UNITED STATES * 4:17-MC-1557 * Houston, Texas VS. * * 10:33 a.m. JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE * September 13, 2017
|
|
- Solomon Rich
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION UNITED STATES * :-MC- * Houston, Texas VS. * * 0: a.m. JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE * September, 0 APPEARANCES: MISCELLANEOUS HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KEITH P. ELLISON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Lewis Arnold Booth, II OFFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL 0 S. Gessner Rd., Suite 0 Houston, Texas 0..0 FOR DEFENDANT JOHN PARKS TROWBRIDGE: John Parks Trowbridge (Pro se) Memorial Blvd. Humble, Texas -0 Court Reporter: Johnny C. Sanchez, RPR, RMR, CRR Rusk, #00 Houston, Texas Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography. Transcript produced by computer-assisted transcription.
2 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: Good morning and welcome. We'll turn to United States versus Trowbridge. We'll take appearances of counsel or parties. MR. BOOTH: Lewis Booth for the United States of America, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. TROWBRIDGE: By special appearance, John Parks Trowbridge, Jr. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. It's the IRS's petition. Mr. Booth, anything you want to say? MR. BOOTH: Just generally, Your Honor. Respondent is making arguments that are not appropriate in this setting, or frankly any judicial setting concerning the applicability of the laws of Revenue Service to him. His allegation, if I understand it correctly, is that he is not a person subject to any of Internal Revenue laws, that the Internal Revenue laws only apply to federal government employees and citizens of the District of Columbia. These are argument that courts have consistently held to be frivolous. He has not alleged an abuse of process, and the IRS attempting to enforce the summons. He has not alleged that any of the Powell factors are defective in any way. The United States of America is entitled to have its summons enforced, and this
3 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 Court issue an order of compliance. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, this is really not an opportunity to argue the merits of the case because Mr. Booth, who is a legal professional, has failed to respond to my motion to dismiss when notified of that failure, in the subsequent filing he's failed to respond or ask for an extension of time or offer a neglect or excuse, and he's failed to respond to the motion for summary judgment. I'm unclear, but I believe under the rules I'm entitled to summary judgment in that situation. THE COURT: Well, you moved for both a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment. And I'm -- it doesn't compel the government to respond to either if it doesn't want to. The arguments you have been thought of by other people. I'm sure you understand that if the Internal Revenue Code only applied to residents of District of Columbia and America territories, other people would have chosen not to pay their taxes. And the arguments you're not a person, if I understand that correctly, that's clearly been tried before. I can't find any legal authority for any of the arguments you're advancing. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Judge, as I
4 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 understand, statutes mean what they say. Under the definitions of terms of the statute are the ones that must be used, not just generally definitions or dictionary definitions. I'm more than willing to pay my taxes. My concern is I have well put in the merits of the case is that according to these definitions, I cannot find that I am under that qualification, that I am under that liability. And, again, I cannot see that this is where the merits of the case are to be discussed. We are dealing with my motion for summary judgment and my motion to dismiss, none of which Mr. Booth has given an adequate response. THE COURT: But we have, we set this hearing to discuss every pending motion. And what the IRS has asked for is a show of cause order, you filed the motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment. And as I stated, these arguments, because Texas is a sovereign and the federal government cannot exercise here, these have been advanced many times by other taxpayers, and those trying to avoid taxes. Do you have any law at all that suggests that there's judicial precedent in support of any of these arguments you're making? MR. TROWBRIDGE: Just that the law means
5 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 what it says. The statutes have termed those definitions do not apply in this case, as I've shown quite adequately in the filings. And, again -- THE COURT: But are there any cases that hold that? I'm a lowly district court. Can you give me any authority that suggests that you're correct in these arguments? MR. TROWBRIDGE: I understand the Supreme Court has said repeatedly the statutes mean what they say, and that definitions are to be drawn from the statutes with regard to the terms. And I have illustrated those. And, again, my concern is I have a motion for dismissal, I have a motion for summary judgment. And Mr. Booth has not responded to any of those in terms of presenting evidence in contradistinction to what I've offered. THE COURT: He has no obligation to respond if he doesn't wish to. And whatever the Supreme Court has said, if there's any basis for believing that the laws of the IRS do not apply to you, you haven't given me that authority. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well -- THE COURT: The fact that they say that statutes mean what they are intended to mean, I understand that, but that doesn't really advance your argument at all. I don't know why that rule of construction comes to
6 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0::0 0 0 your assistance in this context. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, as I understand, Mr. Booth is operating on the presumption that I would be under the laws that he's seeking to enforce. THE COURT: And he's right about that. He's quite right about that. MR. TROWBRIDGE: But once a rebuttable presumption is challenged, Mr. Booth has an obligation, does he not, to present any evidence? THE COURT: No. There's no rebuttable presumption in interpretations of statutes, sir. I'm sorry. There's not. And he has no obligation to respond that argument if he doesn't want to. The Court can decide a motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment without opposing papers. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Judge, has Mr. Booth submitted any evidence with regard to me being a person or me being a citizen as those terms are used in the code he's seeking to enforce? MR. BOOTH: Your Honor, the government has filed the declaration of Revenue Agent Kendria Bruno, which goes through the four Powell factors as set forth in United States versus Powell, to allow the government to seek enforcement of the summons. Her declaration also indicates that there's no Justice Department referral.
