged absent an adversary hearing in which Banks proved undue hardship. The court also noted Banks' failure to initiate an adversary proceeding which would have provided such notice. Which is required under the Bankruptcy Code and Rules. Whether a Chapter 13 plan provision required an adversary proceeding and whether the confirmation process violated a creditor's due process rights are both legal questions we review de novo. A. Student loans are nondischargeable in bankruptcy unless the Debtor can prove excepting the debt from discharge would impose an undue hardship.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="227"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200307/02-1308a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="227"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-8060.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
€the€City€would€be€entitled€to€qualified€immunity€onĐ
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="226"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/031520P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Arguing that the strict liability award was not permissible under Minnesota common law. That the MERA claim is moot because Viacom has entered an administrative consent order concerning the contaminated property. That the attorneys' fee award was excessive. That the prejudgment interest was excessive because Viacom had offered to settle the case. A portion of Westinghouse's business there was the repair of transformers that were insulated with Inerteen. Chlorobenzenes were used as a solvent to thin the PCBs down to a usable consistency. It was recognized that PCBs were potential carcinogens and that they were accumulating. PCBs and chlorobenzenes are classified as hazardous substances under MERLA and CERCLA. Sites contaminated with hazardous substances are subject to remediation under federal and state law. The purpose of the study was to ascertain whether PCBs were leaking from those sites and migrating off Westinghouse property. Whether the PCBs were likely to be detected by others and traced back to Westinghouse.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="226"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D9BE31CB175DCC2688256CC6007B29E2/$file/0116437.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the schools are supported by a measurable amount of public funds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reverse. I. Background PLANS is a non profit California corporation whose members include taxpayers residing in both the Sacramento City Unified School District (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="226"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0264p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the activity that Mezibov claims subjected him to retaliation is not a constitutionally protected activity. Even if it were. A criminal defense attorney of ordinary firmness would not have been chilled from 1 No. 03 3973 Mezibov v. BACKGROUND Mezibov is an attorney licensed to practice in the state of Ohio. Allen was the Hamilton County Prosecutor during Dr. Mezibov] is a man who doesn't try too many cases and the verdict shows that. If I were Dr. In consumer law we have a saying let the buyer beware. You ought to have a saying. That's something that in all likelihood we would have entertained. Here's a man that now is going to lose his medical license. Who may very well have been able to work with us and escape prosecution. When my ethics are questioned and when I'm called unethical. You're gonna get it back and you're gonna get it back with both barrels because I have to. They try cases from the testimony that comes from the witness stand and the law that is given from the judge. I have to say had this matter been handled in the normal fashion by a defense lawyer who was interested in his client's best interest rather than having a political show trial.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="226"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2199.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant. <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/11/97-2327.htm">97-2327 -- AMIGOS BRAVOS V. MOLYCORP INC. -- 11/13/1998<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> <center>I.</center> <p> Defendant Molycorp Inc. operates a molybdenum mine in New Mexico that discharges pollutants into the Red River. The discharge of pollutants from a point source<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200302/02-5037a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/06/98-3049a.htm">98-3049A -- ANDERSEN V. UNIPAC-NEBHELP -- 06/07/1999<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/06/98-3049.htm">98-3049 -- ANDERSEN V. UNIPAC-NEBHELP -- 06/07/1999<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/02-5342a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/03-1025a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//feb2003/00-14413.op2.html">ATLANTA JOURNAL AND CONSTITUTION V. CITY OF ATLANTA DEP'T OF AVIATION (2/28/2003, NO. 00-14413)<BR></A><BR>
Is permitted to assess profit conscious fees on expressive activities for use of distribution facilities in a non public forum. The district court found that the assessment of any fee in excess of administrative costs was contrary to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and precedent in this circuit under <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/feb2003/00-14413.op2.html">ATLANTA JOURNAL AND CONSTITUTION V. CITY OF ATLANTA DEP'T OF AVIATION (2/28/2003, NO. 00-14413)<BR></A><BR>
Is permitted to assess profit conscious fees on expressive activities for use of distribution facilities in a non public forum. The district court found that the assessment of any fee in excess of administrative costs was contrary to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and precedent in this circuit under <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTQwODQ2X29wbi5wZGY=/03-40846_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is substituted as Respondent in this case. 1 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 29 30 The New York Public Interest Research Group. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661d(b)(2) and 7607(b)(1). The public have easy access to a source's obligations under the Act. The EPA's Regulations explain what it intended: [R]egulations are often written to cover broad source categories. EPA often has no easy way to establish whether a source is in compliance with regulations under the Act. The title V permit program will enable the source. The public to understand better the requirements to which the source is subject. Whether the source is meeting those requirements. The program will also greatly strengthen EPA's ability to implement the Act and enhance air quality planning and control. Which is somewhat complicated. The denial of a petition is then subject to judicial review. The Act also contains a grandmothering clause: Polluting sources in existence in 1977 were not required initially to comply with emission limitations.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1847.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Posner and Rubin & Rudman were on consolidated brief for petitioner Town of Norwood. Were on consolidated brief for respondent. Whittaker and Winston & Strawn were on brief for intervenor New England Power Company. Stever and Dewey Ballantine LLP were on brief for intervenor USGen New England. I. THE HISTORY Our history of this case is drawn primarily from the administrative record. New England Power is a subsidiary of New England Electric System. Wholesale sales in interstate commerce are subject to regulation by FERC under the Federal Power Act. Those charged by Mass Electric to its business and residential customers) are subject to state regulation. Electricity sales have been regulated on the familiar public utility model: the rates have been set forth in filed tariffs. Unreasonable or unduly discriminatory rates have been forbidden. The suppliers are vertically integrated and are engaged in electricity generation. Legislators and regulators have over the last 25 years sought to introduce a greater measure of competition into the electric power industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTMwMjctY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-3027-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Judge) granting the defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint on the ground that the defendants are absolutely immune from the instant suit. We are asked to circumscribe the scope of the absolute immunity we have previously extended to so called self regulatory organizations (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1826.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.A. was on brief. Were on brief. Yesterday's Children is a non profit corporation which operates. Evidence was heard in October 1993 by an Administrative Law Judge. His decision was reviewed by a three member panel of the NLRB. The Board reversed the ALJ and found that the employer's actions were illegal because the conduct of the two employees was protected by 7 of the Act. The facility's name was changed from Agape House to Birchwood Living Center. 2 2 issued two written reprimands and then discharged. I. The facts are now largely undisputed. During the first half of 1992 Laura Cunningham was a nursing assistant at Agape House. Smith was a charge nurse2 there. Jeffrey Cake was hired as the Executive Director of Yesterday's Children and the Administrator of Agape House. It appears that the charge nurse is the head nurse on a given shift. That is. The person at the facility who is primarily responsible for the medical care of the residents. 3 3 Leavitt. Leavitt is alternately described in the record as the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTMwMjctY3YgdyAybmQgRXJyYXRhLnBkZg==/04-3027-cv%20w%202nd%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Sitting by designation. 1 2 on the ground that the defendants are absolutely immune from the instant suit. We are asked to circumscribe the scope of the absolute immunity we have previously extended to so called self regulatory organizations (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTMwMjcgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-3027%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Judge) granting the defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint on the ground that the defendants are absolutely immune from the instant suit. We are asked to circumscribe the scope of the absolute immunity we have previously extended to so called self regulatory organizations (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/August2004/031626p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because that denial was predicated on legal error and improper findings of evidentiary deficiency. I. Camphill Soltane is a non profit organization.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200005/99-1183a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Howard A. Brenner and Katherine Connor Linton were on the brief of amici curiae Members of Congress. Lorence was on the brief of amici curiae Evangelical Association of Pastors & Layman. With him on the brief were Christopher J. I
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E60C173698EE152F88256D1A0076F5CD/$file/0055993.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is withdrawn and replaced with the attached opinion. The petition for rehearing and the suggestion for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Gospel Missions argues that the City is in contempt of an injunction against the City's enforcement of certain provisions of the pre amended version of that law and that the threatened enforcement of new provisions in the law would violate Gospel Missions' First Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Professional fundraisers are those who solicit charitable contributions on behalf of others for gain. Gospel Missions is a non profit religious corporation that provides ministry and shelter to homeless individuals. Five of its properties were raided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department because the Sheriff's Department believed Gospel Missions might be violating City and County charitable solicitation laws. (2) that numerous provisions applying to professional fundraisers in the Amended Ordinance are either in contempt of the GMA I injunction or are unconstitutional.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="222"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1930.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Brenner</U> and <U>Nixon Peabody LLP</U> were on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="222"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1620.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Of counsel on the brief was Alan H. With him on the brief were Julian D. Of counsel were Ross R. With him on the brief were Ronald P. This invention includes both
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/75F3A9963D5C50F188256E5A00707C2B/$file/9935165.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
FACTS The District has adopted a policy for use of school facilities that provides as follows: It is the opinion of the Board that the school district buildings shall be considered a community center. This policy is in conformity with state statutes permitting the use of school property
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-1127a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lemly was on brief. Were on brief. The Board held that the Opera's refusal to bargain with the American Guild of Musical Artists (Union) after the Union was certified as the collective bargaining representa tive of an allegedly appropriate unit of the Opera's employ ees constituted an unfair labor practice (ULP) under section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act (Act). It contests the Board's conclusion that the Opera's auxiliary choristers are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9421CF93EA06677788256AA1005BF5BF/$file/9935165.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
FACTS The District has adopted a policy for use of school facilities that provides as follows: It is the opinion of the Board that the school district buildings shall be considered a community center. This policy is in conformity with state statutes permitting the use of school property
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/92-5123c.html">SANJOUR WILLIAM V. EPA<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-1127a.html">SEATTLE OPERA V. NLRB<BR></A><BR>
