John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts"

Transcription

1 John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts Donald P. Balla I. INTRODUCTION This year the Arkansas Supreme Court took its first good look at the issue of pseudonyms. Three members of an undocumented immigrant family brought suit in the circuit court under the names of John, Jane, and Junior Doe. 1 They challenged an Arkansas statute that removes or denies a driver s license to any person who lacks documents showing citizenship or legal immigration status. 2 The Doe plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. 3 However, they were never close to prevailing. The State, without answering the complaint, objected to the use of pseudonyms in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, citing Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a), 10(a), and 17(a). 4 The judge agreed, and the plaintiffs appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court. Although the supreme court affirmed the trial court s decision, Justice Paul E. Danielson, writing for the court, added this interesting comment: In his brief and at oral argument, appellants counsel urged this court to consider adopting rules to provide guidance on this issue in future litigation. We agree that some rules in this area are essential and, therefore, we refer this matter to the Civil Practice Committee. 5 Professor of Business and Law, John Brown University, Siloam Springs, Arkansas. J.D., University of Arkansas School of Law; CPA, University of Illinois; B.M., Southern Illinois University; M.M., Florida State University; M.S.F.S., The American College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. 1. Plaintiff s Second Amended Complaint, Doe v. Weiss, No. Civ (Benton Cnty. Cir. Ct. Aug. 4, 2008). 2. ARK. CODE ANN (a) (Repl. 2008). 3. Plaintiff s Second Amended Complaint, supra note 1, at Doe v. Weiss, 2010 Ark. 150, at 2. These rules are essentially the same as the federal rules and have the same numbers. 5. Id. at 6.

2 692 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 Wisely, the Arkansas Supreme Court sidestepped the patchwork approach to pseudonym rules that has plagued the federal circuit courts. When Arkansas s Civil Practice Committee tackles the Arkansas Supreme Court s assignment, the result could be the first comprehensive pseudonym policy in America. If done thoughtfully, Arkansas s rules could influence the United States Supreme Court when it finally resolves the differences among the circuits. This article is about what those rules should be. Currently there are no court rules about pseudonym use. The rules of civil procedure, both federal and in Arkansas, are silent on the matter. Decisions opposing pseudonym use cite the lack of authority allowing it, while courts allowing the use of pseudonyms point out the lack of a ban. 6 In 2008, Professor Ross E. Cheit decried the lack of uniform standards for pseudonyms, noting that the matter seem[ed] to be entirely in the discretion of judges. 7 The 2007 Sedona Conference, a legal think-tank, reporting on what they considered to be the best practices for keeping names confidential, called on courts to provide clear guidelines to civil litigants. 8 In spite of this rule vacuum, some judges who have denied pseudonym petitions still cite the federal rules failure to authorize the practice. 9 Joan Steinman, in her 1985 article still the most quoted and influential of all pseudonym studies considers this a mistake: Almost all courts that have considered this question, however, have held that the Rules silence on the issue, or even their contrary implications, are not dispositive. 10 Nevertheless, almost all pseudonym cases that reach the appellate level begin with Rules 10(a) and 17(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or their state equivalents. 11 Arkansas 6. See, e.g., Ew v. N.Y. Blood Ctr., 213 F.R.D. 108, (E.D.N.Y. 2003); Doe v. Ind. Black Expo, Inc., 923 F. Supp. 137, (S.D. Ind. 1996). 7. Ross E. Cheit, Tort Litigation, Transparency, and the Public Interest, 13 ROGER WILLIAMS U. L. REV. 232, 275 (2008). 8. THE SEDONA CONFERENCE WORKING GROUP ON PROTECTIVE ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY & PUBLIC ACCESS, THE SEDONA GUIDELINES BEST PRACTICES ADDRESSING PROTECTIVE ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY & PUBLIC ACCESS IN CIVIL CASES 19 (2007) [hereinafter SEDONA GUIDELINES]. 9. See, e.g., Ind. Black Expo, 923 F. Supp. at Joan Steinman, Public Trial, Pseudonymous Parties: When Should Litigants Be Permitted to Keep Their Identities Confidential?, 37 HAST. L.J. 1, 35 (1985). 11. See, e.g., Ind. Black Expo, 923 F. Supp. at 139.

3 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 693 Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) reads, Every pleading shall contain a caption setting forth the name of the court, the title of the action, the file number and a designation as in Rule 7(a). In the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties.... The rule contains no guidance as to what parties should do to keep their names confidential. An anonymous complaint one with a missing name would clearly violate Rule 10(a) and could properly be dismissed with a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. However, as so many pseudonym cases show, pseudonyms, where allowed, do not produce defective complaints. The pseudonym is the party s name, albeit not his given one, and seems to fulfill Rule 10(a). Rule 17(a) of the Arkansas and federal rules similarly lacks any discussion of pseudonym use: Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. 12 Rule 17, as one judge wrote, has more to do with getting the right people than about getting the right name. 13 So the Rules of Civil Procedure contain a void that new pseudonym rules could fill. Thoughtfully designed pseudonym rules offer hope for a consistent and cohesive policy. Legal practitioners throughout Arkansas and the United States are calling for clarity in this area. Let us be proud that Arkansas courts have heard the call. II. THE BASIS FOR PSEUDONYMS: THE CONSTITUTION AND JUSTICE A. Past Decisions Have Lacked a Common Foundation One reason for the split of opinions in the appellate courts on pseudonym use is that courts have based their opinions upon different foundations, limited by the arguments of counsel from both sides. In many pseudonym cases, the issue never comes up. Before Doe v. Weiss, there were seven Arkansas Supreme Court cases with Doe as a plaintiff; defendants objected to the use of a pseudonym in only one case. 14 Even in famous federal 12. ARK. R. CIV. P. 17(a). 13. See Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477, 504 n.27 (M.D. Pa. 2007). 14. Doe v. Ark. Dep t of Human Servs., 357 Ark. 413, 128 S.W.3d 107 (2004); United Food and Commercial Workers Int l Union v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 353 Ark. 902, 120 S.W.3d 89 (2003); Doe v. Baum, 348 Ark. 259, 72 S.W.3d 476 (2002); Stilley v. City