7 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:0: 0:0: 0 0 Therefore, the summons that the government issued to respondent should be enforced by this Court. In addition, the government did file a response to petitioner's motion. Petitioner may not have been served with it. It could have been a clerical error in our office. We can provide him with a copy of that, but his motions, frankly, Judge, are frivolous. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Judge, I understand that Mr. Booth has offered a declaration, and still that is not evidence as presented to the Court. A commentary by an agent does not constitute evidence, does it? MR. BOOTH: Your Honor, the cases made clear that a declaration of a revenue agent is prima facie evidence that this Powell factors have been complied with, and that the summons is enforceable. The obligation is then upon respondent to either allege an abuse of process, some sort of constitutional defense, or allege that one of the Powell factors is not relevant in this case or have not been followed. He has done none of those things. THE COURT: Mr. Trowbridge, do you contend that you alone, among those who live in Texas, are free from obligation to pay taxes, or do you think all Texans have that same right? MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, I have not addressed that question at all.
8 0:0: 0:0: 0:0: 0::0 0:: 0 0 THE COURT: That's why I'm asking you. I'm asking. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I simply looked at that with regard to myself and with regard to my specific circumstances. As Mr. Booth knows, prima facie evidence is nothing but rebuttable evidence. And if -- THE COURT: You haven't come forward with any rebuttal evidence. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I'm sorry, sir? THE COURT: You have not come forward with any rebuttal evidence. MR. TROWBRIDGE: He stated that the declaration of the agent was prima facie evidence. Am I misunderstanding what he's saying? THE COURT: No. I'm asking, you have not come forward with any rebuttable evidence to show you're not a person. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I understand in a civil case, Mr. Booth is supposed to establish the grounds of jurisdiction. And certainly whether I am a person or a citizen with regard to these laws would appear to be fundamental to establishing the jurisdiction. He's asking to exercise a territorial jurisdiction of a sum and subject matter, and has not offered what I understand to be evidence to the Court that
9 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0 0 he's satisfied the jurisdiction of prerequisite. Everything else, then, of the merits is irrelevant. THE COURT: He's come forward with a declaration, there's ample precedent for the proposition that those who reside in the United States are subject to the income, Internal Revenue laws of the federal government. There's no requirement that the IRS prove you're a person. I'm sorry. There's just no requirement. And I don't understand where your argument comes from that you are not a person. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, you're specifically stating there's evidence that I reside in the United States. That, of course, is a term, and a term that if you go through the motions that I have previously filed, suggest that that is the District of Columbia and not the United States of America, of which Texas is one of the freely associated compact states. THE COURT: So you're saying all Texans are spared any obligation to pay taxes to the federal government? MR. TROWBRIDGE: I'm not going to answer to all Texans. I'm certainly going to answer to me. And I've addressed those merits well in my filings in this case. THE COURT: Tell me what judicial authority
10 0 0:: 0::0 0:: 0:: 0::0 0 0 you can point me to that you're not a person, that you're not obligated to pay taxes, that Texas is not a state, that Texas is not subject to the Internal Revenue laws of the federal government. Give me any authority. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Judge, I'm not sure that I actually stated Texas is not a state. And I'm not sure I stated that I am otherwise a different kind of party than just being me, a man, one of the people, entitled to fair application of the laws. And my understanding is that when Congress, the legislature states this is what the terms will mean, this is what they mean, and I have gone extensively through the merits of what the term means in the filings. And Mr. Booth has not shown anything, other than saying: Everybody knows that's hogwash. Everybody knows that the courts have ignored that before and everybody knows Powell. But Powell does not apply unless he gets jurisdictional prerequisite. And I cannot find in a case, unless I am mistaken, Judge, that he hasn't met his jurisdictional prerequisite to even have me here. MR. BOOTH: Your Honor, the Internal Revenue Code is clear. Code section , 0, 0, 0 allow the district courts to hear enforcement matters for IRS summons. The statutes are clear. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Judge, I certainly
