First Circuit:
Weiss v. DHL Express, Inc.
US v. Mahoney
Second Circuit:
VRG Linhas Aereas S.A. v. MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners II
Ali v. Fed. Ins. Co.
Vincent v. Yelich; Earley v. Annucci
Third Circuit:
Interfaith Comm Orgn v. Honeywell Intl Inc
Fourth Circuit:
Westmoreland Coal Company v. Jarrell Cochran
SG Homes Associates, LP v. Michael Marinucci
Fifth Circuit:
Asbert Joseph v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Seventh Circuit:
USA v. Javier Zamudio
USA v. Ricardo Garcia-Segura
USA v. Jeffrey Weaver
Shu Han Liu v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Anil Goyal v. Gas Technology Institute
Eighth Circuit (from site):
136012P.pdf 06/04/2013 Laura Mehlhaff v. Forrest Allred
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 13-6012
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre
[PUBLISHED] [Federman, Author, with Schermer and Shodeen,
Bankruptcy Judges]
Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Bankruptcy court did not err in
determining debtor's prepetition claim against her former spouse for
alimony was property of the bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec.
541(a)(1), and the order directing her to turn that claim over to the trustee
is affirmed.
121383P.pdf 06/03/2013 James Bradshaw v. FFE Transportation Services, I
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 12-1383
and No: 12-2161
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs
[PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges]
Civil case - Torts. District court did not abuse its discretion by deciding
defendants had waived their objections to plaintiff's medical witnesses by
failing to make these objections at the time set in the district court's
discovery scheduling order; nor did the court err in declining to reopen
discovery after declaring a mistrial in the first trial; no error, under the
circumstances of the case, in allowing a doctor to use undisclosed
anatomical drawings at the second trial as the court properly limited
testimony on the drawings and gave the jury an instruction that the
drawings did not amount to substantive evidence; defendants did not
sufficiently articulate a Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(iii) objection to the drawings.
122450P.pdf 06/03/2013 United States v. Delmarcus Johnson
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 12-2450
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
[PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Melloy and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal case. There was a factual basis for defendant's
guilty plea and no Rule 11(b)(3) error occurred; district court did not
abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motion to withdraw his plea.
Ninth Circuit:
| STEVE HARRIS V. AMGEN, INC. | |||||
| RONALD DEERE V. VINCE CULLEN | |||||
| HIGHER TASTE V. CITY OF TACOMA | |||||
| USA V. KELECHI AJOKU | |||||
| USA V. PEDRO CABRERA-GUTIERREZ | |||||
| USA V. SHIRLEY MORGAN |
Tenth Circuit:
11-9524
Eleventh Circuit:
DC Circuit:
10-3010USA v. Ian Watson
12-7064Louis Cannon v. DC