Lemly was on brief. <span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-3766_019.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jean Kikson is the inventor of Eldfast. Eldfast was manufactured and marketed. Where Kikson's profit margin on sales of Eldfast was in the neighborhood of 80 2 No. 06 3766 percent. UL is the biggest player in the U.S. safety testing industry. The broadest and most common is the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2309.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Either pays the subsidy to the service provider directly (if the approved schools have not already paid in full) or reimburses the schools for part of the cost (if the projects have been approved and the schools have paid the service provider for the work). Who in turn must pass the funds through to the school.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI0NjYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2466-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The District Court allocated funds for the benefit of needy identifiable Holocaust survivors and declined to allocate funds to a trust that would have provided grants to disability oriented. The DRA argued that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI0NjYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2466-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The District Court allocated funds for the benefit of needy identifiable Holocaust survivors and declined to allocate funds to a trust that would have provided grants to disability oriented. The DRA argued that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr2002/01-14431.opn.html">MEIER V. SUN INT'L HOTELS, LTD. (4/19/2002, NO. 01-14431)<BR></A><BR>
Plaintiffs were vacationing on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Victor was struck by a commercial motorboat and sustained massive injuries. Victor was airlifted to Miami. He survived but lost his arm and was permanently disfigured. </P> <P> The Meiers subsequently filed this diversity action<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-5039.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Nancie G. With him on the brief were Kelly A. Set forth here only those facts that are necessary for the resolution of the appeal. The Normans are real estate developers who. Identifying 41 conditions that the developer was required to satisfy before final approval would issue. One of those conditions required the developer to submit to the council
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr2002/01-14431.opn.html">MEIER V. SUN INT'L HOTELS, LTD. (4/19/2002, NO. 01-14431)<BR></A><BR>
Plaintiffs were vacationing on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Victor was struck by a commercial motorboat and sustained massive injuries. Victor was airlifted to Miami. He survived but lost his arm and was permanently disfigured. </P> <P> The Meiers subsequently filed this diversity action<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/04/97-3011.htm">97-3011 -- HEARTSPRINGS INC. V. HEARTSPRING INC. -- 04/20/1998<BR></A><BR>
Defendant Heartspring runs a school in which physically disabled children are taught basic life skills such as dressing. Plaintiff claims defendant's use of the name
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="219"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/62A9E3308338CD0488256D860078FD24/$file/0156595.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Without first considering whether the copyright and non copyright claims were related. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. As both of the defendants' claims are meritorious. The plaintiffs are the Traditional Cat Association incorporated in the State of Washington and Diana L. After a number of claims were voluntarily dismissed. The only remaining copyright claims were resolved when the district court granted the defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) on the plaintiffs' claims for copyright infringement. Citing their successful defense 1 The jury was unable to reach a verdict on the plaintiffs' claim for conversion and the defendants' claim for defamation. The district court ruled that the defendants were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="219"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A834291C04DDDBA7882572F2007B2FA2/$file/0476131.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is required to allow anyone to transmit power over these lines. DWR is the state agency responsible for the control and management of much of California's water supply. DWR is considered a third party generator. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 825l(b) over this petition for review of an order issued by FERC. We deny DWR's petition for review because its various claims of error are unfounded. FERC's decision to categorize the facilities as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="219"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-2251.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With whom Mary Jo Mendez and Rosalinda Pesquera were on brief. Odell & Calabria were on brief. We conclude that while Title VII's employment related shelter might in certain circumstances extend to a person who is a partner in a law firm. Is not entitled to such shelter here. The appellant was mitted a non proprietary
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="219"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1098.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on brief. <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-4316.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Have been audited by the Internal Revenue Service virtually. Every year since Richard Nixon was President. Kanter was a wellknown and accomplished tax and estate lawyer. Among Kanter's clients was the Pritzker family of Hyatt Corporation fame. Kanter was also an accomplished businessman. Was an expert on the subject of trusts and estate planning. His estate was subsequently substituted as the principal party to this litigation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001498.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Benjamin Cotten and Ronald Charnock were longtime friends and business associates. Is due to our relationship.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19948607.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Are former students Honorable George C. The appellees are: the Secretary of the United States Department the Student Loan Higher Education of Education. Assistance Corporation (GHEAC). and the Georgia Higher Education This lawsuit is based upon the appellants' contention that the school fraudulently induced them to enroll in the school and to enter into federally guaranteed student loan contracts. Appellants were left with several thousand dollars in student loan debt. Financed their attendance at the school.1 The GSL program was designed to encourage private lenders to provide educational loans to students. The federal government provides private commercial lenders with a guaranty that a student's educational loan will be repaid even if the student defaults. The institution of higher education ordinarily is not a party to the loan agreement and has no role in the transaction other than to provide the lender with a statement of the student's estimated cost of attendance and financial assistance needs. Provides the private lender with a guaranty that the loan will be repaid even if the student defaults.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul1998/98a1908p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. I. The underlying facts of this case are undisputed and are comprehensively set forth in the district court's published opinion. Is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dean Foods. Which was damaged as a result. There is no dispute that because Dean Dairy issued monitoring reports to Union Township on a monthly basis. The United States moved for and was granted summary judgment on the issue of Dean Dairy's liability for the CWA violations. The action against the Municipal Authority of Union Township was settled and therefore the Authority is not a party to this appeal. Its appeal is limited to the amount of the civil penalty imposed. The district court found these efforts were belated and ineffective. It was only the construction of a $865. Important to the issue before us is that Dean Dairy considered various options to meet its permit obligations but.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2457FDB8B7C15C2688256A9C005962B2/$file/9935936.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were not eligible for pension benefits under the NWP plans. I. BACKGROUND NWP is a private corporation formed by a group of physicians to provide medical services to members of the Kaiser Permanente Medicare Care Program (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/86673F2D6ED08BEF882572920003565D/$file/0635781.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Requesting that the court strike or correct portions of the opinion is construed as a petition for panel rehearing and is ordered filed. Is LANDS COUNCIL v. Is amended as follows: On slip opinion page 1951. The petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. Which are environmental organizations. Which are a forestry advocacy organization and logging companies. Because trees that are damaged or destroyed by fire depreciate in value quickly. Danger trees are trees that present a risk to public safety. Such as trees that are likely to fall on a road or building. 1 LANDS COUNCIL v. MARTIN 2377 and Sun Salvage Timber Sales are located in the most severely burned areas of the forest. Arguing that the district court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction.2 STANDARDS OF REVIEW A preliminary injunction is appropriate when a plaintiff demonstrates
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4D34EE39602972AC88257280007F3DC7/$file/0635781.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which are environmental organizations. Which are a forestry advocacy organization and logging companies. Danger trees are trees that present a risk to public safety. Such as trees that are likely to fall on a road or building. 1 1944 LANDS COUNCIL v. Because trees that are damaged or destroyed by fire depreciate in value quickly. Sun Salvage Timber Sales are located in the most severely burned areas of the forest. Arguing that the district court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction.2 STANDARDS OF REVIEW A preliminary injunction is appropriate when a plaintiff demonstrates
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1BA7E556D075EA0488256E5A00707C12/$file/9935936.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were not eligible for pension benefits under the NWP plans. I. BACKGROUND NWP is a private corporation formed by a group of physicians to provide medical services to members of the Kaiser Permanente Medicare Care Program (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B69E06DD4D1F3D3288256BE30081B1FE/$file/0056970.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was bound by the forum selection clause in the bill of lading issued by the ship's owner to the NVOCC. (2) whether the NVOCC was entitled to take advantage of a statutory limitation of liability by having given the cargo's owner a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114431.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs were vacationing on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. Victor was struck by a commercial motorboat and sustained massive injuries. Victor was airlifted to Miami. He survived but lost his arm and was permanently disfigured. Plaintiffs claimed that the Sun Defendants were partially responsible for the motorboat and. The motorboat was owned and operated by a It is undisputed that the district court had original subject matter jurisdiction through diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The Plaintiffs are citizens of Utah and the Defendants are foreign Bahamian corporations. The Plaintiffs requested that the court dismiss the Sheraton claims without prejudice in order to pursue this appeal. 3 2 1 Bahamian water sports vendor conducting business at the Atlantis Hotel and Casino (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19944323.OPA.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As they are partners in South Florida Cogeneration Associates. Senior Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the denial of a motion for summary judgment by the district court. 1 Two questions are presented: first. Whether a public utility is immune from antitrust liability under the state action doctrine of Parker v. The denial of a motion for summary judgment under the state action immunity doctrine is immediately appealable under the collateral order exception to the final judgment rule. The appeals were then consolidated by order of this court as they both involve the same parties and the same issues. Are taken from the same summary judgment order. 1 * 63 S.Ct. 307. Whether lobbying of a county legislative body by the utility is protected from antitrust liability under the Noerr/Pennington doctrine. The district court found that the utility was not entitled to immunity from antitrust sanctions for its actions. The denial by the district court of the utility's Cogeneration is the production of electricity and useful thermal energy at a single facility.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9C44E8CD02A01D038825700C007E70EE/$file/0056970.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This case is before us for a second time.1 In our previous opinion. We held: With respect to the in rem action: The forumselection clause in the Hyundai bill of lading is enforceable against Plaintiff. Glory Express is entitled to the limitations on liability provided in 46 U.S.C. app. § 1304(5). The Supreme Court criticized our
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="217"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199905/98-5502a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were James M. With her on the brief were Wilma A. With him on the brief were Lloyd N. Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the judgment of the district court dismissing a complaint filed against the National Science Foundation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="217"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-5083.html">LITTLE SIX, INC V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