4 694 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 pseudonym cases such as Roe v. Wade 15 and Plyler v. Doe, 16 the parties never placed the pseudonym issue before the United States Supreme Court. Early federal appellate decisions emphasized the authoritative weight on the side of pseudonym opponents. For some, the issue went no further than the use of the word name in Rules of Civil Procedure 10(a) and 17(a) and the assumption that a pseudonymous name is not good enough. 17 Others considered open courts to be the highest value trumping all other constitutional mandates. As one court wrote, [I]dentifying the parties to the proceeding is an important dimension of publicness. The people have a right to know who is using their courts. 18 Others point to a series of First Amendment decisions 19 hammered out in criminal cases 20 where the media has consistently won access to most court information. [H]aving judicial proceedings fully open to the public so that the public may fully assess the merits of the lawsuit and the quality of the courts is in the public interest. 21 Courts issuing these decisions considered pseudonym use as a First Amendment violation. Over time, federal appellate courts began permitting pseudonyms on a seemingly ad hoc basis. The open-court argument operated only as a presumption and not as an of Conway, 343 Ark. 124, 31 S.W.3d 870 (2000); Doe v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 323 Ark. 237, 914 S.W.2d 312 (1996); Barr v. Richardson, 314 Ark. 294, 862 S.W.2d 253 (1993); Doe v. Porter, 3 Ark. 18, 1840 WL 269 (1840). Only in Doe v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. did the defendants object. 323 Ark. At 239, 914 S.W.2d at U.S. 113 (1973) (challenging an abortion law) U.S. 202 (1982) (challenging a Texas law denying education to undocumented children). 17. E.g., Roe v. New York, 49 F.R.D. 279, 281 (S.D.N.Y. 1970). Four boys challenged the care they received from a state juvenile school. Id. The court ruled that their complaint was a nullity because the court had to be able to identify from the complaint at least one plaintiff by name. Id. at Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185, 189 (2d Cir. 2008) (alteration omitted) (quoting Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United, 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 1997)). The Tenth Circuit considers a complaint void from a fatal jurisdiction flaw if permission to file pseudonymously is not granted before filing. W.N.J. v. Yocom, 357 F.3d 1171, 1172 (10th Cir. 2001). 19. E.g., Doe v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 237 F.R.D. 545, 549 (D.N.J. 2006). 20. SEDONA GUIDELINES, supra note 8, at 16 (discussing public-access concerns in criminal cases). 21. Qualls v. Rumsfeld, 228 F.R.D. 8, 13 (D.D.C. 2005)

5 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 695 absolute, unreviewable license to deny their use. 22 The early decisions gave the impression that a court could tell whether a petitioner could proceed pseudonymously simply by the type of case. However, exceptions arose and the type-of-case method of deciding on pseudonym use broke down. Courts began weighing various pros and cons, 23 but these weighing processes were so loose and undefined that decisions could easily boil down to the arbitrary leanings of individual judges. Steinman declared this ad hoc process of deciding to permit pseudonyms unsatisfactory. 24 Because of these diverse foundations, gleaning a pseudonym policy from existing appellate court decisions requires discernment. Writers of pseudonym policy will not be reading cases for precedent. They will be looking for policies that make the most legal sense. Courts deciding future pseudonym cases need a logical, wellunderstood foundation if the American legal system is ever going to offer parties something solid to stand on. B. Courts Should Base Pseudonym Decisions on Justice and the Constitution 1. Justice Is Equalizing the Scales The purpose of court rules is to balance the scales of justice for injured members of the public. We all know what justice looks like. She is the blindfolded lady holding the balance. When people suffer harm, they sense the weight of loss on their side of the balance. Justice is the process of evening the balance. When the injured cannot even the balance themselves, they turn to the courts for help. Usually the courts help. When court rules add unnecessary extra harm to one party s side of the balance, the court ceases to be a tool of justice. Of course, some harm is inescapable. Justice, for example, is expensive, and the cost of the legal system cannot be ignored. So court systems do their best and learn to live with unfixable imperfections. But where the added harm is so great 22. James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 238 (4th Cir. 1993). 23. A survey of the practice used by other circuits demonstrates a consistent trend towards the use of a balancing of the equities-type test.... Hartford Life, 237 F.R.D. at Steinman, supra note 10, at 2.

6 696 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 that it effectively bars access to the courts, and where the solution is simple with minimal harm to adverse parties and the public, court systems have redesigned the rules of civil procedure to remove those unnecessary burdens. It is their job to do so. When justice and court rules collide, justice trumps. In certain cases, using one s own name can add heavy weights of retaliatory, privacy, or legal harm to one s side of the scale. When that happens, the hope of balancing the scale via the courts disappears, and disheartened people abandon their legitimate claims. These harms exist when the trial process requires the exposure of sensitive information. When sensitive information must be made public, the easiest and most narrowly tailored way to avoid this extra harm is to keep party-names confidential. Thus courts have waded into the pseudonym arena with what is now a hefty armload of common-law decisions. Not every court is sympathetic to those suffering the extra harm imposed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. Femedeer was the pseudonym for a convicted sex offender suing to stay off a state sex-offender registry. 25 The trial court ordered him to use his own name and the Tenth Circuit affirmed, adding, those using the courts must be prepared to accept the public scrutiny that is an inherent part of public trials. 26 Pseudonym opponents commonly quote this rules-trump-justice point of view. 27 New pseudonym rules, if they are to remove this unnecessary harm, will need to make it clear that their purpose is to keep the court system open, as much as possible, as a tool for justice. 2. Constitutional Requirements at Times Call for Pseudonym Use Trial judges perform more uniformly when court rules clearly guide them. In the same way, rule designers can create rules more effectively when guided by constitutional requirements. Where these requirements appear to conflict, rule designers must chart a course to address them all. In the pseudonym arena, there are five guiding constitutional issues. On the pseudonym-opponents side is the 25. Femedeer v. Haun, 227 F.3d 1244, 1246 (10th Cir. 2000). 26. Id. 27. See, e.g., Doe v. Ind. Black Expo, Inc., 932 F. Supp. 137, 139 (S.D. Ind. 1996).

