[1] Newport International University, Inc. (hereinafter "NIU") appeals from a summary judgment granted in favor of the State of Wyoming, Department of Education and Mr. McBride (hereinafter collectively "Department"). The district court ruled that the Private School Licensing Act, Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 21-2-401 to 407 (LexisNexis 2007) (hereinafter "Act"), and Department rules promulgated pursuan

Police officers of the City of Grass Valley, California, arrested plaintiff-appellant Matthew Fogel and impounded his van because of messages painted on the back of the vehicle. Fogel brought suit against Grass Valley and six police officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a violation of his First Amendment rights. The district court assumed without deciding that Fogel's First Amendment r

Plaintiffs Armando Cuevas and Heather Burlette appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment against them on their civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.1

Although Plaintiffs alleged a variety of constitutional violations in the district court, they press on appeal only their claim that a warrantless entry into their residence on February 25, 2004, was unlaw

We are asked to decide whether the Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS")1 has an enforceable duty promptly to withdraw a threatened species from the protections of the Endangered Species Act (the "ESA" or the "Act"), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531- 1544, after a five-year agency review mandated by the Act found that the species does not fit into one of the several types of population categories protected und

As she was driving through the Village of Lyons en route to the North Riverside Mall, Laura Phelan was pulled over and arrested. Officer Damien Dyas executed the traffic stop based on his belief that Phelan was driving a stolen vehicle. His belief turned out to be mistaken, and Phelan was released shortly thereafter. She sued the Village of Lyons1 and Officer Dyas under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, al

Graylon L. Walch brought suit based on his discharge from the Texas Air National Guard and the loss of his position as a full-time National Guard civilian employee. The district court found the claims to be non-justiciable. We agree and affirm. Our decision does not affect any right Walch may have to return to the interrupted administrative processing of some of his claims under Title VII.

1 Jesse, Benjamin and Elaine Stanton ("the Stantons") appeal the order granting summary judgment for Pennsylvania Power & Light Company ("PP & L") based on PP & L's statutory immunity under the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act ("the RULWA" or "the Act"). The RULWA provides immunity from negligence liability for owners of undeveloped land who open that land without charge for recreation

The defendant state of Connecticut1 appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a jury trial, in favor of the plaintiff, Herbert Hicks, for damages pursuant to General Statutes § 52-556,2 which provides a right of action against the state for persons whose injuries are sustained ‘‘through the negligence of a state . . . employee when operating a motor vehicle owned and insu

This case arises from the Ontario Police Department's review of text messages sent and received by Jeff Quon, a Sergeant and member of the City of Ontario's SWAT team. We must decide whether (1) Arch Wireless Operating Company Inc., the company with whom the City contracted for text messaging services, violated the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2711 (1986); and (2) whether the

We must decide whether a non-Indian contractor who purchases construction materials from non-Indian vendors, which are later delivered to a construction site on Indian land, is exempt from state sales taxes. The California State Board of Equalization (the "Board") appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Barona Band of Mission Indians (the "Tribe") in which the district court de

Plaintiffs appeal after judgment was entered against them on their claims for their decedents' wrongful deaths and survivors' personal injuries resulting from a traffic collision with a speeding police vehicle.(FN1) Defendants in this case are the City of Farmington and three of its police officers.(FN2) This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Missouri Constitution article V, section 10, as the ca

Relators seek a writ of mandamus ordering dismissal of a wrongful death claim brought by the decedents of a man killed while hunting on Relators' property. Because Relators are entitled to immunity under Missouri's Recreational Use Act ("RUA"),(FN1) the alternative writ of mandamus is made peremptory.

II. Facts

Relators, the Youngs, gave permission to James Shaw and John Hartnagel to e

[1] Appellants, Michael Hannifan (Hannifan) and Kevin Hampleman (Hampleman) (collectively Appellants) contend that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law1 because there is insufficient evidence that either of them acted "intentionally" to harm the Appellees, Leslie Roy "Les" Butts (Butts), or Davis Butts and Dawson Butts, the minor children of Butts (hereafter "Children" or "Butts‟

Plaintiff-Appellant Frank J. Lawrence, Jr. (Lawrence) appeals from the district courts judgment dismissing his claims filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 against officials of the State Bar of Michigan in connection with their denial of his application for a license to practice law. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM.

