Summit Speaker Bios
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
NO. 18-0159 in the SUPREME COURT of TEXAS GTECH CORPORATION, Petitioner, V. JAMES STEELE, Et Al., Respondents RESPONDENTS JAMES
NO. 18-0159 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS GTECH CORPORATION, Petitioner, V. JAMES STEELE, et al., Respondents RESPONDENTS JAMES STEELE, ET AL.’S RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR REVIEW W. Mark Lanier Richard L. LaGarde Manfred Sternberg Kevin P. Parker LaGarde Law Firm Manfred Sternberg & Chris Gadoury 3000 Weslayan, Suite 380 Associates, P.C. THE LANIER LAW Houston, Texas 77027 4550 Post Oak Place Dr., FIRM, P.C. Phone: (713) 993-0660 Suite 119 6810 FM 1960 Rd. West Fax: (713) 993-9007 Houston, Texas 77027 Houston, Texas 77069 [email protected] Phone: (713) 622-4300 Phone: (713) 659-5200 Fax: (713) 622-9899 Fax: (713) 659-2204 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Respondents James Steele, et al. (See signature block for all other counsel of record) August 20, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................... iii ISSUE PRESENTED ................................................................................................. 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................ 1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ........................................................................ 5 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................. 7 I. THE COURT OF APPEALS CORRECTLY DETERMINED, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, THAT GTECH EXERCISED DISCRETION ......................................... 9 A. The Record is Replete with Evidence of GTECH -
Unofficial 2018 General Election Results
Unofficial 2018 General Election Results Updated 11/13/2018 POSITION AND CANDIDATES WHO HAVE FILED TERM LENGTH TOTAL # OF UNITED STATES SENATOR 6 YEAR TERM VOTES RICK BRECKENRIDGE LIBERTARIAN 227 MATT ROSENDALE REPUBLICAN 3854 JON TESTER DEMOCRAT 2070 UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE 2 YEAR TERM GREG GIANFORTE REPUBLICAN 4075 ELINOR SWANSON LIBERTARIAN 210 KATHLEEN WILLIAMS DEMOCRAT 1852 CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 6 YEAR TERM BOWEN GREENWOOD REPUBLICAN 3969 REX RENK DEMOCRAT 1501 ROGER ROOTS LIBERTARIAN 373 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE #4 8 YEAR TERM BETH BAKER - YES N/P 4234 BETH BAKER - NO N/P 1127 SUPREME COURT JUSTICE #2 8 YEAR TERM INGRID GUSTAFSON - YES N/P 4125 INGRID GUSTAFSON - NO N/P 1166 20TH DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, DEPT 2 6 YEAR TERM DEBORAH "KIM" CHRISTOPHER N/P 3733 ASHLEY D MORIGEAU N/P 1803 STATE REPRESENTATIVE - HOUSE DISTRICT 13 2 YEAR TERM BOB BROWN REPUBLICAN 2592 CHRIS GROSS DEMOCRAT 986 Unofficial 2018 General Election Results Updated 11/13/2018 POSITION AND CANDIDATES WHO HAVE FILED TERM LENGTH TOTAL # OF STATE REPRESENTATIVE - HOUSE DISTRICT 14 DENLEY M. LOGE REPUBLICAN 1790 DIANE L. MAGONE DEMOCRAT 633 COMMISSIONER Dist #1 6 YEAR TERM CAROL A. BROOKER N/P 3129 PAUL C FIELDER N/P 2785 COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER/TREASURER / SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 4 YEAR TERM NICHOL SCRIBNER N/P 4811 COUNTY SHERIFF/CORONER 4 YEAR TERM DARLENE LEE N/P 1598 TOM RUMMEL N/P 4350 COUNTY ATTORNEY/PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR 4 YEAR TERM NAOMI R. LEISZ N/P 4557 JUSTICE OF THE PEACE 4 YEAR TERM DOUGLAS DRYDEN N/P 3641 MARK T FRENCH N/P 2054 LEGISLATIVE REFERENDUM NO. -
2016 Judicial Performance Review
2016 Judicial Performance Review Prepared by The Iowa State Bar Association Table of Contents Judicial Performance Review Information....................................................................................................3 Judicial Performance Review Q&A...............................................................................................................4 Judicial Biographies.....................................................................................................................................6 Judicial Performance Review Results Iowa Supreme Court..................................................................................................................................22 Iowa Court of Appeals...............................................................................................................................23 District 1A.................................................................................................................................................24 Allamakee, Clayton, Delaware, Dubuque, Winneshiek Counties District 1B.................................................................................................................................................25 Black Hawk, Buchanan, Chickasaw, Fayette, Grundy, Howard Counties District 2A.................................................................................................................................................26 Bremer, Butler, Cerro Gordo, Floyd, Franklin, Hancock, Mitchell, Winnebago, Worth Counties -
State Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Water Suit