For plaintiffs appellants.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="217"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-5428a.html">STDNT LOAN MKT ASSN V. RILEY RICHARD<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="217"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-1429.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant. Was on brief for appellee. This case is the sequel to United States v. Woodward claims that the evidence was insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on any of the four counts. Woodward was first elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1977. He was assigned to the Joint Committee on Insurance (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="216"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19979053.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Alleging that the United States is breaching various written and oral covenants made in connection with its purchase of land formerly owned by the Trust. I. The Wassaw Island Trust was originally formed in 1930 for the purpose of preserving Wassaw Island. These agreements were not memorialized in a formal written contract signed prior to the Trust's delivery of the deed. It expressly recited that the Trust was conveying the land to the Nature Conservancy
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="216"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan96/94-3145.opa.html">LEVINE V. CENTRAL FLA. MED. AFFILS.<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Levine v. The four defendants are Healthchoice. The incidents giving rise to the lawsuit are Dr. Because we conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact about Dr. That the defendants are accordingly entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The following is a summary of the facts as viewed in the light most favorable to Dr. Levine is an internist. Was granted. Provisional staff privileges at the ORHS hospitals.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="216"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan96/94-3145.opa.html">LEVINE V. CENTRAL FLA. MED. AFFILS.<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Levine v. The four defendants are Healthchoice. The incidents giving rise to the lawsuit are Dr. Because we conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact about Dr. That the defendants are accordingly entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The following is a summary of the facts as viewed in the light most favorable to Dr. Levine is an internist. Was granted. Provisional staff privileges at the ORHS hospitals.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="215"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/96-4153.htm">96-4153 -- VIERNOW V. EURIPIDES DEVELOPMENT CORP. -- 09/14/1998<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="215"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1641.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A1EB78DA8B420AB882571C6007C3BDA/$file/0435984.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-8038.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The defendants promoted investments in which investors were promised enormous returns (in excess of 6. Claim there was insufficient evidence to sustain his other convictions. She also claims in supplemental briefing that her sentence is improper under United States v. Naylor was a sixty nine year old resident of Cheyenne. Which were supposedly authentic and worth billions of dollars. Which Naylor was to use for expenses associated with bringing the projects to fruition. B. The Gold Certificates Naylor's representations as to how he intended to realize the promised exorbitant returns were inconsistent. 000 metric ton certificate The first certificate was purportedly redeemable for 1. A government expert witness testified that legitimate mid or medium term notes are debt obligations issued by banks or bank holding companies that are ordinarily repaid in ten years and issued into the market by brokers or sold privately to large pension funds. Naylor's testimony did not explain how the alleged programs operated other than stating that they
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI1MTEtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-2511-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Three other appeals from the District Court's allocation and distribution orders were argued in tandem with appellants' one brought by. The District Court entered a 2 As we have previously explained. The settlement agreement defines
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/01/01-7160.htm">01-7160 -- PITTSBURG COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 11 V. KPP SUPPLY CO. -- 01/29/2003<BR></A><BR>
We affirm. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI1MTEtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2511-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Three other appeals from the District Court's allocation and distribution orders were argued in tandem with appellants' one brought by. The District Court entered a 2 As we have previously explained. The settlement agreement defines
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200003/98-1415a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Clark Evans Downs. With him on the brief were Jay L. APX is a public utility subject to regulation under the Federal Power Act.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI1MTEtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-2511-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Three other appeals from the District Court's allocation and distribution orders were argued in tandem with appellants' one brought by. The District Court entered a 2 As we have previously explained. The settlement agreement defines
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="213"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb1995/94a0966p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are presented with the question whether defendants' acts. We must determine what showing is required for plaintiffs to meet the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1998/98a2012p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This appeal is from a decision in an adversary proceeding brought by plaintiff appellant/cross appellee Committee of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="210"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FADCFEB6A80E352688256C3E005866EC/$file/0115159.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
VENEMAN is substituted for her predecessor DAN GLICKMAN. NORTON is substituted for her predecessor BRUCE BABBITT. The action is a challenge to Proposition 4. Five different groups of parties are involved in this litigation. The state parties and sponsors appeal the district court's summary judgment granting declaratory relief to the Audubon plaintiffs on the ground that relevant portions of Proposition 4 are preempted by the federal Endangered Species Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="210"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EAEDD61359E4AF0A88256C8700814318/$file/0115159.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
VENEMAN is substituted for her predecessor DAN GLICKMAN. NORTON is substituted for her predecessor BRUCE BABBITT. Is hereby amended as follows: 1. 2. It is not preempted by the ESA.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/99-1020a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012021.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Section 1 the status is changed from
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1313a.html">DEL CMERCL PROP INC V. CMSNR IRS<BR></A><BR>
Fuller argued the cause for appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E9F3667478A9A52988256DF100006E1D/$file/0156380o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The majority of the active judges have voted to deny rehearing the matter en banc. The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Judge Gould's dissent from denial of en banc rehearing is filed concurrently herewith. I remain convinced that the panel majority's interpretation of the statutory immunity found in 47 U.S.C. § 230(c) is wrong in light of Congress's intent. Will needlessly harm persons defamed on the Internet. That the communication must have been
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AE0A858C82A2EA8F88256D4E007A736C/$file/0156380.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: There is no reason inherent in the technological features of cyberspace why First Amendment and defamation law should apply differently in cyberspace than in the brick and mortar world. Has chosen for policy reasons to immunize from liability for defamatory or obscene speech
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/07/973207P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Excess property is essentially personal property that has outlived its usefulness to a federal agency.2
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-1439.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Mena was shot and killed. Although there was an initial cover up. The fact that the SWAT team had raided the wrong house was anonymously leaked to the media and publicized in November 1999. Kearney investigated and concluded that Mena had been unarmed and that the SWAT team members had initially shot him solely (1) This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent. We recite the facts as alleged in the complaint and assume for purposes of this appeal that they are true. Was essentially ignored. (2) his
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021459.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The court also held that the alleged misrepresentations and omissions were not material as a matter of law and that certain of the alleged misrepresentations were mere puffery. Inc. was created by Congress through the Energy Policy Act of 1992 primarily to provide uranium enrichment services to transform natural uranium into enriched uranium to be used as fuel for nuclear reactors to produce electricity. Pursuant to which USEC was obligated to purchase from Russia certain components of materials derived from the highly enriched uranium contained in dismantled nuclear weapons of the former Soviet Union. Which was held during the period from July 23 through July 28. The prospectus issued in connection with the IPO stated that USEC was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/nov96/95-3134.wpd.html">CHAMBERS V. FAMILY HEALTH PLAN CORP.<BR></A><BR>
The parties agreed to have a federal magistrate judge hear the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm. Is a beneficiary of a prepaid healthcare plan provided by FHP (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D0555E2F83B8D3CA88256C5B000261BB/$file/0056446.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The District Court for the Southern District of California agreed with BSI that the property in question was not an asset of the judgment debtor FLATOW v. Was killed in an explosion when the bus in which she was traveling collided with a van loaded with explosives. See 28 U.S.C. § 1605 statutory note.3 This provision is commonly referred to as the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3601_012.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022069.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
1 seeking a declaration that Travelers was obligated to participate in the defense of Nissan Computer Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-2546.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Calabria</U> was on brief for appellee.</FONT></P> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1811.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on brief for appellee. Judgment was entered in the United States District Court for the District of Maine following a jury trial. The tobacco was transported 3 3 surreptitiously into Canada through the Passamaquoddy Reservation in Pleasant Point. Passamaquoddy Tribe member Anthony Stanley testified that on April 15 he was called to discuss some tobacco business by Beverly Pierro. Who was then serving as chief of police of the Passamaquoddy Tribe (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="207"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/96opinions/96-1509.html">SIGMA CORP ET AL V. THE UNITED STATES<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="206"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1313a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were David L. With him on the brief was Jonathan S. The United States all of which were related to each other and to Delcom Financial. The final transaction was a $14 million loan from Del Investments Netherlands B.V. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="205"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0378p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Claiming that the cooperatives (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/00/00-4167.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was insufficient. It held that the proper interest rate was the prime rate plus a risk adjustment of 1.5%. SCS Credit Corporation was the only creditor to object to confirmation of the Tills' amended Chapter 13 plan. SCS is a secured creditor and holds a security interest in an automobile. The vehicle was valued at $4. SCS is a sub prime lender. The Tills are such borrowers. The interest rate on the Tills' loan was 21%. A bankruptcy plan will be confirmed over the objection of a secured creditor if the creditor retains its lien on the collateral. The creditor receives cash payments over the course of the plan that are equivalent to the value of the collateral on the plan's effective date. The interest rate it would have No. 00 4167 3 earned if SCS had foreclosed on the vehicle. Both witnesses testified that SCS had received 21% interest on all of its loans because borrowers like the Tills are poor credit risks. SCS reasserted its argument that it was entitled to 21%. The court held that the bankruptcy court had misread Koopmans and that Koopmans required 4 No. 00 4167 that SCS receive the interest rate it would have earned on a new loan financed by the proceeds from the sale of its collateral.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-2328.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Glasson & Dineen was on brief for appellant Guadalupe Rojas. Were on brief for appellee Cynthia A. Cobleigh were on brief for appellee Salvation Army. BACKGROUND BACKGROUND The following facts are not disputed. Rojas was a paid employee of the Salvation Army. Rojas was not. Was not required to be. The DET found that Rojas was ineligible because her former employer. Was exempt from contributing to Rhode Island's unemployment insurance scheme under sections 28 42 8(4) and 28 44 11 of the Rhode Island General Laws.1 Pursuant to the exemption for religious employers under section 28 42 8(4). No taxes were withheld from Rojas's wages by the Salvation Army. Her income was not reported to the DET. The DET's denial of benefits was upheld by a DET referee after a hearing. Later the referee's determination was upheld by the DET Board of Review. The DET determined that the Salvation Army is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-4043.