7 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 697 qualified First Amendment right that the public should have access to court proceedings. 28 The public has a legitimate interest in knowing all the facts of a case, including the identities of the parties. 29 On the petitioner s side are the following four constitutional protections: (1) a set of privacy rights hammered out in a number of liberty cases; 30 (2) state and federal constitutional guarantees of access to courts to redress wrongs; 31 (3) the Fifth Amendment protection from self-incrimination; 32 and (4) courts responsibility to review legislative acts for constitutionality. 33 a. First Amendment Rights Grant Limited Access to Courts There is a First Amendment right, hammered out in criminal cases, to keep judicial proceedings open. 34 This right belongs to the public, who may intervene and petition courts for more information. The right is not absolute; the normal practice of disclosing the parties identities yields to a policy of protecting privacy in certain circumstances. 35 There are valid policy reasons for enforcing this First Amendment right: (1) Open courts protect against judicial abuse 36 and insures accountability. 37 They assure fair trials 38 and guard against corruption, bias or partiality on the part of the court. 39 Any step that withdraws an element of the judicial process from public view makes the ensuing decision look more like fiat, which requires compelling justification See, e.g., Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Court, 464 U.S. 501, (1984) (discussing purposes of open access to criminal trials). 29. Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320, 322 (11th Cir. 1992). 30. See, e.g., Riniker v. Wilson, 623 N.W.2d 220, (Iowa Ct. App. 2000). 31. See discussion infra Part II.B.2.b. 32. See Steinman, supra note 10, at See discussion infra Part II.B.2.e. 34. SEDONA GUIDELINES, supra note 8, at S. Methodist Univ. Ass n of Women Law Students v. Wynne & Jaffe, 599 F.2d 707, 712 (5th Cir. 1979) (quoting Doe v. Deschamps, 64 F.R.D. 652, 653 (D. Mont. 1974)). 36. Steinman, supra note 10, at SEDONA GUIDELINES, supra note 8, at Steinman, supra note 10, at 13 (citing Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 569 (1980)). 39. See id. at Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. Leavell, 220 F.3d 562, 568 (7th Cir. 2000), quoted in United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988, 1012 (9th Cir. 2008).

8 698 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 (2) Open courts cause all trial participants to perform their duties more conscientiously 41 and inform the public on the workings of the court. 42 (3) Open courts promote public respect for and confidence in the judicial system. 43 (4) Open courts offer the public the therapeutic value of seeing criminals brought to justice 44 and unconstitutional laws removed from the books. b. Court-Defined Privacy Rights Can Conflict with the First Amendment The Supreme Court has recognized privacy as one of the liberty rights Americans enjoy. 45 The types of privacy recognized and protected in the First Amendment include issues about abortion, 46 the marital bedroom, 47 extramarital sexual conduct, 48 procreation and conception, 49 child rearing, 50 education and the acquiring of useful knowledge, 51 and any other personal privacy right that is either fundamental or implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. 52 This means that government actors, including courts, may not expose this information about identified parties without good cause when there exists a simple, nonbiasing solution to prevent it. Pseudonyms have become a solution. About the time the 41. Steinman, supra note 10, at 14 (quoting Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. 368, 383 (1979)). 42. SEDONA GUIDELINES, supra note 8, at Steinman, supra note 10, at See id. 45. See, e.g., Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, (1965); see also M.M. v. Zavaras, 139 F.3d 798, 800 (10th Cir. 1998) ( Of course privacy interests are recognized in particular circumstances to be in the public interest. ). In that case, the court found that M.M., an inmate who wanted an abortion, did not have a sufficiently high privacy interest. Id. at E.g., Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 153 (1973). 47. Griswold, 381 U.S. at (1965). 48. Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972) (voiding a state law that made it a crime to give a contraceptive to an unmarried woman). 49. Carey v. Population Servs. Int l, 431 U.S. 678, (1976). 50. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). 51. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923). 52. Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 325 (1937).

9 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 699 Supreme Court started recognizing privacy rights, the use of plaintiff pseudonyms took off. 53 The Arkansas Supreme Court has allowed pseudonym use to protect the privacy of plaintiffs. Those plaintiffs were: (1) a third grade girl allegedly raped; 54 (2) a pair whose criminal records had been expunged; 55 (3) a bus driver fired for having a positive drug screen; 56 and (4) a minor allegedly made pregnant by her minister. 57 But a sexual-touching lawsuit was not of utmost privacy and, therefore, did not merit pseudonym use. 58 Federal pseudonym cases protecting privacy rights have included these issues: religion, 59 mental health, 60 minors, 61 homosexuality, 62 abortion, 63 trade secrets, 64 and protection of the attorney-client privilege. 65 Cases involving information not sufficiently private to warrant pseudonym protection have included: the fear of making public some personal medical information, 66 high-school students claiming that a history teacher used sexually explicit material, 67 alcoholism, 68 sexual 53. See Carol M. Rice, Meet John Doe: It Is Time For Federal Civil Procedure To Recognize John Doe Parties, 57 U. PITT. L. REV. 883 (1996), for a thorough history of pseudonym use. 54. Doe v. Baum, 348 Ark. 259, 72 S.W.3d 476 (2002). 55. Doe v. Ark. Dep t of Human Servs., 357 Ark. 413, 182 S.W.3d 107 (2004). 56. Doe v. Cent. Ark. Transit, 50 Ark. App. 132, 900 S.W.2d 582 (1995). 57. Barr v. Richardson, 314 Ark. 294, 862 S.W.2d 253 (1993). 58. Doe v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 323 Ark. 237, 914 S.W.2d 312 (1996) (discussing Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320 (11th Cir. 1992)). 59. Doe v. Stegall, 653 F.2d 180 (5th Cir. 1981). 60. Doe v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 237 F.R.D. 545, 549 (D.N.J. 2006) ( [M]any courts have recognized pseudonym use in mental health cases. ). 61. A court should consider, inter alia, the ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected. James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 238 (4th Cir. 1993). We emphasize the special status and vulnerability of the child-litigants.... Stegall, 653 F.2d at 186. The more tender the years, the more likely a court is to consider granting pseudonym protection. 62. E.g., Doe v. United Servs. Life Ins. Co., 123 F.R.D. 437 (S.D.N.Y. 1988); Doe v. Chafee, 355 F. Supp. 112 (N.D. Cal. 1973). 63. Doe v. Deschamps, 64 F.R.D. 652 (D. Mont. 1974). 64. Leucadia Inc., v. Applied Extrusion Tech., Inc., 998 F.2d 157, 166 (3d Cir. 1993), cited in SEDONA GUIDELINES, supra note 8, at Doe v. A Corp., 709 F.2d 1043 (5th Cir. 1983). 66. Jane Noe v. Carlos, No. 2:08 cv 227, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (N.D. Ind. Sept. 25, 2008); Singer v. Rosenkrantz, 903 N.E.2d 191, (Mass. 2009). 67. Doe v. Pleasant Valley Sch. Dist., No. 3:07cv854, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (M.D. Pa. Aug. 1, 2007). 68. Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320, 323 (11th Cir. 1992).

