• Cargill v. Garland

    Cargill v. Garland United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit January 6, 2023, Filed No. 20-51016 Opinion  [*450]  Since the National Firearms Act of 1934 , federal law has heavily regulated machineguns. Indeed, as proposed, that law was known...
  • United States v. Thoreen

    During defendant attorney's representation of a client at a criminal trial, defendant substituted his client with another person with the intent of causing a misidentification. The district court found defendant in criminal contempt.
  • In re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum

    The grand jury sought to subpoena certain notes taken by counsel for the White House that concerned an investigation conducted by the OIC. The district court denied the OIC's motion to compel production of the documents. The OIC challenged the decision...
  • Sch. Comm. of Burlington v. Dep't of Educ.

    Parents' son was handicapped and entitled to public-expense instruction and transportation. They placed him in a private school, and the BSEA ordered the town to cover tuition and transportation. The town filed a judicial review.
  • Will v. United States

    Petitioner sought review of a writ of mandamus by appellate court, compelling petitioner to vacate a portion of a pretrial discovery order in a criminal case. The order required respondent United States to supply the defense with information concerning...
  • Mahon v. Pa. Coal Co.

    Plaintiff landowners filed a bill in equity under the Kohler Act asking that defendant coal-owner be restrained from mining any coal underlying plaintiffs' property. The trial court dismissed plaintiffs' bill, and the court reversed the decision...
  • Bacon v. St. Paul Union Stockyards Co.

    The dealer filed suit against the stockyard, contending that the stockyard had wrongfully, unlawfully, and willfully excluded him from the stockyards and barred and prevented him from carrying on his occupation. The stockyard filed a demurrer to the complaint...
  • Millison v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co.

    Plaintiffs sued defendants, alleging that defendant employer knowingly exposed plaintiffs to asbestos, and that all defendants concealed knowledge that plaintiffs were suffering from asbestos-related diseases.
  • Nippert v. Shinn Farm Constr. Co.

    The claimant was injured and was denied worker's compensation benefits. He was struck by a tornado at his job site and sought compensation for total temporary disability and permanent partial disability suffered as a result of injuries sustained in...
  • Procanik v. Cillo

    Plaintiffs contacted defendants, attorneys, to commence a medical malpractice claim against defendants, physicians. Defendants, attorneys, withdrew from the case. Plaintiffs argued that the attorneys, who considered themselves medical malpractice specialists...