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This appeal is the result of certain Utah optometrists' decade long effort to become panel providers for the largest managed health care company in the state. The Plaintiffs The Plaintiffs are forty nine optometrists who practice along Utah's Wasatch Front and their affiliated professional organizations. Have been permitted under Utah law to perform the full scope of non surgical eye care (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4CC13E6C46DD0B0C88256C0C007E8659/$file/0035667.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A cornerstone of the Clean Water Act is that the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200512742.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="203"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3554_019.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Peterson and Knox (her husband) were the organizers and lead conspirators in a plan to defraud the Ameritech company between September of 1999 to early May of 2000. Peterson served as manager of Ameritech's Business Communication Services Desktop Support Division and was responsible for supplying laptop computers exclusively to Ameritech personnel at various locations within the United States for use in conducting Ameritech business. It is interesting to note that Michael Knox. Both Peterson and Knox had agreed and were obligated to follow Ameritech's Code of Business Conduct. No. 05 3554 3 which required that employees are not allowed to use corporate property for personal use nor engage in any form of fraud. The orders were approved without hesitation. Peterson's department was solely responsible for the delivery of the computers to authorized Ameritech employees. Fraudulently indicating on shipping labels that the packages were destined for Ameritech employees. Fasanella would hold the packages until Peterson was able to pick them up.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="201"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May1995/95a1043p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is precluded from relitigating the issue of its successor liability for Raymark's asbestos liabilities. We conclude that Raytech is collaterally estopped from relitigating this issue. Will. Was named as the defendant in thousands of personal injury complaints around the country.[fn1] As a result of this burgeoning asbestos litigation. Schmoll and Raymark/Raytech agreed to submit to the district court the question whether Raytech was a successor in liability to Raymark Industries. The district court found that Raytech was a successor in liability to Raymark Industries for Raymark's production. That Raytech was legally responsible for Raymark's strict liability torts. Raytech then filed this adversary proceeding seeking a declaratory judgment that it is not liable for the asbestos related torts of Raymark. The adversary proceeding was transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The case was then transferred. The district court certified for immediate appeal the Connecticut district court's ruling that Raytech was estopped from denying successor liability.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042849p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The survey itself was designed to be voluntary and anonymous. Survey results were designed to be and actually were released only in the aggregate with no identifying information. We will affirm. The Parties Plaintiffs are Carol Nunn. We will refer to the student Plaintiffs as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-7134a.html">MAHONEY WILLIAM V. RADIO FREE EUROPE<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4260.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that 1) prospective intervenors do not have to establish their own standing. 2) SUWA is entitled to intervene as a matter of right. (1) This court granted SUWA's motion to expedite this appeal. <hr> I.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200507/03-7195a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the briefs were Robert J. With him on the brief was Fritz Mulhauser. Circuit Judge: We remanded the record because it was uncertain whether the First Amendment issue in this case was moot. 396 F.3d 416 (D.C. We will therefore proceed to the merits. I. The following recitation of facts is drawn from our earlier opinion. The Commission retained ownership of the decorated donkeys and elephants and planned to sell them at auction after the exhibit ended. 3 The written announcement stated that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1254.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Raulerson & Middleton were on brief. P.A. were on brief. The seeds for the underlying litigation were sown when the late Howard Phillips (Phillips or the testator) bequeathed all the stock in a profitable Florida based real estate development company. I. BACKGROUND Phillips resided in Florida and executed his will there. His will directed that the stock be offered in turn to a series of family sponsored charitable foundations. The testator was an alumnus of Exeter and a stalwart supporter of his alma mater. His will obligated the Fund. Phillips's will further provided that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1234.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Judgment for Medtronic was granted on Colorado Visionary's promissory estoppel claim after a bench trial. Final judgment was entered and the appeal therefrom is timely.(1) We first hold that the district court erred in concluding that Colorado Visionary's negligent misrepresentation claim could not be maintained under the circumstances of the case. Because Colorado Visionary was entitled to a jury trial on that claim. Because any explicit findings of the jury and any necessary inferences from a general verdict would have been binding on the district court in the bench trial of the promissory estoppel claim. Must be determined in light of the specific facts and circumstances as they are finally determined. I THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND Only a very general overview of the background of this litigation is necessary for the context of our analysis of the legal issues involved in this appeal. The relevant facts are stated in the light most favorable to Colorado Visionary. Plaintiff Colorado Visionary Academy is a charter school.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/02/951360P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is locally operated and staffed by local employees. Is subject to HUD approval. Which was reviewed by HUD. The eligibility technician is identified as the individual who determines whether a particular housing applicant meets federally imposed threshold criteria. Hang screened applications to verify whether persons were initially qualified or entitled to any preferences for low income housing. HUD did not have any direct role in paying Hang or conducting his If an applicant qualifies for a preference. He will receive more desirable placement on the waiting list for federally subsidized housing. 2 2 performance reviews. Used his bilingual skills to prey on housing applicants who were also immigrants from Southeast Asian countries. Hang apparently communicated to these unfortunate and vulnerable victims that they would have to pay him money in order to obtain federally subsidized housing. Was taking some sort of medication. When police officials notified the court that Hang's friends and relatives were terrorizing certain individuals who had testified against the convicted felon.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Feb2004/022932np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is an appeal by Plaintiff. Because the payments were made when Color Tile was insolvent and the payments left Color Tile with unreasonably small capital or caused Color Tile to incur debts beyond its ability to pay. The Depository Trust Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200701/05-1231a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Glen L. With her on the brief were John S. Gardiner were on the brief for intervenors California Independent System Operator Corporation. While non firm service permits the utility to cut service when there is not enough excess capacity.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTYzMTNfb3BuLnBkZg==/02-6313_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
(3) should have allowed the jury to consider punitive damages. That action was settled through a consent judgment. Who is deaf. Which is transmitted over telephone lines to a relay service operator who reads the message to the person on the other end of the call. Which is transmitted back to the screen of [the] deaf individual's TDD.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9FC27E3948AED01988256E290070C525/$file/0215872.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: At page 1183. Bonnette and TorresLopez
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/94D5D6521A8F2F5188256DA2005AA509/$file/0215872.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We must decide whether and in what circumstances contracted service workers should be considered in determining whether an employer is exempt from the requirements of the Family Medical Leave Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/044502p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
PHA was obliged to construct a number of public housing units with accessibility features for the mobility impaired and to lease these units to the appropriate persons having the requisite disability. Appeals were filed after the entry of each order. The threshold question we must answer is whether entry of final judgment the District Court's August 29. Concluding that the orders from which the instant appeals were taken are not final and appealable orders. Inc. is a federally funded social service and advocacy non profit corporation that is mandated. ADAPT of Philadelphia is an organization that advocates on behalf of individuals with disabilities. 51 for occupancy no later than December 31. These units were required
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/95opinions/95-1066.html">FESTO CORP V. SHOKETSU KINZOKU KOGYO KABUSHIKI CO<BR></A><BR>
With him on the brief were <u>Gerald T. Of counsel on the brief were <u>Charles L. Also of counsel on the brief was <u>James B. With him on the brief was <u>Louis T. Of counsel on the brief was <u>Joseph R. Of counsel on the brief were <u>John G. Also of counsel on the brief were <u>Rory J. With him on the brief were <u>Kendrew H. Of counsel on the brief were <u>Perry M. Also on the brief was <u>Mark J. Of counsel on the brief were <u>Frederick T. Also of counsel on the brief was <u>J. Of counsel on the brief was <u>James W. <u>Circuit Judge</u>.</p> <p ALIGN=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B7D84051F04DFF6788256E5A00707BFE/$file/0015968.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CV 99 03892 THE OPINION *Donald Evans is substituted for his predecessor. Hogarth is substituted for his predecessor as Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. Was not in accordance with the law and constituted an abuse of discretion because the Secretary failed to (1) obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress studies and (2) apply the proper legal standard to the available scientific information. I. Factual and Procedural Background This case concerns congressional efforts to protect dolphins 1 Appellants and appellees will be referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/07/012775P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
ACT was a non profit corporation providing clients with. Sylvan was furnishing high security computerbased testing and other educational services to its customers. The first agreement was a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed by both parties in August 1993 stating that ACT and NASD were entering into
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4B061938B5D891E888256A8F0071A690/$file/0015968.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CV 99 03892 THE OPINION *Donald Evans is substituted for his predecessor. Hogarth is substituted for his predecessor as Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. Was not in accordance with the law and constituted an abuse of discretion because the Secretary failed to (1) obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress studies and (2) apply the proper legal standard to the available scientific information. I. Factual and Procedural Background This case concerns congressional efforts to protect dolphins 1 Appellants and appellees will be referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2143.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Were on brief. Vinick appeals the district court's determination that he personally is liable for withholding taxes that Jefferson Bronze. Previously this court vacated a determination that Vinick was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981965.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The material facts are not in dispute. Plaintiffs are seven master firefighters employed by the City. It is not 1 Under the Commonwealth of Virginia's emergency medical services regulations. Basic Life Support is defined as that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1405.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Herrero & Jim nez were on brief for appellants. Peirats and Pietrantoni Mendez & Alvarez were on brief for appellee Centro Medico Del Turabo. The district court said it was dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). Stated in the judgment that the complaint was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The preferable practice is to assume that jurisdiction exists and proceed to determine whether the claim passes muster under Rule 12(b)(6). 682 83 (1946) (where the merits of the action are intertwined with the issue of jurisdiction. The federal claim should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction only if the claim is immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or if the claim is clearly frivolous or wholly insubstantial). 280 (1st Cir. 1990) (since plaintiff's assertion that federal law implied a private right of action was not frivolous. Should have been premised upon Rule 12(b)(6)).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct12/02-60288.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct12/03-10506.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct98/95-6234.man.html">CITY OF TUSCALOOSA V. HARCROS CHEMICALS, INC. (10/23/1998, NO. 95-6234)<BR></A><BR>