STATE SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS DISMISSAL OF WATER SUIT AGAINST DNR BY RUSS PANKONIN THE IMPERIAL REPUBLICAN In an opinion released Friday, March 10, the Nebraska Supreme Court upheld the district court dismissal of two water suits brought against the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Water users in the Frenchman Cambridge Irrigation District (FCID) lost their appeal of the dismissal of the suits by Furnas County District Court Judge James E. Doyle IV in May 2016. The suits were filed by four water users in the FCID as a class action suit—one for 2013 and one for 2014. The complaints claimed the surface water users in the district were harmed when DNR issued closing notices on river flows for compact compliance purposes in 2013 and 2014. In their appeal, they contended their water rights were superior to those of the Republican River Basin Compact. They also added that DNR’s failure to regulate groundwater depleted available stream flow, which represented a “taking” of water. Compact counts as federal law Writing for the court, Chief Justice Michael Heavican said the surface water rights do not supersede the Compact. “We conclude that the appropriators’ rights to use the water are subject to the Compact and are thus not a compensable property interest when the right to use is limited to ensure Nebraska’s compliance under the Compact,” Heavican wrote. He continued, “The U.S. Supreme Court held that the Compact, having received Congress’s blessing, counts as federal law. “As federal law, the allocations set forth under the Compact are the supreme law in Nebraska and the DNR must ensure Nebraska remains within its allocation under the Compact. -
2006 Annual Report
2006 Annual Report Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Table of Contents 1SFTJEFOU+VEHFBOE%JTUSJDU$PVSU"ENJOJTUSBUPS 'JGUI+VEJDJBM%JTUSJDUPG1FOOTZMWBOJB+VEHFTPGUIF $PVSUPG$PNNPO1MFBTCZ%JWJTJPOBOE1IPUPHSBQI 5BCMFPG0SHBOJ[BUJPO $PVSU"ENJOJTUSBUJPO $SJNJOBM%JWJTJPO "EVMU1SPCBUJPO 'BNJMZ%JWJTJPO "EVMU4FDUJPO $IJMESFOT$PVSU +VWFOJMF4FDUJPO $JWJM%JWJTJPO 0SQIBOT$PVSU%JWJTJPO %JTUSJDU+VTUJDF$PVSUT +VEJDJBM5SBOTJUJPOT To the Citizens of Allegheny County We are pleased to present to the citizens of Allegheny County our 2006 Annual Report of Court operations. Joseph M. James Raymond L. Billotte President Judge District Court Administrator In February 2006, the Allegheny County Court of Common McClain, Ph.D., to facilitate the second annual high school Pleas began using the statewide Common Pleas Case education project in the city schools. This program, Management System (CPCMS) to manage and disseminate developed to educate students about the role of the courts Criminal Court case information. Allegheny County became in our society and their responsibilities as citizens, further the 59th of 60 judicial districts in Pennsylvania to “go-live” encourages students to participate in jury service by on CPCMS. An integrated case management system registering to vote. Common Pleas Court Judges visited 11 initiated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, CPCMS was city high schools during the month of March 2006, created to facilitate secure, complete, timely and accurate impressing upon students the positive aspects of civic criminal justice information sharing among criminal justice responsibility. entities throughout the state. This system will eventually allow for access to certain information by the public. In December 2006, the Pretrial Services Agency was created to improve the Court’s ability to more closely The Court sponsored its first Juror Appreciation Day in May monitor defendants released on bail and coordinate pretrial 2006 in conjunction with Governor Ed Rendell, the services among various programs. -
Reasonable Efforts: a Judicial Perspective
REASONABLE EFFORTS: A JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVE By Judge Leonard Edwards (ret.)1 .INTRODUCTION The term “reasonable efforts” challenges and confounds many in our juvenile dependency and family courts across the country.2 Judges hear about it in their judicial trainings, read about it now and then in publications, sign their names to court orders finding that the children’s services agency (“agency”) made “reasonable efforts” on a daily basis, and on occasion make “no reasonable efforts” findings. Yet attorneys rarely refer to reasonable efforts in court, and most judges approve of what the agency has done with little or no thought about it.3 The law requires judges to make these findings, and good reasons exist to do so. By making the reasonable efforts/no reasonable efforts findings the court informs the parties, the children’s services agency, and the federal government that the agency is or is not meeting its legal responsibilities. By monitoring the agency’s actions the court ensures that the agency has complied with its legal obligation to provide services to prevent the child’s removal from parental care, assist the family safely to reunify with its child, and make certain to finalize a permanent plan for the child. The reasonable efforts/no reasonable efforts findings are the most powerful tools juvenile court judges have at their disposal in dependency cases, and attorneys and judges should pay special attention to them to ensure that the 1 Judge Edwards is a retired judge now working as a consultant to juvenile courts in California and other states. The author is indebted to many people for the research and information contained in this booklet. -