10 700 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 discrimination by a landlord, 69 the common annoyance and criticism that all plaintiffs face, 70 and the risk of some embarrassment. 71 These are common-law privacy rights, and they are not limited by the fact that some statutes allow pseudonyms in narrow circumstances. 72 Not every judge deciding a pseudonym case sees constitutionally protected privacy as meriting protection. Usually, the constitutionality of the protection never comes up. Instead, courts look to see if the harm is, in their estimation, sufficient. Some use an utmost privacy standard. 73 While this may be appropriate for privacy issues not granted constitutional protection, courts should not run roughshod over constitutionally protected privacy rights. Courts should first consider whether the case involves one of those constitutionally protected privacy issues. If justice demands publishing the private information, then courts should consider one of the several non-prejudicial methods of allowing pseudonyms. New pseudonym rules should make it clear that risk of harm to constitutionally protected privacy is always significant harm. Immigrant status is not constitutionally protected as a privacy right. In Doe I v. Merten the court held that unlawful or problematic immigration status was not the type of personal information of the utmost intimacy that warrants abandoning the presumption of openness in judicial proceedings. 74 In Day v. Sebelius, a district court used similar reasoning. 75 Pseudonym opponents commonly quote these two cases as issue-settling precedent. They fail to mention that the judges in both Sebelius and Merten moved on from the discussion of privacy harm to measure the risk of retaliatory and legal harm that immigrants might suffer. 76 Since the issue of 69. Luckett v. Beaudet, 21 F. Supp. 2d 1029, 1029 (D. Minn. 1998). 70. James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233, 238 (4th Cir. 1993). 71. Femedeer v. Haun, 227 F.3d 1244, 1246 (10th Cir. 2000). 72. For example, the Arkansas Code allows pseudonyms for a minor seeking an abortion without parental permission. ARK. CODE ANN (2)(B) (Repl. 2005). 73. E.g., Doe v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 323 Ark. 237, 239, 914 S.W.2d 312, 313 (1996) (noting language used by the trial court) F.R.D. 387, 392 (E.D. Va. 2004); see also Doe v. Sebelius, 227 F.R.D. 668 (D. Kan. 2005) F.R.D. 668, 677 (D. Kan. 2005). 76. Day v. Sebelius, 227 F.R.D. 668, (D. Kan. 2005); Doe I v. Merten, 219 F.R.D. 387, (E.D. Va. 2004).

11 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 701 access to courts for undocumented aliens will be relevant for decades to come, new pseudonym rules should make it clear that permission for undocumented aliens to proceed pseudonymously hinges not on privacy harm but on other types of harm. c. Our Constitutions Guarantee Access to Courts The United States and Arkansas constitutions guarantee access to the courts to redress wrongs. The Arkansas Constitution provides, Every person is entitled to a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries or wrongs he may receive in his person, property or character The First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution contains a similar guarantee: Congress shall make no law... abridging... the right of the people peaceably... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 78 However, sometimes state and federal rules of civil procedure needlessly block plaintiffs access to courts. Injured parties can be effectively blocked from access to the courts if the rules require them to use their own names when doing so threatens additional retaliatory, privacy, and legal harm. The in terrorem effect of scaring plaintiffs away from bringing lawsuits has long been considered an improper purpose. The Supreme Court has held that judges may keep trial information confidential where there is reason to believe that the court files would become a vehicle for improper purposes. 79 Examples of the risk of retaliation harm which have been found to justify pseudonym use include: a federal witness fearing reprisal, 80 a Jewish mother who feared physical and mental harassment from Christians, 81 legal Chinese-immigrant workers suing their employer, 82 and undocumented aliens contesting city ordinances in an openly hostile local environment. 83 Retaliation can be physical, mental, 84 or 77. ARK. CONST. art. 2, U.S. CONST. amend. I (emphasis added). 79. Steinman, supra note 10, at 26 (citing Nixon v. Warner Commc ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). 80. United States v. Doe, 655 F.2d 920, (9th Cir. 1980). The court s discussion in note 1 on page 922 is particularly helpful. Id. 81. Doe v. Stegall, 653 F.2d 180, 181 (5th Cir. 1981). 82. Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058, (9th Cir. 2000). 83. Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477, (M.D. Pa. 2007).

12 702 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 63:691 economic harm from harassment, ridicule, or personal embarrassment. 85 On the other hand, one court held that a group of women law students suing law firms faced no greater threat of retaliation than the typical plaintiff alleging Title VII violations. 86 Harm to privacy, even if not recognized as constitutionally protected, can still effectively block access to the courts. Thus, courts may need to take steps to protect the identities of, for example, minors and crime victims in order to give life to the constitutional guarantee of access to courts. 87 New pseudonym rules should give life to constitutional guarantees of access to courts and should reject past pseudonym decisions that have blocked access. For example, the judge in Qualls v. Rumsfield denied pseudonym use to a soldier seeking to prevent the Army from unilaterally extending enlistment contracts. 88 The judge was comfortable knowing the soldier would drop his case if denied the right to proceed pseudonymously. 89 Requiring plaintiffs to use their own names, the court explained, encourage[s] suits by the most zealous, passionate and sincere litigants A similar argument to this court s reasoning is that access to courts is synonymous with the ability to file a lawsuit. Unreasonable procedural hurdles or risk of extraordinary harm do not deny this access, the argument goes plaintiffs are free to take it or leave it. 91 However, Steinman writes that this either-or approach interferes with plaintiffs constitutional right to have claims adjudicated by the court, and should be rejected. 92 The Fourth Circuit held that a trial judge had abused his discretion when the judge wrote: 84. Does I thru XXIII, 214 F.3d at 1068; Qualls v. Rumsfeld, 228 F.R.D. 8, (D.D.C. 2005). 85. United States v. Doe, 655 F.2d 920, 922 n.1 (9th Cir. 1980). 86. S. Methodist Univ. Ass n for Women Law Students v. Wynne & Jaffe, 599 F.2d 707, 713 (5th Cir. 1979). 87. The type of legal harm that could impermissibly block a party from access to the courts is discussed in Part IV.A Qualls, 228 F.R.D. at 9, See id. at Id. at See Steinman, supra note 10, at Id. (citing Doe v. Bodwin, 326 N.W.2d 473, (Mich. Ct. App. 1982)).