Remand for further proceedings.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>A.</CENTER> </P> <P> The plaintiffs and plaintiffs intervenors in this case are thirty nine Alabama municipal entities that purchase repackaged chlorine for the treatment of drinking water. Repackaged chlorine is liquid chlorine that has been pressurized and stored in containers for delivery to. The five defendant corporations are chemical companies that repackage or distribute chlorine in Alabama.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-60288.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct13/03-10506.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-10506.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C03/03-10528.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct13/03-10528.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct13/03-10528.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C02/02-60288.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C03/03-10506.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-10506.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C03/03-10506.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C02/02-60288.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-10528.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct98/95-6234.man.html">CITY OF TUSCALOOSA V. HARCROS CHEMICALS, INC. (10/23/1998, NO. 95-6234)<BR></A><BR>
Remand for further proceedings.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P><CENTER>A.</CENTER> </P> <P> The plaintiffs and plaintiffs intervenors in this case are thirty nine Alabama municipal entities that purchase repackaged chlorine for the treatment of drinking water. Repackaged chlorine is liquid chlorine that has been pressurized and stored in containers for delivery to. The five defendant corporations are chemical companies that repackage or distribute chlorine in Alabama.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-60288.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C03/03-10528.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct13/02-60288.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct13/02-60288.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-10528.1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Oct2004/Oct12/03-10528.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * A list of acronyms used in this opinion is appended. A direct appeal from two orders of the FAA brought by Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association in which the Welch parties have intervened. 2 3 prepared by the Air Force and adopted by the FAA does not satisfy NEPA and therefore remand to the agencies to prepare a supplemental EIS in accordance with this opinion. I. Background The basis of petitioners' complaints is the RBTI. The MTR is a flight corridor where pilots can practice lowaltitude navigation and maneuvers. Petitioners are Davis Mountains Trans Pecos Heritage Association (DMTPHA). A nonprofit corporation whose members are farmers. We have jurisdiction to review the FAA's approvals under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a). We will not address intervenors' argument that the FAA failed to adequately consider the effects of the RBTI on Lubbock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr2001/993773.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is an appeal by defendant Ellwood Group. The most important issue involves the question whether the joint venture agreement was ambiguous as a matter of law as to whether Ellwood could properly claim rebates for its sales to third parties of ingots pr oduced by the Ellwood Uddeholm Steel Company (EUS). Or whether Ellwood was limited to rebates for sales by EUS to Ellwood for Ellwood's own use. We conclude that the District Court was correct in finding a contractual ambiguity. That it erred in instructing the jury that Ellwood had the burden of establishing the meaning of the disputed terms in the agreement because of the fiduciary relationship between the parties that was cr eated by the joint venture. Other important issues include: (1) whether Uddeholm's breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of trade secrets claims were covered and thus precluded by its breach of contract claim. (2) whether Ellwood's potential liability on the civil conspiracy claim was for eclosed because the jury found no other conspirator.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May2001/993773.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is an appeal by defendant Ellwood Group. The most important issue involves the question whether the joint venture agreement was ambiguous as a matter of law as to whether Ellwood could properly claim rebates for its sales to third parties of ingots pr oduced by the Ellwood Uddeholm Steel Company (EUS). Or whether Ellwood was limited to rebates for sales by EUS to Ellwood for Ellwood's own use. We conclude that the District Court was correct in finding a contractual ambiguity. That it erred in instructing the jury that Ellwood had the burden of establishing the meaning of the disputed terms in the agreement because of the fiduciary relationship between the parties that was cr eated by the joint venture. Other important issues include: (1) whether Uddeholm's breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of trade secrets claims were covered and thus precluded by its breach of contract claim. (2) whether Ellwood's potential liability on the civil conspiracy claim was for eclosed because the jury found no other conspirator.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200614020.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: At issue before us is the application of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 to a claim for discrimination arising out of a verbal contract for the delivery of food. Kinnon contends that she was subject to racially motivated discrimination at the hands of Gopman. Is as follows. Kinnon is an African American female who works as a project director at a non profit organization in Miami. Explained that she was ordering food for a staff meeting that was to begin at 12:00 p.m. Was told that it would arrive within five minutes. Kinnon responded that the pizza was no longer needed. The employee told the driver the pizza was not needed. Almost immediately after the driver was sent away without payment. While Kinnon was eating lunch out of the office at a restaurant. This is Ju . . . .
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-2063.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.A.</U> were on brief. Lanham</U> was on brief. Twombly provided the services she was required to provide under the contract. Participants such as Twombly had full time work assignments averaging 40 hours per week and were paid stipends at an annual rate of $7. 650 in exchange for their service.<STRONG> </STRONG> Twombly was the single parent of a seven year old child and relied on AFOP's promises to provide health insurance and workers' compensation.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/06/032821P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ed Kelly was approached by businessmen Marvin Tipton and Lindy Barrett about the possibility of mining gravel on the Kelleys' property. The plan was approved. Although it is disputed who first introduced the idea. It is disputed who initiated the idea The Kelleys maintain that Tipton requested that Kelley terminate access so that he and Kelley could obtain 2 N 1's mine permits and form a new business. Tipton implies that Kelley did it because he was upset that he was not made a partner in 2 N 1. 21 or what the parties' motivations were for entering the agreement.2 Tipton and Kelley were the only two shareholders of Mill Creek stock. Nor any provision setting a date by which the gravel plant was required to be in operation. Mill Creek was subsequently registered as a corporation with the Missouri Secretary of State. 000 loan was obtained for the equipment and other expenses necessary to set up the mine site. Which was approved. Tipton testified at trial that the intent was to mine these twenty acres until Mill Creek could secure the 135 acre mine plan of 2 N 1 mentioned above.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Oct2003/022544p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jr. was convicted of theft from a museum for his involvement in the misappropriation of a Civil War officer's uniform in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 668 (1994). At issue is whether the Hunt Phelan Home Foundation. From whose care the uniform was taken. Was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/03/992124P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because we hold that the College was a tribal agency immune from suit. The College's board of trustees is comprised of one enrolled member from each of the Tribe's seven districts. After their contracts were not renewed. Was served. After the jury awarded damages but before judgment was entered. The court also stated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1172_016.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
None of which was accepted by Raybestos. This
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971698.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
In which Judge Williams joined. *Senior Judge Merhige participated in the hearing of this case at oral argument but retired before the decision was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel. Grace & Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1385.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.A. were on brief. With whom Hamilton Law Offices was on brief. Stacey Perkins is a ten year old female with an affinity for the sport of basketball. Stacey was one of two girls selected to play on the SRL's twelve member All Star team. LBC and the Town's Recreation Commission have a modest interlock two members of LBC's five member board of directors happen to serve as members of the Recreation Commission and Commission members often assist as volunteers at the tournament by keeping score. Gym time is allocated by Psaledas. Uncontroverted evidence makes clear that the Town's goal in adopting these requirements was to bring competing groups together and thus lessen the burden on municipal facilities. Each group that aspires to gym use is required to submit a request for dates to the Town's School District. There are other points of contact between LBC and the Town: LBC holds meetings in school buildings. The most salient contact point is financial: LBC from time to time contributes money to the Town's schools for scholarships.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/02/954029P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Indicated he was suffering from chest pains. Shea's doctor said a referral to a cardiologist was When Mr. Shea's doctor persuaded for the cardiologist himself. was then forty years old. That he was too young and did not have enough symptoms to justify a visit to a cardiologist. Who was on Medica's list of preferred doctors. necessary care. Shea was insured for all of his medically Before Mr. Medica's contracts with its preferred doctors created financial incentives that were designed to Specifically. The primary care doctors were rewarded According to Mr. Were docked a portion of their fees if they made too many. less. He would have disregarded if her husband would have known his doctor could earn a bonus for treating cardiologist's opinion at his own expense. Shea's tort claims were preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). 1104(a)(1). disclose its doctor compensation arrangements because they See id. are not See Believing ERISA does not require an HMO to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2618.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Parties No. 02 2618 The plaintiffs in this case are Alliant Energy Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/05/953581P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Presiding. 1 The Arts in the Park Festival is held annually in a public park in Brookings. The weekend festival is free and attracts some It is fully funded and organized by a private. The committee maintains its own liability insurance There are approximately 180 booths at the festival The committee pays several city The relating to art. One rule prohibits people who do not have a booth from distributing literature inside the park. The purpose of the rule is to limit litter The festival committee problems. None was adopted in connection with the 1994 festival. Ross Reinhart was an independent candidate for Governor of South Dakota in 1994. He approached people at the festival and handed out business cards which he was using for his campaign. A security guard approached him and said that campaigning was prohibited in does not grant political candidates booths or permit them to hand out 2 the park. A few feet back from where he was standing. Reinhart claims that he was told only that campaigning was not permitted inside the park and that he would be arrested if he did not stop.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1723a.html">TIME WARNER ENTRTNMT V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="190"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/45F1DA9F2FA913E888256F3A0076B3E5/$file/0335279oa.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Appellants' Motion for Technical Correction of Language in the Opinion is hereby GRANTED. Is AMENDED as follows. That final sentence of Subsection I.A. on page 1063 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following sentence: If the BiOp concludes that jeopardy or adverse modification cannot be avoided.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="190"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-1484a.html">RENO HILTON RESORTS V. NLRB<BR></A><BR>
With him on the </p> <p>brief were Linda Sher. We deny the petition for review and </p> <p>grant the Board's cross application for enforcement of the </p> <p>order.</p> <p>I.</p> <p>When Reno Hilton began operating what was formerly a </p> <p>Bally's hotel restaurant casino complex in 1992. The members of which were not repre </p> <p>sented by any labor organization. While those charges were pending. An election was scheduled </p> <p>for September 1995. Was called into the office of Reno Hilton's director </p> <p>of security. The Burk Group official asked Parillo to help </p> <p>determine which security employees were pro or anti union. The hotel would </p> <p>contract out the security jobs and showing Parillo figures </p> <p>purporting to represent the associated cost savings.</p> <p>The Union won the election by a vote of 44 to 33 and was </p> <p>certified by the Board on October 12. </p> <p>Bennett's impression after that meeting was that Reno Hilton </p> <p>". May have lost the battle. The unit security employees] were gone.".