11 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0::0 0 0 have no argument with that. And to those people to whom those statutes sections apply, then certainly the Court is going to work with the IRS in the enforcement question. However, if you were to bring someone from France -- and that's a classic argument -- or someone from South America in here and they have nothing to do with those statutes and the Internal Revenue Service, the Judge would certainly say: You haven't met a jurisdictional prerequisite. Well, in that case, I'm saying that if you look at how they define -- and Mr. Booth has read the law, and he understands what I've stated in my filings -- that the definitional statutes to which he's referring, I have clearly shown create a different kind of, quote, person, not someone like me. THE COURT: Give me one judicial precedent that is supportive of your argument. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Well, Your Honor, that would require me to go to the merits of the case and not to the motion to dismiss. THE COURT: No. It goes directly to jurisdiction. You said you want to talk about jurisdiction. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I'm sorry, sir? THE COURT: It goes directly to jurisdiction. You said you want to talk about
12 0::0 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 jurisdiction. MR. TROWBRIDGE: As I understand, I'm not the one to prove that I am, quote, the person that's a citizen. Mr. Booth is required to put evidence in the case. THE COURT: He's put evidence before the Court that shows that. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I'm sorry. What was that evidence, sir? THE COURT: He has come forward with a declaration, which is sufficient to show that. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I understood that I had an opportunity to submit actual rebuttable evidence. THE COURT: I'm asking for what your evidence is, either judicial precedent, or facts that have been presented by way of affidavit. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I believe I have presented in my filings adequate information in that regard, and I would be more than happy to respond to the Judge and present something more in detail to that particular question. I quite honestly did not expect that was a question in the Judge's mind about the declaration being a basically nonrebuttable item. THE COURT: I'm giving you every possible chance to rebut it. You just haven't done so.
13 0:: 0:: 0:: 0::0 0:: 0 0 MR. TROWBRIDGE: I understand that, sir, but I'm not that good on my feet as a legal professional because I'm not one, and did not come prepared to provide you. And I would certainly -- and this is no disrespect to you, Judge -- I would be more than happy to prepare the exact response that I could come up with in regard to that jurisdictional question. I apologize. I thought I'd answered that adequately in my filings, and I did not mean to mislead you in any way. MR. BOOTH: Your Honor, the United States of America believes that we are entitled to finality, at least at the District Court. We have an order compelling compliance a proposed order that this Court could sign. Mr. Trowbridge has made his arguments for the record, and if he likes, he has the ability to appeal to the Fifth Circuit if he thinks that your order is incorrect that you would enter on behalf of the United States. But to go back and forth, given the types of arguments that Mr. Trowbridge is making, is inappropriate, from the perspective of the United States of America. THE COURT: Do you have a proposed order? MR. BOOTH: Yes, Your Honor. May I approach. THE COURT: Yes. Have you shown it to
14 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 Mr. Trowbridge? MR. BOOTH: I will show it to Mr. Trowbridge, Your Honor. The United States of America requests at this time that Mr. Trowbridge appear before Kendria Bruno the September th at 0:00 o'clock. THE COURT: What time are you suggesting? MR. BOOTH: September th at 0:00 o'clock a.m. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, if I might? THE COURT: Yes, sir. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I am preparing that day to leave for a week of educational materials and such, in California, and the following week would work. Anytime after that would work. MR. BOOTH: May I have just a moment, Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes, sir. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge -- THE COURT: Yes. Wait for Mr. Booth. Just a second. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Thank you. MR. BOOTH: That's October nd, Ms. Bruno is free. THE COURT: October nd work for you?