13 2010] PSEUDONYM USE IN AMERICAN COURTS 703 That [harm to the children] seems to me a risk you take when you undertake to try your case in what is going to be a public forum. I m not trying to discourage litigation, but to be able to proceed in secret, in effect, is not my notion of how a case ought to proceed. 93 Finally, writers of pseudonym rules may be tempted to play loose with the words every person in our constitutional guarantees of access to the courts. It is tempting to deny access to justice by defining every person to mean everyone but our currently least-favored group. Let us not do so. The thought that any government would choose to design justice for us and kangaroo courts for them is too much for a moral society to bear. New pseudonym rules should make it clear that one of their purposes is to keep courts open for everyone to redress injuries and wrongs. d. The Fifth Amendment Prevents Courts from Compelling Self-Incrimination The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that No person shall be... compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself As with the other constitutional protections at work in pseudonym decisions, 95 a thorough study of the Fifth Amendment is important to understand why it implicates pseudonym use. Such thoroughness, though, is outside the scope of this article. For now it is enough to show that the United States Supreme Court recognizes that the sole concern [of the protection] is, as its name indicates, with the danger to a witness forced to give testimony leading to the infliction of penalties affixed to the criminal acts. 96 Thus, a judge who would deny a claim of the Fifth Amendment privilege must be perfectly clear, from a careful consideration of all the circumstances in the case, that 93. James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d & n.1 (4th Cir. 1993) (alterations in original). 94. Article II, section 8 of the Arkansas Constitution is essentially identical. 95. See, e.g., Steinman, supra note 10, at 19 ( Finally, secrecy hampers the structural function of the [F]irst [A]mendment. ). 96. Ullmann v. United States, 350 U.S. 422, (1956) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 634 (1886)).

Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Case 8:13-cv-01731-VMC-TBM Document 36 Filed 03/17/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID 134 JOHN and JOANNA ROBERTS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 8:13-cv-1731-T-33TBM

More information

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS Sources: US Courts : http://www.uscourts.gov/library/glossary.html New York State Unified Court System: http://www.nycourts.gov/lawlibraries/glossary.shtml Acquittal A

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 20, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court LORRIE LOGSDON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TURBINES,

More information

Glossary of Court-related Terms

Glossary of Court-related Terms Glossary of Court-related Terms Acquittal Adjudication Appeal Arraignment Arrest Bail Bailiff Beyond a reasonable doubt Burden of proof Capital offense Certification Charge Circumstantial evidence Citation

More information

LEGAL MALPRACTICE AND THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY By Peter L. Ostermiller

LEGAL MALPRACTICE AND THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY By Peter L. Ostermiller LEGAL MALPRACTICE AND THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY By Peter L. Ostermiller Occasionally, a defendant, while incarcerated and apparently having nothing better to do, will file a Motion under RCr. 11.42,

More information

Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS SANDRA H. DEYA and EDWIN DEYA, individually and as next friends and natural

More information

Supreme Court Decision Affirming Judicial Right to Review EEOC Actions

Supreme Court Decision Affirming Judicial Right to Review EEOC Actions Supreme Court Decision Affirming Judicial Right to Review EEOC Actions The Supreme Court Holds That EEOC s Conciliation Efforts Are Subject to Judicial Review, Albeit Narrow SUMMARY A unanimous Supreme

More information

You ve Got to Keep Them Separate Katie Tefft Program Attorney TMCEC

You ve Got to Keep Them Separate Katie Tefft Program Attorney TMCEC Public Inspection of Criminal Case Files You ve Got to Keep Them Separate Katie Tefft Program Attorney TMCEC Public Information Act (PIA) Rule 12 Common-Law Right To Judge Judy, Please send me copies of

More information

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. Opn. No. 2000-1

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. Opn. No. 2000-1 Page 1 of 6 Opn. No. 2000-1 US CONST, FOURTH AMEND; CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW 1.20, 140.10, 140.25, 140.30; PENAL LAW 10.00; 8 USC, CH 12, 1252c, 1253(c), 1254(a)(1), 1255a, 1324(a) and (c), 1325(b). New

More information

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals RENDERED: MARCH 14, 2008; 2:00 P.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2007-CA-001304-MR DONALD T. CHRISTY APPELLANT v. APPEAL FROM MASON CIRCUIT COURT HONORABLE STOCKTON

More information

STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. February 3, 2014. Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS

STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. February 3, 2014. Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS STATE OF TENNESSEE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Juveniles on Sex Offender Registry February 3, 2014 Opinion No. 14-15 QUESTIONS 1. Would a juvenile who committed a violent juvenile sexual offense before

More information

Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9

Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 Case 5:14-cv-00093-RS-GRJ Document 21 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 MARY SOWELL et al., Plaintiffs, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION Page 1 of

More information

General District Courts

General District Courts General District Courts To Understand Your Visit to Court You Should Know: It is the courts wish that you know your rights and duties. We want every person who comes here to receive fair treatment in accordance

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 15-1328 NEAL D. SECREASE, JR., v. Plaintiff-Appellant, THE WESTERN & SOUTHERN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal

More information

INVESTIGATIONS GONE WILD: Potential Claims By Employees

INVESTIGATIONS GONE WILD: Potential Claims By Employees INTRODUCTION INVESTIGATIONS GONE WILD: Potential Claims By Employees By: Maureen S. Binetti, Esq. Christopher R. Binetti, Paralegal Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. When can the investigation which may

More information

1 of 2 DOCUMENTS. No. A--2000-1 REVIEW TRIBUNAL OF TEXAS. 55 S.W.3d 243; 2000 Tex. LEXIS 83

1 of 2 DOCUMENTS. No. A--2000-1 REVIEW TRIBUNAL OF TEXAS. 55 S.W.3d 243; 2000 Tex. LEXIS 83 Page 1 1 of 2 DOCUMENTS In re Honorable Thomas G. JONES, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 7, Place 1, Dallas, Dallas County, Texas, Judicial Disciplinary Proceeding No. A--2000-1 REVIEW TRIBUNAL OF TEXAS

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 99,491 KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, v. JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Under the Kansas Act for Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement

More information

Chapter 153. Violations and Fines 2013 EDITION. Related Laws Page 571 (2013 Edition)

Chapter 153. Violations and Fines 2013 EDITION. Related Laws Page 571 (2013 Edition) Chapter 153 2013 EDITION Violations and Fines VIOLATIONS (Generally) 153.005 Definitions 153.008 Violations described 153.012 Violation categories 153.015 Unclassified and specific fine violations 153.018

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 14-mc-0052 DECISION AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 14-mc-0052 DECISION AND ORDER EEOC v. Union Pacific Railroad Company Doc. 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. Case No. 14-mc-0052 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD

More information

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 93-1789. George S. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 93-1789. George S. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 93-1789. George S. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Sept. 26, 1994. Appeal from the United States