MINUTES of the MEETING of the NEBRASKA JUDICIAL RESOURCES COMMISSION September 17, 2020
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEBRASKA JUDICIAL RESOURCES COMMISSION September 17, 2020 A public meeting of the Nebraska Judicial Resources Commission was held on the 17th day of September/ 2020, in Room 1510, State Capitol Building/ in Lincoln/ Nebraska/ with some Commission members attending by videoconference as provided by law. The Chair called the meeting to order in Room 1510 at the hour of 1 p.m. Roll call by the Chair showed the following members in attendance: PRESENT EXCUSED Justice Stephanie Stacy/ Chair Charles Conrad Judge Matthew Kahler Robert Slovek Judge Anne Paine Darlene Starman Judge John Samson William Dittrick ABSENT Timothy Engler Stephen Bader Roxanne Kracl Michael Mccarthy Christopher Nielsen Robert Parker Brian Phares Lori Scherer Jacqueline Tessendorf It was moved by Timothy Engler and seconded by Brian Phares that the minutes of the June 25, 2020 be approved. All present voting yes/ the minutes were accepted. The Chair announced that the purpose of the public meeting was to determine: (1) whether a judicial vacancy exists in the office of the County Court of the 6th Judicial District as a result of the retirement of Judge Kurt T. Rager and/ and if sor to recommend the primary office location of such vacancy; and (2) to determine whether a judicial vacancy exists in the office of the Separate Juvenile Court for Lancaster County as a result of the retirement of Linda S. Porter/ effective August 31, 2020. Exhibits 1-18 were identified and received for purposes of the hearing. The commission first took up whether a judicial vacancy exists in the office of the County Court of the 6th Judicial District as a result of the retirement of Judge Kurt T. -
Useful Internet Sites and Articles Casemaker V
Issue 2016-03 www.collincountytx.gov August 2016 Useful Internet Sites and Articles Casemaker v. Fastcase—What’s the Differ- opinions from 1947, Texas case law since 1886, ence? Texas session laws since 1995, state court rules, In June of 2014, the State Bar of Texas became and Texas revised statutes with archived ver- the first state bar association to offer its mem- sions since 2001. Just like Fastcase, Casemaker bers free access to both Casemaker and Fast- offers free webinars and tutorials. Casecheck+ case. While both are legal research products, ensures that the case law citations are still good there are some differences between the two. law, CiteCheck shows any negative history and CasemakerDigest is a daily summary of state and federal appellate cases searchable by practice area. A few months after access to both Fastcase and Casemaker was introduced, the State Bar of According to the State Bar of Texas website, the Texas Texas Bar Blog featured an article with a Texas Plan is available free to all Texas lawyers review of both services. Attorney Grant and the Premium Plan is available free to solo Scheiner prefers Fastcase because of its easy firms and firms of 10 lawyers or less. The Texas transition to smartphones and tablets with the Plan includes Supreme Court of Texas opinions Fastcase app, available on both Andriod and Ap- and courts of appeal opinions dating back to ple. The mobile sync feature allows the user to 1759, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals opinions, share search results and research materials the United States Code annotated, Texas stat- across all devices at once. -
Fortieth Emergency Order Regarding the Covid-19 State of Disaster
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS ════════════════════ Misc. Docket No. 21-9079 ════════════════════ FORTIETH EMERGENCY ORDER REGARDING THE COVID-19 STATE OF DISASTER ════════════════════════════════════════════════════ ORDERED that: 1. Governor Abbott has declared a state of disaster in all 254 counties in the State of Texas in response to the imminent threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. This Order is issued pursuant to Section 22.0035(b) of the Texas Government Code. 2. The Thirty-Eighth Emergency Order (Misc. Dkt. No. 21-9060) is renewed as amended. 3. Subject only to constitutional limitations, all courts in Texas may in any case, civil or criminal, without a participant’s consent: a. except as provided in paragraph 4, modify or suspend any and all deadlines and procedures, whether prescribed by statute, rule, or order, for a stated period ending no later than October 1, 2021; b. except as this Order provides otherwise, allow or require anyone involved in any hearing, deposition, or other proceeding of any kind—including but not limited to a party, attorney, witness, court reporter, grand juror, or petit juror—to participate remotely, such as by teleconferencing, videoconferencing, or other means; c. consider as evidence sworn statements made out of court or sworn testimony given remotely, out of court, such as by teleconferencing, videoconferencing, or other means; d. conduct proceedings away from the court’s usual location with reasonable notice and access to the participants and the public; e. require every participant in a proceeding to alert the court if the participant has, or knows of another participant who has: (i) COVID-19 or a fever, chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, sore throat, loss of taste or smell, congestion or runny nose, nausea or vomiting, or diarrhea; or (ii) recently been in close contact with a person who is confirmed to have COVID-19 or exhibiting the symptoms described above; f. -
