Case law

Lauderdale v. United States

666 F. Supp. 1511 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 26, 1987

Brown, 382 So.2d 528, 531 (Ala.1980) (per curiam); and, before a plaintiff may prevail, the evidence must establish that the negligence proximately caused the injury. Williams v. … Co. v. United States, 352 U.S. 128 , 77 S.Ct. 186 , 1 L.Ed.2d 189 (1956); Hoyt v. United States, 286 F.2d 356 (5th Cir.1961); Edwards v. United States, 552 F.Supp. 635, 639 (M.D.Ala.1982).

Mobile Gas Co. v. Patterson

288 F. 884 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 14, 1923

In the case of Caspary v. Carter (C. … Richmond v. Louisa R. Co., 13 How. 71 , 14 L. Ed, 55; Ohio Life Ins. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 431 , 14 L. Ed. 997 ; N. O. Gas Co. v. La. L. & H. P. & M. Co., 115 U. S. 650 , 6 Sup. Ct. 252, 29 L. Ed. 516 ; Reagan v.

United States v. Laird

99 B.R. 470 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 21, 1988

Everett v. Napper, 833 F.2d 1507, 1510 (11th Cir.1987). III.DISCUSSION A. Was defendants’ indebtedness discharged in bankruptcy? … Plaintiff cites as a case on point United States v. Vonderau, 837 F.2d 1540 (11th Cir.1988).

Dothan Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. United States

561 F. Supp. 1261 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Dec 10, 1982

In Fulman v. … Montgomery Coca-Cola v. U.S., supra, at 1327. Witness castigation of this sort tends to make witnesses scarce and expensive.

Gilley

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 27, 2026

Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 404–05 (2000). … Brown v. Head, 272 F.3d 1308, 1313 (11th Cir. 2001).

Bey v. Turner (MAG+)

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 19, 2025

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION P BROWN BEY, … See, e.g., Dresdner Bank AG v.

Richards v. Southeast Alabama Youth Services Diversion Center

105 F. Supp. 2d 1268 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jul 21, 2000

See Stewart v. Baldwin County Board of Educ., 908 F.2d 1499 (11th Cir.1990). … See Stewart v. Baldwin County Board of Educ., 908 F.2d 1499 (11th Cir.1990).

Wirtz v. Camp Hill Lumber Co.

35 F.R.D. 301 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Mar 10, 1964

of payment should be granted the court would then be imposing not so much judicial sanctions as legislative sanctions specifically authorized by Congress, as Congress had a clear right to do. ' National Labor, Relations Board … v.

Thomas v. Jones Restaurants, Inc.

64 F. Supp. 2d 1205 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 14, 1999

In Donovan v. … Id. at 521-22 ; see also Murray v.

Carver

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 8, 2026

Brown v. Head, 272 F.3d 1308, 1313 (11th Cir. 2001). … Bundy v. Wainwright, 808 F.2d 1410, 1415 (11th Cir. 1987).

Hyde

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Aug 6, 2026

Brown v. City of Huntsville, 608 F.3d 724, 734 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted). … Gates v. Khokhar, 884 F.3d 1290, 1298 (11th Cir. 2018) (quoting Brown, 608 F.3d at 734); see also Dahl v. Holley, 312 F.3d 1228, 1236 (11th Cir. 2002); Redd v.

Warr v. Horsley

705 F. Supp. 540 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 8, 1989

Silver v. Baggiano, Civ. A. No. 84-V-1375-N (M.D.Ala. … This court agrees with the Silver v.

Wright v. Butts

953 F. Supp. 1343 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jul 24, 1996

Norton v. … Newbold v. United States Postal Service, 614 F.2d 46, 47 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 878 , 101 S.Ct. 225 , 66 L.Ed.2d 101 (1980); see also Brown v. General Serv.

United States v. Averi

715 F. Supp. 1508 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 25, 1989

E.g., United States v. … As to his motion for new trial, Averi relies on certain “newly discovered” evidence, consisting of a letter to him from the Alabama State Board of Podiatry relating to state-enforced rules and regulations on podiatrists.

AM BY AND THROUGH LAW v. Grant

889 F. Supp. 1495 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jun 21, 1995

Louis v. … Lassiter v. Alabama A & M Univ. Board of Trustees, 28 F.3d 1146, 1149 (11th Cir.1994) (en banc) (citations omitted).

Owners Insurance Company v. Keeble

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Feb 7, 2022

Co. v. Brown, 26 So. 3d 1167, 1169 (Ala. 2009) (per curiam) (citation omitted). … It indicates some intent of permanency of occupation as distinguished from boarding or lodging, but does not require the intent of permanency to the degree required in domicile.” Crossett v. St.

Sims v. Montgomery County Commission

887 F. Supp. 1479 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · May 19, 1995

In Sims v. … Contrast Seibels, 31 F.3d at 1571 (“Although the decree ordered the Board to comply with Title VII by developing valid tests, it provided no deadlines or formal review mechanism to ensure that the Board actually did so.

Orval Sheppard Real Estate Co. v. Valinda Freed & Associates, Inc.

608 F. Supp. 354 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 25, 1985

Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corporation, — U.S. -, -, 104 S.Ct. 1464, 1469 , 79 L.Ed.2d 775 (1984); Theatre Enterprises v. … The section is understood to prohibit only those that impose an “unreason *358 able restraint,” N.C.A.A. v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, — U.S. -, -, 104 S.Ct. 2948, 2959 , 82 L.Ed.2d 70 (1984).

Thompson v. Allen

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Jun 26, 2020

In Ellison v. … Similarly, in 2 McGoy v. Ray, 164 F.

McKenzie v. Kijakazi (CONSENT)

District Court, M.D. Alabama · Sep 14, 2021

Tuggerson-Brown v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 572 F. App’x 949, 951 (11th Cir. 2014). … See Tuggerson-Brown, 572 F. App’x at 951-52; see Packer v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 542 F.