More information

Employee Relations. Howard S. Lavin and Elizabeth E. DiMichele

Employee Relations. Howard S. Lavin and Elizabeth E. DiMichele VOL. 34, NO. 4 SPRING 2009 Employee Relations L A W J O U R N A L Split Circuits Does Charging Party s Receipt of a Right-to-Sue Letter and Commencement of a Lawsuit Divest the EEOC of its Investigative

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 12-408

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 12-408 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 12-408 JAMES K. MEADOR V. APPELLANT T O T A L C O M P L I A N C E CONSULTANTS, INC., AND BILL MEDLEY APPELLEES Opinion Delivered January 31, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE BENTON COUNTY

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent, APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent, APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO STATE OF ARIZONA, Petitioner/Appellant, HON. CHARLES SHIPMAN, Judge of the Green Valley Justice Court, in and of the County of Pima, v. and THOMAS

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND NICOLE MARIE CRUZ, Plaintiff, v. C.A. No. 05-38S HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER WILLIAM E. SMITH, United

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Goodridge v. Hewlett Packard Company Doc. 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION CHARLES GOODRIDGE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION H-07-4162 HEWLETT-PACKARD

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Memorandum and Order

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Memorandum and Order IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CAROSELLA & FERRY, P.C., Plaintiff, v. TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 00-2344 Memorandum and Order YOHN,

More information

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE Filed 5/28/15 Lopez v. Fishel Co. CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued June 11, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00636-CV SINHUE TEMPLOS, Appellant V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

More information

Case 1:13-cv-00563-RBJ Document 56 Filed 09/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9

Case 1:13-cv-00563-RBJ Document 56 Filed 09/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 Case 1:13-cv-00563-RBJ Document 56 Filed 09/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 Civil Action No 13-cv-00563-RBJ W.L. (BILL) ARMSTRONG; JEFFREY S. MAY; WILLIAM L. (WIL) ARMSTRONG III; JOHN A. MAY; DOROTHY A.

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 LUZ RIVERA AND ABRIANNA RIVERA Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RONALD MANZI Appellee No. 948 EDA 2015 Appeal from the Order

More information

AGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 Cite as 20 Neb. App. 597. N.W.2d

AGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 Cite as 20 Neb. App. 597. N.W.2d AGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 At the hearing on the motion to withdraw his plea, he requested that the court take judicial notice of a six-page portion of the U.S. statutes. The court took judicial

More information

Florida Senate - 2016 SB 872

Florida Senate - 2016 SB 872 By Senator Bean 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 A bill to be entitled An act relating to federal immigration enforcement; providing a short title; creating

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION BRIAN Z. FRANCE, v. MEGAN P. FRANCE, Plaintiff, Defendant. Case No. 3:11-CV-00186 PLAINTIFF S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT

More information

Lesson 1. Health Information and Litigation ASSIGNMENT 1. Objectives. Criminal versus Civil Law

Lesson 1. Health Information and Litigation ASSIGNMENT 1. Objectives. Criminal versus Civil Law Health Information and Litigation ASSIGNMENT 1 Read this entire introduction. Then read Chapter 1 in your textbook, Legal Aspects of Health Information Management. When you ve read all of the material

More information

THE CIVIL LITIGATOR New Shield Law Prohibits Most Subpoenas to Reporters. by Daniel E.D. Friesen and Andrew M. Low

THE CIVIL LITIGATOR New Shield Law Prohibits Most Subpoenas to Reporters. by Daniel E.D. Friesen and Andrew M. Low Originally published in The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 20, No. 5, May 1991. THE CIVIL LITIGATOR New Shield Law Prohibits Most Subpoenas to Reporters by Daniel E.D. Friesen and Andrew M. Low A new Colorado law

More information

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2010).

This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2010). This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2010). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A10-1489 Barry H. Nash, Appellant, vs. James D. Gurovitsch,

More information

2015 IL App (1st) 133515-U. No. 1-13-3515 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2015 IL App (1st) 133515-U. No. 1-13-3515 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2015 IL App (1st) 133515-U FIRST DIVISION November 9, 2015 No. 1-13-3515 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS IN THE MATTER OF THE EXPUNCTION OF A.G. O P I N I O N No. 08-12-00174-CV Appeal from 171st District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC # 2012-DVC02875)

More information

Case 2:11-cv-03070-WHW -MCA Document 17 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 199 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:11-cv-03070-WHW -MCA Document 17 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 199 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 211-cv-03070-WHW -MCA Document 17 Filed 09/26/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID 199 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY KERRY FEDER, on behalf of herself and the putative class, Plaintiffs, WILLIAMS-SONOMA

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0721n.06. No. 13-2126 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0721n.06. No. 13-2126 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0721n.06 No. 13-2126 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT PATRICK RUGIERO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; FANNIE MAE; MORTGAGE

More information

JUSTICE HOFFMAN delivered the opinion of the court: The plaintiff, Melissa Callahan, appeals from an order of the

JUSTICE HOFFMAN delivered the opinion of the court: The plaintiff, Melissa Callahan, appeals from an order of the SECOND DIVISION FILED: July 3, 2007 No. 1-06-3178 MELISSA CALLAHAN, ) APPEAL FROM THE ) CIRCUIT COURT OF Plaintiff-Appellant, ) COOK COUNTY ) v. ) ) No. 05 L 006795 EDGEWATER CARE & REHABILITATION CENTER,

More information

ARE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS COVERED: A REVIEW OF MOTOR CARRIERS FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

ARE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS COVERED: A REVIEW OF MOTOR CARRIERS FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ARE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS COVERED: A REVIEW OF MOTOR CARRIERS FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Seth G. Gausnell Rabbitt, Pitzer & Snodgrass, P.C. 100 South Fourth Street, Suite 400 St. Louis, Missouri 63102

More information

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION TAMMY FABIAN, v. Plaintiffs, CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner

More information

Defendant brought a Motion to Suppress the DNA Testing Results or in the alternative,

Defendant brought a Motion to Suppress the DNA Testing Results or in the alternative, STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN COUNTY ` DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT STATE OF MINNESOTA, Plaintiff, vs. JIMMIE DALE JACKSON, File No: 04085182 ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW Defendant. Defendant

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2010-IA-02028-SCT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2010-IA-02028-SCT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2010-IA-02028-SCT RENE C. LEVARIO v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/23/2010 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ROBERT P. KREBS COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: JACKSON COUNTY

More information

BILL ANALYSIS. Senate Research Center C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Jurisprudence 4/5/2007 Committee Report (Substituted)

