Jan Ely DuBois

“Although I find that the defendants do not pose a danger to the community sufficient to merit pretrial detention, I do find that they pose a serious risk of flight and that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendants as required. Therefore, I affirm the Detention Orders issued by Magistrate Powers.”

“Because the arbitration clause only applies if the vehicle that ran over the defendant’s foot was an uninsured vehicle, and the issue raised by the Nationwide Complaint is directly relevant to the question of whether uninsured motorist coverage is triggered, the defendant’s Motion to dismiss the action and for a permanent injunction will be denied.”

“IT IS ORDERED that the Complaint of the plaintiffs, J. Egan & Co., Inc., Bloom and Co., Inc. and Ralph L. Jeter is DISMISSED without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ right to refile after they have exhausted their administrative remedies.”

“1. The Motion of the United States of America for Summary Judgment is GRANTED;”

“IT IS ORDERED that the Motions of the defendants are GRANTED and judgment is entered in favor of the defendants, John Riley, John Doherty, Donn Jerre Miller, Robert Lumsden, John Morgan, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration and Ralph Marinetti, and against the plaintiffs, George Hertzke, Sharon Hertzke and Shawn Hertzke.”

“and the Motion of the defendant, Ralph Marinetti, for Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, and the response of the plaintiffs, George Hertzke, Sharon Hertzke and Shawn Hertzke, IT IS ORDERED that the Motions of the defendants are GRANTED”

“1. The part of Motion to Dismiss Counts I, II and VIII of the Complaint is DENIED; 2. The part of the Motion to Dismiss Counts III through VII of the Complaint is GRANTED without prejudice;”

“For the reasons stated above, the Motion of defendant, Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local No. 19, for Summary Judgment is granted, and the Motion of plaintiff, Yorkaire Inc., for Summary Judgment is denied.”

“the Motion of plaintiff, Yorkaire Inc., for Summary Judgment is denied.”

Findings of fact and conclusions of law after a non-jury trial in a defamation case; he credited the plaintiff’s witnesses, held that accusing a union-side lawyer of Mafia ties and of being a government informant was slander per se, awarded $10,000 in compensatory damages, and declined punitive damages. Because this is a post-trial verdict rather than a ruling on a motion, no motion outcome is recorded.

“1) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to plaintiffs’ request for reinstatement of Marie Faison’s parental rights, which will be treated as a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), is GRANTED”

“IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint is DENIED.”

“IT IS ORDERED that the Motion of defendant, Lockheed Martin, for Summary Judgment is GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT II by agreement of the parties and DENIED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT I.”

“For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment will be granted in part and denied in part.”