R--6Ta•--Df Clerk Justice Ingrid Gustafson Delivered the Opinion of the Court
10/15/2019 DA 18-0573 Case Number: DA 18-0573 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2019 MT 249N GEO R. PIERCE, INC., Plaintiff and Appellee, v. PAMELA JO POLEJEWSKI, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District, In and For the County of Cascade, Cause No. DDV 18-0201(b) Honorable Elizabeth A. Best, Presiding Judge COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: Pamela Jo Polejewski, Self-represented, Great Falls, Montana For Appellee: Kelly J. Varnes, Hendrickson Law Firm, P.C., Billings, Montana Submitted on Briefs: September 25, 2019 Decided: October 15, 2019 Filed: __________________________________________r--6ta•--df Clerk Justice Ingrid Gustafson delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this Court’s quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports. ¶2 Pamela Jo Polejewski, appearing pro se, appeals the September 5, 2018 Order Affirming Justice Court Ruling from the Eighth Judicial District Court, Cascade County. Geo R. Pierce, Inc., sued Polejewski for damages and to recover possession of a storage container, when Polejewski failed to make monthly payments on a two-year purchase option lease agreement for the storage container. The Justice Court issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Judgment on March 9, 2018. Polejewski raises various claims challenging the award of $3,850 in damages, plus attorney fees and costs, as well as awarding possession of the storage container at issue to Geo R. -
Initial Report to the 67Th Montana Legislature
April 2021 SPECIAL JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY INITIAL REPORT TO THE 67TH MONTANA LEGISLATURE INITIAL REPORT ON JUDICIAL TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 1 The 67th Montana Legislature PAGE HELD FOR FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 The 67th Montana Legislature SPECIAL JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE MEMBERS The President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House created the Special Joint Select Committee on Judicial Transparency and Accountability on April 14, 2021. Senate Members House Members Senator Greg Hertz, Chair Representative Sue Vinton, Vice Chair Polson, MT Billings, MT Ph: (406) 253-9505 Ph: (406) 855-2625 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Senator Tom McGillvray Representative Amy Regier Billings, MT Kalispell, MT Ph: (406) 698-4428 Ph: (406) 253-8421 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Senator Diane Sands Representative Kim Abbott Missoula, MT Helena, MT Ph: (406) 251-2001 Ph: (406) 439-8721 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] 3 The 67th Montana Legislature Introduction. This report is a summary of the work of the Special Joint Select Committee on Judicial Accountability and Transparency. Members received additional information and testimony during their investigation, and this report is an effort to highlight key information and the processes followed by the Select Committee in reaching its conclusions. To review additional information, including audio minutes, and exhibits, visit -
Rocket Docket Hon. Jason Marks Fourth Judicial District Missoula, MT
MRCP Rule 6 – Rocket Docket Hon. Jason Marks Fourth Judicial District Missoula, MT Dylan McFarland Knight Nicastro LLC Missoula, MT Moderator: Lindsay Ward, Helena Pre-Litigation MTLA Spring 2021 Seminar – April 23, 2021 Live Streaming Only 10/29/2019 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: AF 07-0110 AF 07-0110 IN RE THE MONTANA UNIFORM O R D E R DISTRICT COURT RULES On May 2, 2019, the Uniform District Court Rules Commission submitted proposed revisions to the Montana Uniform District Court Rules. The Court opened a 60-day comment period on the revisions, and after review and consideration of the revisions in a public meeting held on September 24, 2019, the Court determined the revisions were well taken, and approved them with some revisions. IT IS ORDERED that the proposed revisions as approved by the Court are ADOPTED. The Montana Uniform District Court Rules are amended to read as shown in the attachment to this Order, effective January 1, 2020. This Order and the attached rules shall be posted on the Court’s website. In addition, the Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order and the attachment to the State Law Library, to Todd Everts and Connie Dixon at Montana Legislative Services, to Chad Thomas at Thomson Reuters, to Patti Glueckert and the Statute Legislation department at LexisNexis, and to the State Bar of Montana, with the request that the State Bar provide notice of the revised rules on its website and in the next available issue of the Montana Lawyer.