BILL ANALYSIS. Senate Research Center C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Jurisprudence 4/5/2007 Committee Report (Substituted) BILL ANALYSIS Senate Research Center C.S.S.B. 1309 By: Wentworth Jurisprudence 4/5/2007 Committee Report (Substituted) AUTHOR'S / SPONSOR'S STATEMENT OF INTENT C.S.S.B. 1309 gives the State of Texas civil

More information

57 of 62 DOCUMENTS. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 172. March 1, 2006, Filed

57 of 62 DOCUMENTS. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 172. March 1, 2006, Filed Page 1 57 of 62 DOCUMENTS JAMES C. GARDNER, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., and NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS

More information

TAX RETURNS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS

TAX RETURNS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS TAX RETURNS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS DISCOVERY OF TAX RETURNS -- LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS A PLAINTIFF MAY NOT ASSERT A PRIVILEGE TO TX RETURNS AND THUS

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS NO. 13-1006 IN RE ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, RELATOR ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS PER CURIAM Rafael Zuniga sued San Diego Tortilla (SDT) for personal injuries and then added

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION Case: 4:12-cv-02030-DDN Doc. #: 42 Filed: 06/19/13 Page: 1 of 8 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION MARY HAYDEN, ) individually and as plaintiff

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. v. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY et al Doc. 324 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE

More information

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act PLEASE NOTE: Legislative Information cannot perform research, provide legal advice, or interpret Maine law. For legal assistance, please contact a qualified attorney. Be it enacted by the People of the

More information

Morgan County Prosecuting Attorney Debra MH McLaughlin

Morgan County Prosecuting Attorney Debra MH McLaughlin Morgan County Prosecuting Attorney Debra MH McLaughlin Directions: From Fairfax Street Entrance, Enter Main Door, turn Right through door, up the narrow staircase. Office is at top of steps. (Old Circuit

More information

National Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act

National Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act National Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act October 16, 2006 In a recent decision potentially affecting all companies that use mandatory

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT Filed 10/11/13 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT ED AGUILAR, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. B238853 (Los Angeles County

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 13-3229 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ANTHONY BAILEY, v. Plaintiff-Appellee. Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ARISTA RECORDS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; BMG MUSIC,

More information

Inquiry Concerning A Florida Lawyer

Inquiry Concerning A Florida Lawyer Inquiry Concerning A Florida Lawyer This pamphlet provides general information relating to the purpose and procedures of the Florida lawyer discipline system. It should be read carefully and completely

More information

December 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

December 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit December 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT DOUG HAMBELTON, Plaintiff Appellee, v. CANAL

More information

STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OFMICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, v. Case No. Hon. Magistrate Judge UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OFMICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, v. Case No. Hon. Magistrate Judge UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 2:13-cv-12939-PJD-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 07/06/13 Pg 1 of 11 Pg ID 1 DETROIT FREE PRESS, a Michigan corporation, STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OFMICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Plaintiff, v. Case No. Hon.

More information

Peter Tom, Justice Presiding, Angela M. Mazzarelli Eugene Nardelli Luis A. Gonzalez Bernard J. Malone, Jr., Justices.

Peter Tom, Justice Presiding, Angela M. Mazzarelli Eugene Nardelli Luis A. Gonzalez Bernard J. Malone, Jr., Justices. SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT Peter Tom, Justice Presiding, Angela M. Mazzarelli Eugene Nardelli Luis A. Gonzalez Bernard J. Malone, Jr., Justices. ---------------------------------------x

More information

IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT

IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT 2016 IL App (1st) 150810-U Nos. 1-15-0810, 1-15-0942 cons. Fourth Division June 30, 2016 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in

More information

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES Chapter 337-A: PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT Table of Contents Part 12. HUMAN RIGHTS... Section 4651. DEFINITIONS... 3 Section 4652. FILING OF COMPLAINT; JURISDICTION...

More information

IN THE CRIMINAL COURT FOR KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE DIVISION I

IN THE CRIMINAL COURT FOR KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE DIVISION I IN THE CRIMINAL COURT FOR KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE DIVISION I STATE OF TENNESSEE ) ) V. ) ) CAPITAL CASE LETALVIS DARNELL COBBINS ) NO. 86216 A LEMARCUS DAVIDSON ) 86216 B GEORGE THOMAS ) 86216 C VANESSA

More information

2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT

2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO COLORADO CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR, a Colorado non-profit corporation; COLORADO CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM COALITION, a Colorado

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit DEC 8 2004 PATRICK FISHER Clerk RICHARD E. MYERS; SARAH MYERS, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, COUNTRY

More information

Case 8:11-cv-02818-RWT Document 21 Filed 07/12/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Case 8:11-cv-02818-RWT Document 21 Filed 07/12/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Case 8:11-cv-02818-RWT Document 21 Filed 07/12/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND ANICA ASHBOURNE, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: RWT-11-2818 TIMOTHY GEITHNER,

More information

Case 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:

Case 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: <pageid> Case 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION DARYL HILL, vs. Plaintiff, WHITE JACOBS

More information

Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6

Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6 Case 5:10-cv-01025-OLG Document 150 Filed 11/12/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION Hon. Orlando Garcia ERIC STEWARD, by his next friend

More information

CRIMINAL LAW AND VICTIMS RIGHTS

CRIMINAL LAW AND VICTIMS RIGHTS Chapter Five CRIMINAL LAW AND VICTIMS RIGHTS In a criminal case, a prosecuting attorney (working for the city, state, or federal government) decides if charges should be brought against the perpetrator.

More information

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO Filed 8/27/14 Tesser Ruttenberg etc. v. Forever Entertainment CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying

More information

THE IMPACT OF A POLICYHOLDER S MISREPRESENTATIONS IN ILLINOIS JOHN D. DALTON AND MARK A. SWANTEK

THE IMPACT OF A POLICYHOLDER S MISREPRESENTATIONS IN ILLINOIS JOHN D. DALTON AND MARK A. SWANTEK THE IMPACT OF A POLICYHOLDER S MISREPRESENTATIONS IN ILLINOIS JOHN D. DALTON AND MARK A. SWANTEK An insurer s options when the insured is making misrepresentations depend on the timing of those misrepresentations

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 13-20764 Document: 00512823894 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/03/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, L.P., Plaintiff - Appellee v. United States Court

More information

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JAMES E. TOMLINSON and DARLENE TOMLINSON, his wife, v. Plaintiffs,

More information

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) AND DISCOVERY TWO DIFFERENT AVENUES FOR ACCESSING AGENCY RECORDS AND THE BENEFITS OF LEVERAGING E-