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="190"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199912/98-1484a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Linda Sher. I. When Reno Hilton began operating what was formerly a Bally's hotel restaurant casino complex in 1992. The members of which were not repre sented by any labor organization. While those charges were pending. An election was scheduled for September 1995. Was called into the office of Reno Hilton's director of security. The Burk Group official asked Parillo to help determine which security employees were pro or anti union. The Union won the election by a vote of 44 to 33 and was certified by the Board on October 12. Bennett's impression after that meeting was that Reno Hilton
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="189"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept2001/00-10201.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. DE LA MATA (9/27/2001, NO. 00-10201)<BR></A><BR>
That the indictment and jury instructions were fatally defective. That there was insufficient evidence to support their convictions and that the discovery of new evidence mandated the grant of a new trial. Castilla (hereinafter the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="189"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept2001/00-10201.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. DE LA MATA (9/27/2001, NO. 00-10201)<BR></A><BR>
That the indictment and jury instructions were fatally defective. That there was insufficient evidence to support their convictions and that the discovery of new evidence mandated the grant of a new trial. Castilla (hereinafter the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="189"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200010201.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That the indictment and jury instructions were fatally defective. That there was insufficient evidence to support their convictions and that the discovery of new evidence mandated the grant of a new trial. Castilla (hereinafter the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="189"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1998/98a1935p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Venue is proper pursuant to 26 U.S.C. We will reverse the Tax Court's decision. Leaving a will which provided that its
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033677p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are asked to review the grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer and damages awarded by the District Court to the insurer. We will affirm in part. So this aspect of the proposal was not unique. 2 1 Because MetLife could not know in advance how many UPMC employees would choose the High Option versus the Low Option. Has changed 10% or more from the composition when quoted The financial arrangement on any part of the package is changed Any of the coverages are cancelled or not issued Any of the plan designs are changed b. c. d. (49a. This revised proposal was to remain in effect until January 1. Its employees were thereby required to enroll in MetLife's plan before January 1. Enrollment was complete in November. The policy was a form policy for one year. MetLife's standard practice was to issue form policies such as this regardless of negotiated multi year rate guarantees. Which stated: Metropolitan may change any or all of the premium rates if there is a change in the terms of this Policy. The term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAyNjMtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0263-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Appellants are freelance photographers and authors whose photographs and/or written works were originally published in various issues of the National Geographic Magazine. These photographs and writings have now been published in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A8E866ED283F934888256E5A00707A8B/$file/9935373.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court held that the canals were waters of the United States covered by the Clean Water Act. That the active ingredient in Magnacide H was a pollutant. The court concluded that no permit was required because the label on the herbicide. The active ingredient in Magna3067 cide H is acrolein. TID does not have. 000 juvenile steelhead were killed. The complaint alleged that TID is in violation of the CWA. That the irrigation canals were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1652a.html">AMER SCHLST TV PGRM V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/382A2E21DF25A83788256A0D00615FDE/$file/9935373.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court held that the canals were waters of the United States covered by the Clean Water Act. That the active ingredient in Magnacide H was a pollutant. The court concluded that no permit was required because the label on the herbicide. The active ingredient in Magna3067 cide H is acrolein. TID does not have. 000 juvenile steelhead were killed. The complaint alleged that TID is in violation of the CWA. That the irrigation canals were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/03/00-8016.htm">00-8016 -- WYOMING TIMBER INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION V. U.S. FOREST SERVICE -- 03/20/2001<BR></A><BR>
After appellate briefs were filed. The suspension was to become effective March 1. Whichever is first.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="187"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-5472a.html">GALVAN GILBERT V. FEDERAL PRISON INDUSTRIES<BR></A><BR>
Jr. argued the cause and was on the </P> <P>briefs for appellant.</P> <P> Sally M. With her on the brief were Wilma A. He alleged that it had falsely certified that the </P> <P>communication cables and weapons parts that it produced for </P> <P>the Department of Defense had been adequately tested and </P> <P>met the requisite quality standards.</P> <P> FPI is no ordinary employer. It is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="187"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2002/00-13811.opn.html">NAT'L R.R. PASSENGER CORP. V. ROUNTREE TRANSP. AND RIGGING, INC.(3/26/2002, NO. 00-13811)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="187"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2002/00-13811.opn.html">NAT'L R.R. PASSENGER CORP. V. ROUNTREE TRANSP. AND RIGGING, INC.(3/26/2002, NO. 00-13811)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="185"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199912/98-5472a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jr. argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellant. With her on the brief were Wilma A. FPI is no ordinary employer. It is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/03opinions/03-5140.html">LA VAN, ET AL. V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
Argued for defendant appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With her on the brief were <u>Stuart E. <span class=SpellE>Schiffer</span></u>. Director.<span style='mso s
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2721.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Murray</SPAN> were on brief for appellant.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-8074.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Shell filed suit in federal district court requesting a declaration that it is the operator of certain wells on the jointly leased properties pursuant to a previous settlement agreement binding the parties. That the parties' settlement agreement granted Shell the right to operate wells located on surface lands in which it held a majority interest irrespective of the depth to which those wells were drilled. I The predecessors in interest of Shell and Ultra were parties to a federal oil and gas unit located in Wyoming known as the New Fork Unit. Was the Unit Operator approved by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and owner of the remaining 75% leasehold working interest. The properties in which McMurry had the right to earn Meridian's interest were defined and described in the Farmout Agreement by their surface dimensions. Farmout Lands were limited to five quarter sections in a checkerboard like configuration and referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may2001/99-11130.man.html">UNITED STATES V. 1461 W. 42ND ST., HIALEAH, FLORIDA (5/22/2001, NO. 99-11130)<BR></A><BR>
This appeal deals with the considerations that ensue when real property that the government has seized in civil forfeiture proceedings is foreclosed by the property's mortgagee so that when it is time to return the property. We are presented here with the task of tailoring an appropriate remedy under such circumstances when due process was violated pursuant to </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0F10F3F951DA38E288256C0F00567CC7/$file/0055993.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Gospel Missions argues that the City is in contempt of an injunction against the City's enforcement of certain provisions of the pre amended version of that law and that the threatened enforcement of new provi GOSPEL MISSIONS v. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Professional fundraisers are those who solicit charitable contributions on behalf of others for gain. Gospel Missions is a non profit religious corporation that provides ministry and shelter to homeless individuals. Five of its properties were raided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department because the Sheriff's Department believed Gospel Missions might be violating city and county charitable solicitation laws. (2) that numerous provisions applying to professional fundraisers in the Amended Ordinance are either in contempt of the GMA I injunction or unconstitutional. (4) that two of the non professional fundraiser provisions in the Amended Ordinance section 44.15(b) and section 44.02(b)(2) are either in contempt of the GMA I injunction or unconstitutional.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/526A379772BF5DFA88256FA500059763/$file/0335480.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We must decide whether a Washington timber company's claims arising from the alleged breach of a timber contract were properly dismissed on summary judgment. Ballinger was formerly the president of Balkin Enterprises. It was sold by one William Abraczinskas. We must also decide whether either of those decisions was an abuse of the district court's discretion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I Hambleton Brothers is a family owned and operated Washington timber company founded in the 1950s. Balkin Enterprises was an Oregon corporation that engaged in real estate. Hambleton Brothers's decision to enter into the timber contract was based in part on Adams's appraisal of the timber value and in part on discussions with Dale Kinsey. Hambleton Brothers did not know at the time of the contract formation that Balkin Enterprises was also paying Adams a fee for his services. Title to the FruitA
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4F9B79D6C6357BFF88256E5A00707B7B/$file/9815993.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
So we state the facts as they are stated in the complaint to determine whether the complaint states a claim upon which relief could be granted. 1 we may also properly consider SEC filings incorporated by reference in the complaint.2 Nothing has been proved in this case because it was dismissed before the occasion arose for any proof. Larkin and the other defendants were officers and directors of Nellcor. Nellcor announced that it was making a very large acquisition. This raised the obvious question of how Nellcor could expect to make money by spending almost a half billion dollars to acquire a company that was losing money. Would have much greater financial strength because of its size. Would have lower overhead than the combined overhead of the two companies operating separately. The theory of the complaint is that the merger was a failure and that the Nellcor principals knew that almost from the start. Misleading the stock market into overvaluing their stock based on a false impression that the merger was going well.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may2001/99-11130.man.html">UNITED STATES V. 1461 W. 42ND ST., HIALEAH, FLORIDA (5/22/2001, NO. 99-11130)<BR></A><BR>
This appeal deals with the considerations that ensue when real property that the government has seized in civil forfeiture proceedings is foreclosed by the property's mortgagee so that when it is time to return the property. We are presented here with the task of tailoring an appropriate remedy under such circumstances when due process was violated pursuant to </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/041655p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Baer seeks compensation for what he perceives was his role in the creation and development of the popular and financially successful television series. Who originally was from New Jersey. Is the creator. Chase was producing and directing a Rockford Files
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2294.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who was several months pregnant. Worked for a temporary employment agency and was assigned to work for ARC Community Services. She was left with the impression that ARC would not hire her while she was pregnant. She did not return ARC's calls after she left to have her baby. Incorporated (ARC) is a notfor profit corporation that serves women involved with the criminal justice system. Women who have drug problems. Women who are pregnant. Who was visibly pregnant and due to deliver in March 2000. That a temporarily assigned employee (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1E4C133BBFC926F888256A620082F365/$file/9815993.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
So we state the facts as they are stated in the complaint to determine whether the complaint states a claim upon which relief could be granted. 1 we may also properly consider SEC filings incorporated by reference in the complaint.2 Nothing has been proved in this case because it was dismissed before the occasion arose for any proof. Larkin and the other defendants were officers and directors of Nellcor. Nellcor announced that it was making a very large acquisition. This raised the obvious question of how Nellcor could expect to make money by spending almost a half billion dollars to acquire a company that was losing money. Would have much greater financial strength because of its size. Would have lower overhead than the combined overhead of the two companies operating separately. The theory of the complaint is that the merger was a failure and that the Nellcor principals knew that almost from the start. Misleading the stock market into overvaluing their stock based on a false impression that the merger was going well.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTE4OTgtY3YgYXR0eSBmZWVzX29wbi5wZGY=/04-1898-cv%20atty%20fees_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Dubbin's fee request on the ground that his contributions were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Apr2002/004323.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm the district court's orders. Joan McIlhenny's 1990 Ford Taurus had to have its transmission overhauled at 73. James Dunlap's 1995 Ford Winstar had to have its transmission overhauled at 65. The district court first indicated that Pennsylvania courts