15 0:: 0:: 0:0:0 0:0:0 0:0:0 0 0 MR. TROWBRIDGE: Yes. THE COURT: 0:00 a.m.? MR. BOOTH: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Order has been entered. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. TROWBRIDGE: May I ask for a clarification, please? THE COURT: Yes. MR. TROWBRIDGE: So you are formally denying the motion for dismissal? THE COURT: Motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment are denied, yes. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, may I ask for a findings of facts and conclusions of law? THE COURT: There's no requirement of findings of facts or conclusions of law on motion for summary judgment. Motion to dismiss you failed to suggest any defect in the IRS's process, on motion for summary judgment you failed to show an absence of material fact about your relationship and your obligation to the IRS. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Judge, may I ask the opportunity to provide a specific filing to address that question, since I did not realize that that question was not, in your mind, addressed? I'm not a lawyer. I'm just
16 0:0: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0:: 0 0 trying to get through this. MR. BOOTH: Your Honor, Mr. Trowbridge has made adequate representations for the record to preserve his right on appeal to make these arguments if he sees fit. THE COURT: This isn't our first trip here, either. The other filing was in the end dismissed at the IRS request, but I don't think there's any lack of fair warning as to the government's position or any deficiency in what the government has done, in terms of providing you due process. So if you want to file a motion under Rule or Rule 0, you're welcome to. The Federal Rules do contemplate that. MR. TROWBRIDGE: I'm sorry, Judge. -- THE COURT: Rule or Rule 0 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if you would like to file under either of those, you're entitled to whatever the law provides. MR. TROWBRIDGE: Would that be a motion for reconsideration? THE COURT: Well, there's no such thing as a motion for reconsideration in the federal system, but it's similar, similar thereto. Thank you very much.
17 (Recessed at 0: a.m.) COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 0 0 I, Johnny C. Sanchez, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. /s/ Johnny C. Sanchez, CRR, RMR
18 /s [] - : 0 [] - 0: 0 [] - 0: 0 [] - 0: / 0 0:00 [] - :, :, : 0: [] - : th [] - :, : nd [] - :, : [] - :, :, : 0 [] - :, : 0 [] - 0: 0 [] - 0: A a.m [] - :, :, : ability [] - : above-entitled [] - : absence [] - :0 abuse [] - : according [] - : actual [] - : addition [] - : address [] - : addressed [] - :, :, : adequate [] - :, :, : adequately [] - :, : advance [] - : advanced [] - :0 affidavit [] - : agent [] - :, :, : Agent [] - : allege [] - :, : allow [] - :, 0: alone [] - : America [] - :, :, :, :, : ample [] - : answer [] - :, : answered [] - : anytime [] - : apologize [] - : appeal [] - :, : appear [] - :, : application [] - 0: apply [] - :, :, 0:, : approach [] - : argument [] - :, :, :, :, :, : arguments [] - :, :, :, :, :0, : assistance [] - : associated [] - : authority [] - :, :0, :, 0: avoid [] - : B basis [] - : behalf [] - : believes [] - : Booth [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, 0:, :, :, :0 BOOTH [] - :0, :, 0:, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : bring [] - : Bruno [] - :, :, : C California [] - : cannot [] - :, :, :, 0: case [0] - :, :0, :, :, :, :, 0:, :, :, : cases [] - :, : certainly [] - :0, :, 0:, :, :, : CERTIFICATE [] - : certify [] - : challenged [] - : chance [] - : Circuit [] - : circumstances [] - : citizen [] - :, :, : civil [] - : Civil [] - : clarification [] - : classic [] - : clear [] - :, 0:, 0: clearly [] - : clerical [] - : Code [] - 0: code [] - : Columbia [] - : commentary [] - :0 compact [] - : compelling [] - : compliance [] - : complied [] - : concern [] - :, : conclusions [] - :, : Congress [] - 0:0 constitute [] - : constitutional [] - : construction [] - : contemplate [] - : contend [] - :0 context [] - : contradistinction [] - : copy [] - : correct [] - :, : course [] - : COURT [] - :, :, :, :, :, :0, :0, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : court [] - : Court [0] - :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, : courts [] - 0:, 0: create [] - : CRR [] - : D dealing [] - : decide [] - : declaration [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : defect [] - : defense [] - : deficiency [] - : define [] - :0 definitional [] - : definitions [] - :, :, :, :, :, :0 denied [] - : denying [] - :0 Department [] - : detail [] - :0 dictionary [] - : different [] - 0:, : directly [] - :0, : discuss [] - : discussed [] - :0 dismiss [] - :, :, :, :, :, : dismissal [] - :, : dismissed [] - : disrespect [] - : District [] - :, : district [] - :, 0: done [] - :, :, :0 drawn [] - :0 due [] - :
19 E G kind [] - 0:, : knows [] - :, 0:, 0:, 0: educational [] - : either [] - :, :, :, : end [] - : enforce [] - :, : enforceable [] - : enforced [] - : enforcement [] - :, 0:, : enter [] - : entered [] - : entitled [] - 0:, :, :, : error [] - : establish [] - : establishing [] - : evidence [] - :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : exact [] - : exercise [] - :, : expect [] - : extensively [] - 0: F facie [] - :, :, : fact [] - :, :0 factors [] - :, :, : facts [] - :, :, : failed [] - :, :0 fair [] - 0:, : Federal [] - :, : federal [] - :, :, :, 0:, : feet [] - : Fifth [] - : file [] - :, :, : filed [] - :, :, : filing [] - :, : filings [] - :, :, 0:, :, :, : finality [] - : findings [] - :, : first [] - : fit [] - : followed [] - : following [] - : foregoing [] - : formally [] - :0 forth [] - :, : forward [] - :, :0, :, :, :0 four [] - : France [] - : frankly [] - : free [] - :, : freely [] - : frivolous [] - : fundamental [] - : generally [] - : given [] - :, :, : government [] - :, :0, :, :, :, :, :0, 0:, :0 government's [] - : grounds [] - : H happy [] - :, : hear [] - 0: hearing [] - : hogwash [] - 0: hold [] - : honestly [] - : Honor [0] - :0, :, 0:, :, :, :, :, :, :, : ignored [] - 0: illustrated [] - : inappropriate [] - :0 income [] - : incorrect [] - : indicates [] - : information [] - : intended [] - : Internal [] - :, 0:, 0:, : interpretations [] - : irrelevant [] - : IRS [] - :, :, :, 0:, :, :, : IRS's [] - : issued [] - : item [] - : Johnny [] - :, : Judge [] - :, :, :, :, 0:, 0:, 0:, :, :, :, :0, :, :, : judge [] - :, :, :, : Judge's [] - : judgment [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :0 judicial [] - :, :, :, : jurisdiction [] - :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, : jurisdictional [] - 0:, 0:, :, : Justice [] - : I J K Kendria [] - :, : L lack [] - : law [] - :, :, :, :, :, : laws [] - :, :, :, :, 0:, 0: lawyer [] - : least [] - : leave [] - : legal [] - : legislature [] - 0:0 liability [] - : live [] - : look [] - :0 looked [] - : lowly [] - : M man [] - 0: material [] - :0 materials [] - : matter [] - :, : matters [] - 0: mean [] - :, :, :, 0:, 0:, : means [] - :, 0: merits [] - :, :0, :, :, 0:, : met [] - 0:, : might [] - :0 mind [] - :, : mislead [] - :0 mistaken [] - 0: misunderstanding [] - : moment [] - : motion [0] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, : motions [] - :, : MR [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, 0:, 0:, 0:, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :0 must [] - : N none [] - :, : nonrebuttable [] - : nothing [] - :, :