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) AND DISCOVERY TWO DIFFERENT AVENUES FOR ACCESSING AGENCY RECORDS AND THE BENEFITS OF LEVERAGING E- THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) AND DISCOVERY TWO DIFFERENT AVENUES FOR ACCESSING AGENCY RECORDS AND THE BENEFITS OF LEVERAGING E- DISCOVERY TOOLS FOR FOIA The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and

More information

Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation

Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation On January 1, 2012, new rules approved by the Colorado Supreme Court entitled the Civil Access Pilot Project ( CAPP

More information

Jhone M. Ebert, Senior Deputy Commissioner Richard J. Trautwein, Esq., Counsel and Deputy Commissioner of Legal Affairs

Jhone M. Ebert, Senior Deputy Commissioner Richard J. Trautwein, Esq., Counsel and Deputy Commissioner of Legal Affairs THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234 OFFICE OF STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES 89 Washington Avenue, Room 318-M EB Phone: (518) 486-6090; Fax: (518) 474-8299

More information

2015 IL App (3d) 140252-U. Order filed December 17, 2015 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2015

2015 IL App (3d) 140252-U. Order filed December 17, 2015 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2015 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2015 IL App (3d 140252-U Order filed

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-13-00125-CV CHRISTOPHER EDOMWANDE APPELLANT V. JULIO GAZA & SANDRA F. GAZA APPELLEES ---------- FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY

More information

D.C., A MINOR V. HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCH., 98 Cal. Rptr. 3d 300. Plaintiff D.C., a student, appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court decision in favor of

D.C., A MINOR V. HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCH., 98 Cal. Rptr. 3d 300. Plaintiff D.C., a student, appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court decision in favor of D.C., A MINOR V. HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCH., 98 Cal. Rptr. 3d 300 Raquel Rivera Rutgers Conflict Resolution Law Journal November 22, 2010 Brief Summary: Plaintiff D.C., a student, appealed a Los Angeles Superior

More information

FORC QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF INSURANCE LAW AND REGULATION

FORC QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF INSURANCE LAW AND REGULATION The plaintiff in Schmidt filed suit against her employer, Personalized Audio Visual, Inc. ("PAV") and PAV s president, Dennis Smith ("Smith"). 684 A.2d at 68. Her Complaint alleged several causes of action

More information

MINORS AND EQUAL PROTECTION THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF OHIO'S MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS:

MINORS AND EQUAL PROTECTION THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF OHIO'S MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF OHIO'S MEDICAL MALPRACTICE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: MINORS AND EQUAL PROTECTION A s WITH ALL LAWS, statutes of limitations must apply equally to all persons unless reasonable

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JOAN FALLOWS KLUGE, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. L-10-00022 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA Defendant. MEMORANDUM Plaintiff, Joan Fallows

More information

Case 3:05-cv-01771-G Document 35 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 6 PageID 288 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 3:05-cv-01771-G Document 35 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 6 PageID 288 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION Case 3:05-cv-01771-G Document 35 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 6 PageID 288 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOEL N. COHEN, VS. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, NCO FINANCIAL

More information

2013 IL App (1st) 120898-U. No. 1-12-0898

2013 IL App (1st) 120898-U. No. 1-12-0898 2013 IL App (1st) 120898-U FOURTH DIVISION March 28, 2013 No. 1-12-0898 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information

STATE OF MAINE WADE R. HOOVER. [ 1] Wade R. Hoover appeals from an order of the trial court (Murphy, J.)

STATE OF MAINE WADE R. HOOVER. [ 1] Wade R. Hoover appeals from an order of the trial court (Murphy, J.) MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2015 ME 109 Docket: Ken-14-362 Argued: June 16, 2015 Decided: August 11, 2015 Reporter of Decisions Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, and

More information

Amendments to the Rules to Civil Procedure: Yours to E-Discover. Prepared by Christopher M. Bartlett Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP

Amendments to the Rules to Civil Procedure: Yours to E-Discover. Prepared by Christopher M. Bartlett Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP Amendments to the Rules to Civil Procedure: Yours to E-Discover Prepared by Christopher M. Bartlett Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP September 25, 2009 Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure: Yours to

More information

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division PUBLISHED UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division IN RE: WILLIAM G. DADE ) Case No. 00-32487 ANN E. DADE ) Chapter 7 Debtors. ) ) ) DEBORAH R. JOHNSON ) Adversary

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS February 24, 2010 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS February 24, 2010 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT MEMPHIS February 24, 2010 Session STEPHANIE JONES and HOWARD JONES v. RENGA I. VASU, M.D., THE NEUROLOGY CLINIC, and METHODIST LEBONHEUR HOSPITAL Appeal from the

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION Case 1:05-cv-01379-RLY-WTL Document 41 Filed 11/20/06 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION CYNTHIA Y. MARCH, Plaintiff, vs. ADT

More information

2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U. No. 1-13-0250 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U. No. 1-13-0250 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U FIFTH DIVISION September 12, 2014 No. 1-13-0250 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited

More information

2016 PA Super 29 OPINION BY JENKINS, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 09, 2016. Michael David Zrncic ( Appellant ) appeals pro se from the judgment

2016 PA Super 29 OPINION BY JENKINS, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 09, 2016. Michael David Zrncic ( Appellant ) appeals pro se from the judgment 2016 PA Super 29 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL DAVID ZRNCIC Appellant No. 764 MDA 2015 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence March 30, 2015 in the

More information

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00647-CV ACCELERATED WEALTH, LLC and Accelerated Wealth Group, LLC, Appellants v. LEAD GENERATION AND MARKETING, LLC, Appellee From

More information

2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U. No. 1-12-0546 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U. No. 1-12-0546 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U Third Division March 13, 2013 No. 1-12-0546 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information

Criminal Justice System Commonly Used Terms & Definitions

Criminal Justice System Commonly Used Terms & Definitions Criminal Justice System Commonly Used Terms & Definitions A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Accused: Acquittal: Adjudication: Admissible Evidence: Affidavit: Alford Doctrine: Appeal:

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Jerry Keeler felt that his employer, ARAMARK, didn t appreciate his

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Jerry Keeler felt that his employer, ARAMARK, didn t appreciate his FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 21, 2013 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT QUINCEY GERALD KEELER, a/k/a Jerry, v. Plaintiff-Appellant,

More information

A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process

A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process Office of Victims Services California Attorney General s Office A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process Office of Victims Services California Attorney

More information