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511682.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The key issue presented in this petition for review is whether the Federal Communications Commission exceeded its authority. Which is the exclusive province of federal regulation. 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(3)(A). Which are regulable by the states. We dismiss the petition of the Vermont Board because it is not a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1277.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Tootalian was on brief for appellant. Fournier were on brief for appellees. I. The defendant MBTA is a municipal corporation that operates the subway system serving the metropolitan Boston region. Each station is divided into two sections. Plaintiff Jews for Jesus is a not for profit corporation that conducts religious activity. Plaintiff Steven Silverstein is the branch leader of the Boston office of Jews for Jesus. Their primary contention is that the Guidelines impose a ban on leafletting. The Authority counters that the regulations are a reasonable infringement of First Amendment rights and are necessary to preserve the system's transportation function. 1 The twelve stations are Science Park. The current Guidelines were adopted after this suit began. 3 the MBTA points to a concern for public safety to justify the restriction on leafletting. The court applied a tenet of overbreadth doctrine that permits facial invalidation of a regulation whose reach beyond properly prohibited speech is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="184"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/12/982527P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court will collectively refer to the appellants/cross appellees as the class. The court will collectively refer to appellees/cross appellants as Farmland. 2 4 3 2 1 I. A Jurisdictional Issue We have jurisdiction over final orders and certain types of interlocutory orders. A pretrial order dismissing less than all of a plaintiff's claims is interlocutory and cannot be appealed unless it includes the grant or denial of an injunction. Or the interlocutory order is appealable under the narrow. Though the two summary judgment orders were interlocutory. At the class' request the district court both directed the entry of judgment pursuant to a Rule 54(b) determination there was no just reason for delay. Explaining that its purpose was to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="183"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Aug2004/Aug10/03-50419-CV0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Flourogas is a small English company that develops and manufactures fluorine generators. Who was also its president. It was owned by Graham FOC is a Texas company that The began with two brothers. The process involves spraying chemicals onto silicon wafers while those wafers are inside a chamber. cleaning. Chambers are cleaned with nitrogen trifluoride (or NF3) gas. One of these Yet Fluorine has companies have looked for alternatives to NF3. potential alternatives is fluorine gas (or F2). its own problems in particular. It is extremely dangerous and difficult to handle. As even the Siegeles have admitted. The MOU was a handwritten document drafted by Fluorogas Frederick Siegele over the course of a weekend. contends that the parties planned to eventually replace the MOU with a more formal contract. The MOU granted FOC
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="183"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3C2CBD69E6E2C18388256AFD001790CB/$file/9735191.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
While the decision was pending. Judge Schroeder was drawn to replace him. Circuit Judge: This is an appeal of a $5 billion punitive damages award arising out of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. This is not a case about befouling the environment. This is a case about commercial fishing. The jury was specifically instructed that it could not award damages for environmental harm. The reason is that under a stipulation with the United States and Alaska. Exxon had already been punished for environmental harm.1 The verdict in this case was for damage to economic expectations for commercial fishermen. The plaintiffs here were almost entirely compensated for their damages years ago. The punitive damages at issue were awarded to punish Exxon. Among the issues are whether punitive damages should have been barred as a matter of law and whether the award was excessive. Important aspects of this opinion are controlled by a 1 See Eyak Native Village v. Inc. 3 Facts Bligh Island and Bligh Reef have been known to navigators for a long time.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="183"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3D85DBFEC9FD4BC788256E5A00707D3D/$file/9735191.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
While the decision was pending. Judge Schroeder was drawn to replace him. Circuit Judge: This is an appeal of a $5 billion punitive damages award arising out of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. This is not a case about befouling the environment. This is a case about commercial fishing. The jury was specifically instructed that it could not award damages for environmental harm. The reason is that under a stipulation with the United States and Alaska. Exxon had already been punished for environmental harm.1 The verdict in this case was for damage to economic expectations for commercial fishermen. The plaintiffs here were almost entirely compensated for their damages years ago. The punitive damages at issue were awarded to punish Exxon. Among the issues are whether punitive damages should have been barred as a matter of law and whether the award was excessive. Important aspects of this opinion are controlled by a 1 See Eyak Native Village v. Inc. 3 Facts Bligh Island and Bligh Reef have been known to navigators for a long time.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTQ3MDYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-4706-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant counterclaimant appellee National Service Industries is not liable for the actions of Serv All Uniform Rental Corp. It has not established that there was a de facto merger. The question before us is whether federal common law for purposes of determining corporate successor liability under CERCLA incorporates state law in this case. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/September2004/033173p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Concluding the transfer of assets was not a bona fide sale for adequate and full consideration. We will affirm.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1996/95a1238p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This consolidated class action is brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. We conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendants breached section 1104(a)'s fiduciary duties and as to whether the defendants are entitled to section 1104(c)'s protection. We will. Vacate the district court's grant of summary judgment in the defendants' favor and will remand the case to the district court for further proceedings. Each plan permitted an employee to contribute a percentage of his or her compensation into an individual account and to direct that it be invested in any one or a number of funds that were comprised of different types of investments. A GIC is a contract under which the issuer is obligated to repay the principal deposit at a designated future date and to pay interest at a specified rate over the duration of the contract. The Sperry Plan and the BEST Plan were consolidated to form the Unisys Savings Plan. Was closed to new contributions. Assets invested in the Fixed Income Fund were reinvested in the new Insurance Contract Fund.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1475.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were David R. Of counsel on the brief was Bruce M. With him on the brief were Jayme Partridge and Jayne Piana. Of counsel on the brief were John D. Of counsel were Laura F. The '243 patent were invalid. The two cases were consolidated for trial in Delaware. Did not account for Shell's exportation of catalysts because the district court ruled in limine that 35 U.S.C. § 271(f) damages are not available for process claims. Union Carbide cross appeals the district court's holding that 35 U.S.C. § 271(f) does not apply to process claims and the jury verdict finding that Shell's infringement was not willful. EO gas is used primarily in the industrial production of ethylene glycol. Which is used. Most of the EO produced each year is converted into monoethylene glycol (MEG). Shell is a direct competitor of Union Carbide and Dow Chemical in EO production and MEG sales. The process of claim 1 wherein said alkali metal is lithium. 1. Silver containing catalyst contains 2 to 20 weight percent silver deposited on a support which is in a form and size for use in the reactor.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="181"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200013811.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: These consolidated appeals arise from the district court's final judgment resolving a series of cases that were filed after a passenger train of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="181"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F8B20F9778A1E58C882572A3007823D7/$file/0535627o.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
ORDER The court invites supplemental briefs by any amicus curiae addressing the following issue raised in this appeal: Whether a plaintiff who seeks to establish the predatory or anticompetitive conduct element of an attempted monopolization claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act by showing that the defendant offered bundled discounts to the defendant's customers must prove that the defendant's prices were below an appropriate measure of the defendant's costs. What is the appropriate measure of costs and how should the trial court instruct the jury on the matter of costs? What standard should the trial court instruct the jury to use to determine whether the bundled discounts are predatory or anticompetitive? Any person or entity wishing to file a brief as an amicus curiae in response to this order is granted leave to do so pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19955258.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Blanch would have Llampallas fired. Told Kaylie that she was quitting because she could not work with Llampallas anymore. Claiming that she was unlawfully terminated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F2123EC61ABB9D688825735300509F5D/$file/0535408.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This appeal challenges an injunction limiting but not entirely prohibiting coal bed methane development while the Bureau of Land Management expands an environmental impact statement.1 Facts The Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming is the largest coal deposit in the United States and among the largest in the world. Farmers and ranchers generally have surface rights to the land involved in this case. The land is thought to cover vast amount of methane. This coal bed methane is a natural gas generated by coal deposits and trapped in coal seams by groundwater. Coal bed methane is extracted by pumping the groundwater out of the land and into rivers. As the water is removed. The hydraulic pressure on the gas is relieved. So the gas percolates and is piped to the surface. This opinion is written in ordinary English. The pollution of the rivers and streams into which the groundwater is pumped. So that ranchers' and farmers' (and expanding suburban developers') wells run dry unless they are drilled deeper.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec98/95-5258.opn.html">LLAMPALLAS V. MINI-CIRCUITS, LAB, INC. (12/28/1998, NO. 95-5258)<BR></A><BR>
Blanch would have Llampallas fired. Told Kaylie that she was quitting because she could not work with Llampallas anymore. Claiming that she was unlawfully terminated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012227.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These orders were entered after the court discovered RMST's plans to sell some of the artifacts and confirmed that the court's earlier orders prohibiting the sale of artifacts
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec98/95-5258.opn.html">LLAMPALLAS V. MINI-CIRCUITS, LAB, INC. (12/28/1998, NO. 95-5258)<BR></A><BR>
Blanch would have Llampallas fired. Told Kaylie that she was quitting because she could not work with Llampallas anymore. Claiming that she was unlawfully terminated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033972np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiff Appellant PHP Liquidating LLC (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2000/99-10640.man.html">LYONS V. GEORGIA PAC. CORP. SALARIED EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN (8/11/2000, NO. 99-10640)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/03/01-3362.htm">01-3362 -- CIRULIS V. UNUM CORPORATION SEVERANCE PLAN -- 03/05/2003<BR></A><BR>
Employees were required to sign a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2000/99-10640.man.html">LYONS V. GEORGIA PAC. CORP. SALARIED EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN (8/11/2000, NO. 99-10640)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3A95CF272053DC6E882570510054C594/$file/0415228.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. Were on the briefs. Circuit Judge: We must decide whether developmentally disabled recipients of Medicaid funds and their service providers have a private right of action against state officials to compel the enforcement of a federal law governing state disbursement of such funds. We are also asked to decide. Or are at risk of living in. State institutions because community based services are inadequately funded. All members of the class are entitled to services under Title XIX of the Social Security Act. Are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar2000/995051.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The calculation of his sentence.1 We will affirm his conviction and sentence in all aspects. An understanding of the facts of the case is a necessary foundation for a discussion of the issues he raises. We have jurisdiction over Helbling's appeal over his conviction under 28 U.S.C. We have considered both his counseled and pro se submissions. We have denied Helbling's motions to file further supplemental briefs and appendices. 2 embezzlement of employee pension plan funds from an ERISA covered plan (18 U.S.C. The mail fraud counts were dismissed during trial.2 The jury convicted Helbling of twenty seven of the remaining twenty nine counts. Helbling filed a motion to dismiss the indictment on the basis that the indictment was not timely. Helbling argued to the District Court that the waiver was invalid because he had been coerced into signing it by fraud and misconduct. That the government witnesses were lying. The witnesses explained that Helbling was the president. The plan was funded exclusively by Micro Products.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAyNjMtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-0263-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Appellants are freelance photographers and authors whose photographs and/or written works were originally published in various issues of the National Geographic Magazine. These photographs and writings have now been published in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/96opinions/96-1046.html">KOLMES & PLEMMONS V. WORLD FIBERS<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june2001/99-14962.man.html">MAIZ V. VIRANI (6/8/2001, NO. 99-14962)<BR></A><BR>