I. BACKGROUND

Frank J. Lawrence, Jr. graduated from an accredi

Not long after word spread at the Livingston County Jail that detainee Shaun Leary had been charged with raping a nine-year-old girl, several prisoners beat him up. At stake in this 1983 action is, one, whether officer Scott Stone was deliberately indifferent to Learys safety needs and, two, whether officer Denis McGuckin used excessive force against Leary when he hit him on the back of his n

This case requires us to consider whether a municipality's decision to privately reprimand a police officer for her off-duty sexual conduct violated the Constitution. Because we conclude the reprimand was reasonably related to police department policies, we find no constitutional violation.

Sharon Johnson was an officer with the LaVerkin City, Utah, police department. During an out-of-

Plaintiffs-appellants Young Apartments, Inc. ("Young Apartments") appeals a district court order dismissing several of its equal protection claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("§ 1983") against defendants-appellees Town of Jupiter, Florida ("Jupiter"), Jupiter Town Manager Andrew D. Lukasik ("Lukasik") and Jupiter Building Official Robert Lecky ("Lecky"), as well as a breach of contract claim agai

Jacquelyn R. Crawford appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of her former employer, the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia/Georgia State University (GSU), and two of her former supervisors, GSU officers Barbara Carroll and Katherine Johnston. After review and oral argument, we reverse and remand for further proceedings, having determined that genuin

Earl Lee Snider and Carmen Noel Snider filed claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that David Neal and Chris Evans, both officers with the Lincoln County Sheriff's Department, violated their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights when, without a warrant, they entered the Sniders' home, seized Mr. and Mrs. Snider, and seized Mr. Snider's concealed weapon permit (CWP) and fifteen guns. The Sn

Plaintiff Azure Limited owned nearly 19,000 shares of defendant I-Flow Corporation's stock. Plaintiff alleged defendant wrongly transferred the shares to the State of California as escheated property without notice. The court granted judgment on the pleadings, finding the Unclaimed Property Law (UPL) (Code Civ. Proc., § 1500 et seq.)1 immunized defendant from any such liability.

We dis

1 The dispositive issue before us is whether the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment to the defendants in this premises liability action. We answer in the negative. We find the evidence provides undisputed proof of the open and obvious condition of the premises, supporting but a single inference that favors nonliability of the defendants based on absence of duty to the plaintiffs. We

Since the Texas Department of Transportation awarded its "logo sign contract" (1) to a rival vendor, the vendor that had previously held the contract, Texas Logos, L.P., has filed two separate lawsuits alleging that a TxDOT engineer involved in the procurement, in combination with the winning vendor and others, had unlawfully skewed the procurement process so as to cause Texas Logos to lose the co

This is the case of "Where's the sign?" In four issues, Appellant City of Argyle ("the City") appeals the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction and asserts that (1) David Pierce (APierce@) and Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. ("Clear Channel") (collectively, "the Signers") have no standing to bring constitutional property claims because they have no vested property rights; (2) if Pierce and Clear Cha

This free-speech lawsuit requires us to determine the present scope of the "fighting-words" doctrine. The setting is a neighborhood feud. The case features an unsightly, 38-foot recreational vehicle stored on a residential driveway in suburban Chicago, a neighborhood petition drive to force its removal, and a derogatory Halloween yard display erected in retaliation against the neighbors who

The plaintiffs-appellants are the owners and the agent of a building in Chicago that for more than four decades has displayed an advertising sign without a permit. Current zoning provisions prohibit the sign given its size and proximity to a residential district, but the plaintiffs contend that because the sign was lawful when first erected, they have a right to continue displaying the sign