Who are Mexican citizens. Defendants do not argue that there was insufficient evidence to support the liability verdict as a whole. Plaintiffs are 53 residents of Monterrey. Most of them are members of fourteen family groups. Also plaintiffs in this case (although not participants in this appeal) are six corporations to which the individual Plaintiffs eventually transferred their interests.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june2001/99-14962.man.html">MAIZ V. VIRANI (6/8/2001, NO. 99-14962)<BR></A><BR>
Who are Mexican citizens. Defendants do not argue that there was insufficient evidence to support the liability verdict as a whole. Plaintiffs are 53 residents of Monterrey. Most of them are members of fourteen family groups. Also plaintiffs in this case (although not participants in this appeal) are six corporations to which the individual Plaintiffs eventually transferred their interests.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-8026.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court further held that casino style gaming and slot machine wagering were against Wyoming public policy and thus not subject to negotiation. I The Northern Arapaho Tribe is a federally recognized Indian tribe with a reservation in the State of Wyoming. The state took the position that because Wyoming has a broad criminal prohibition against gambling and exceptions to that prohibition are narrowly drawn. The compact negotiations with the Tribe were thus limited to raffles. Claiming that Wyoming was required to negotiate regarding all games listed in the Tribe's proposed compact because state law permitted a nearly unlimited variety of gaming. That the state was not required to negotiate regarding
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1952.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The action was brought in federal court on behalf of Abbott shareholders against Abbott's board of directors alleging that the directors breached their fiduciary duties and are liable under Illinois law for harm resulting from a consent decree which required Abbott to pay a $100 million civil fine to the FDA. An order vacating the panel opinion was issued on August 2. Is a diversified health care company that develops and markets pharmaceutical. These products are heavily regulated by the FDA and must be manufactured in accordance with the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/04-5089b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1344.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C.</SPAN> were on brief. Howard</SPAN> were on brief. Haseotes is the oldest of six children who together own all of the shares of Cumberland. The corporation was just beginning the gradual process of growth and diversification. Haseotes was not satisfied with relying on an outside source for gas. The refinery's physical assets were taken in the name of Newfoundland Processing. Which was formed to conduct the oil refining operations. Cumberland's loans to CCP eventually were represented by a promissory note in the amount of $52. That note was replaced by a new one in the same amount. Cumberland's largest lender was the Industrial Bank of Japan Trust Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-6222.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As we are reversing the grant of summary judgment. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5D977ACC79EDB86D882570F2007C9238/$file/0415625.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Construction financing was secured through a commitment from the Federal National Mortgage Association that included the Wellington Place project along with three other AHDC enterprises.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="177"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-2392_034.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These individuals were required to join the Christian Freedom Foundation. Of which Sloan was the signatory. The offers of free electricity and the chance to make hundreds of thousands of dollars were too good to be true.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="177"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-1558.html">CRYSTAL SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION V. TRITECH MICROELECTRONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC<BR></A><BR>
Argued for plaintiff appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="176"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/032042.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Are constitutional because they provide for reasonable restrictions on speech in a non public forum. Point Lookout Confederate Cemetery is administered by the VA and is located near the former Point Lookout Prison Camp. SCV and PLPOW have held formal Confederate memorial ceremonies at the cemetery. Providing as follows: (i) All visitors are expected to observe proper standards of decorum and decency while on VA property. Is prohibited. Sledding and other forms of physical recreation on cemetery grounds is [sic] prohibited. (ii) For the purpose of the prohibition expressed in this paragraph. Unless the oration is part of an authorized service. Unauthorized demonstrations or ceremonies on the premises of a national cemetery are punishable by removal from the premises and a $250 fine.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="176"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-5092a.html">JAMES C. WOOD, JR V. AMER INSTITUTE IN TAIWAN<BR></A><BR>
II argued the cause for appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="176"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200204/01-5092a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Bradley S. With him on the brief were Roscoe C. Agreeing with the district court that the Insti tute is immune. Congress wanted to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec98/96-8787.man.html">JOHNSON V. UNIV. HEALTH SERVICES, INC. (12/3/1998, NO. 96-8787)<BR></A><BR>
Is a perinatologist. Which is an obstetrician who specializes in high risk pregnancies. She was recruited in May 1992 by Hossam E. Fadel is a member of the obstetrics department of University Hospital in Augusta. Which is run by the non profit University Health Services (UHS).</P> <P> Only a few months into her employment. Her primary dissatisfaction was based on the low number of new patients that Dr. It was important that she admit a large number of new patients in order to become a board certified perinatologist. Fadel was not permitting her to admit patients in sufficient numbers to allow her to qualify for certification as quickly as she would have liked. Johnson claims to have been promised an $800. Fadel that she was considering other alternatives before it would provide any assistance.</P> <P> Dr. Johnson claimed that UHS was estopped from refusing to provide her with financial assistance under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. We conclude that they are without merit. Johnson's first two causes of action are antitrust claims.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan2003/01-14291.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. AETNA LIFE INS. CO. (1/28/2003, NO. 01-14291)<BR></A><BR>
We held that an insurance company occupying the role of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july97/96-6560.opa.html">BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD V. NIELSEN<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. Individually and on behalf of all other persons who are similarly situated. The disposition of this appeal depends upon the resolution of these issues: (1) is Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama (Blue Cross) exempt from the application of the three Alabama acts by the terms of previously enacted Alabama statutes. (2) if Blue Cross is exempt from the application of the three Alabama Acts due to the terms of those previously enacted statutes. Are those exempting statutes violative of the Alabama Constitution. (3) are those three acts preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) insofar as they relate to ERISA governed health benefit plans?<p> Although the third issue involves a question of federal law. Its existence in and relevance to this case is entirely dependent upon the answers to the first two issues. Not only is this case fraught with unsettled issues of Alabama law. The decision of those state law issues will affect the insurance rights of more than half of Alabama's population.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/95-1411.htm">95-1411 -- SPORTS RACING SERVICES, INC. V. SPORTS CAR CLUB OF AMERICA, INC. -- 10/28/1997<BR></A><BR>
SCCA is a nonprofit organization that organizes and sanctions amateur sports car racing events for twenty three classes of sports cars. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200507/03-1361a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With them on the briefs were Thomas F. Bernard and Jeremy Kyle Kinner were on the brief of amici curiae Indigenous Environmental Network. With him on the brief were Thomas L. With him on the briefs were Alan F. Nick Goldstein were on the brief of industry intervenors in support of respondent. Henderson were on the brief of amicus curiae Washington Legal Foundation in support of respondent. Wolff were on the brief of amicus curiae John D. Circuit Judge: Petitioners are twelve states. They are opposed by the Environmental Protection Agency as respondent. The controversy is about EPA's denial of a petition asking it to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions from new motor 5 vehicles under § 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. EPA concluded that it did not have statutory authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles and that. Have jurisdiction over citizen suits to compel EPA to perform nondiscretionary acts or duties. 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a)(2). We have jurisdiction only if EPA thereby engaged in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114291.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We held that an insurance company occupying the role of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec98/96-8787.man.html">JOHNSON V. UNIV. HEALTH SERVICES, INC. (12/3/1998, NO. 96-8787)<BR></A><BR>
Is a perinatologist. Which is an obstetrician who specializes in high risk pregnancies. She was recruited in May 1992 by Hossam E. Fadel is a member of the obstetrics department of University Hospital in Augusta. Which is run by the non profit University Health Services (UHS).</P> <P> Only a few months into her employment. Her primary dissatisfaction was based on the low number of new patients that Dr. It was important that she admit a large number of new patients in order to become a board certified perinatologist. Fadel was not permitting her to admit patients in sufficient numbers to allow her to qualify for certification as quickly as she would have liked. Johnson claims to have been promised an $800. Fadel that she was considering other alternatives before it would provide any assistance.</P> <P> Dr. Johnson claimed that UHS was estopped from refusing to provide her with financial assistance under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. We conclude that they are without merit. Johnson's first two causes of action are antitrust claims.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8858623031FAE4BF88256F090054C98E/$file/0135898.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The plaintiffs in this case are suing to vindicate a public right that has already been litigated by other environmental groups. Have already been challenged by other environmental groups using the same arguments that the plaintiffs now present. We agree with the district court that the current plaintiff's interests were virtually represented by the previous groups. We have jurisdiction based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Both the Beaver Newt and Silver Fork areas are located within the Rogue River National Forest in southwestern Oregon. The Rule 60(b) motion was based upon the allegation that the attorney in the American Lands suit did not have authority to The named plaintiffs included: American Lands Alliance. Headwaters' complaint is virtually identical to the complaint filed by KlamathSiskiyou. Headwaters is represented by the same counsel that represented Klamath Siskiyou in the prior litigation. Standard of Review A district court's judgment based upon res judicata is a mixed question of law and fact in which legal issues predominate and is reviewed de novo.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan2003/01-14291.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. AETNA LIFE INS. CO. (1/28/2003, NO. 01-14291)<BR></A><BR>
We held that an insurance company occupying the role of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM5MjYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3926-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court also found that such a claim of preemption is not barred by the Tax Injunction Act. The court also found that such a claim of preemption is not barred by the Tax Injunction Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6C97098ADF8099AB88256C910059D128/$file/0136089.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This flaw is fatal to a qui tam1 action under the False Claims Act.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july97/96-6560.opa.html">BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD V. NIELSEN<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. Individually and on behalf of all other persons who are similarly situated. The disposition of this appeal depends upon the resolution of these issues: (1) is Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama (Blue Cross) exempt from the application of the three Alabama acts by the terms of previously enacted Alabama statutes. (2) if Blue Cross is exempt from the application of the three Alabama Acts due to the terms of those previously enacted statutes. Ar |