20 0 O o'clock [] - :, : obligated [] - 0: obligation [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, : October [] - :, : offered [] - :, :, : office [] - : once [] - : one [] - :, :, 0:, :, :, : ones [] - : operating [] - : opportunity [] - :, : opposing [] - : order [] - :, :, :, :, :, : otherwise [] - 0: P papers [] - : particular [] - :0 party [] - 0: pay [] - :, :, :, 0: pending [] - : people [] - 0:, : person [] - :, :, :0, :, :0, 0:, :, : perspective [] - : petitioner [] - : petitioner's [] - : point [] - 0: position [] - : possible [] - : Powell [] - :, :, :, :, 0: precedent [] - :, :, :, : prepare [] - : prepared [] - : preparing [] - : prerequisite [] - :, 0:, 0:, : present [] - :, :0 presented [] - :0, :, : presenting [] - : preserve [] - : presumption [] - :, :, : previously [] - : prima [] - :, :, : Procedure [] - : proceedings [] - : process [] - :, :, : professional [] - : proposed [] - :, : proposition [] - : prove [] - :, : provide [] - :, :, : provides [] - : providing [] - :0 put [] - :, :, : Q qualification [] - : quite [] - :, :, : quote [] - :, : R read [] - : realize [] - : really [] - : rebut [] - : rebuttable [] - :, :0, :, :, : rebuttal [] - :, : Recessed [] - : reconsideration [] - :, : record [] - :, :, : referral [] - : referring [] - : regard [] - :, :, :, :, :, : relationship [] - : relevant [] - : repeatedly [] - : REPORTER'S [] - : representations [] - : request [] - : requests [] - : require [] - : required [] - : requirement [] - :, :, : reside [] - :, : respond [] - :, :, : responded [] - : respondent [] - :, : response [] - :, :, : Revenue [] - :, :, 0:, 0:, : revenue [] - : RMR [] - : rule [] - : Rule [] - :, : Rules [] - :, : S Sanchez [] - :, : satisfied [] - : second [] - : section [] - 0: sections [] - : see [] - : seek [] - : seeking [] - :, : sees [] - : September [] - :, : served [] - : Service [] - : set [] - :, : show [] - :, :, :, :, :0 shown [] - :, 0:, :, : shows [] - : sign [] - : similar [] - : simply [] - : someone [] - :, :, : sorry [] - :, :, :, :, :, : sort [] - : South [] - : sovereign [] - : spared [] - : specific [] - :, : specifically [] - : state [] - 0:, 0: States [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : states [] - :, 0: stating [] - : statute [] - : statutes [0] - :, :, :, :0, :, :, 0:, :, :, : still [] - : subject [] - :, :, 0: submit [] - : submitted [] - : sufficient [] - : suggest [] - :, : suggesting [] - : suggests [] - :, : sum [] - : summary [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, : summons [] - :, :, :, 0: support [] - : supportive [] - : supposed [] - : Supreme [] - :, : system [] - : T taxes [] - :, :, :, :, 0: taxpayers [] - :0 term [] - :, 0: termed [] - : terms [] - :, :, :, :, 0:, :0 territorial [] - : Texans [] - :, :, : Texas [] - :, :, :, 0:, 0:, 0: THE [] - :, :, :, :, :, :0, :0, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :,
21 :, :, :, :, :, :, : therefore [] - : thereto [] - : thinks [] - : transcript [] - : trip [] - : TROWBRIDGE [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, 0:, 0:, :, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :, :, :, :0, :, :, :, :0 Trowbridge [] - :0, :, :0, :, :, :, : trying [] - :, : types [] - : U under [] - :, :, :, :, : understood [] - : United [] - :, :, :, :, :, :, :, : unless [] - 0:, 0: up [] - : V versus [] - : W wait [] - :0 warning [] - : week [] - :, : welcome [] - : willing [] - : wish [] - :
JANICE COLEMAN, CSR 1095, RPR OFFICIAL FEDERAL COURT REPORTER (313)
EXHIBIT 11 Trial transcript excerpt in which prosecutor Melissa Siskind misrepresents the content of 26 U.S.C. 6020(b) in open court during the second trial of Doreen Hendrickson. This is followed by the
More informationJANICE COLEMAN, CSR 1095, RPR OFFICIAL FEDERAL COURT REPORTER (313)
EXHIBIT 3 Trial transcript excerpt in which US attorney and prosecutor Melissa Siskind and presiding Judge Victoria Roberts misrepresent the content of 26 U.S.C. 6020(b) in open court during the trial
More informationWIL S. WILCOX, OFFICIAL FEDERAL REPORTER
1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 WESTERN DIVISION 4 THE HON. GEORGE H. WU, JUDGE PRESIDING 5 6 Margaret Carswell, ) ) 7 Plaintiff, ) ) 8 vs. ) No. CV-10-05152-GW ) 9
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Docket Nos. CA CA (RJL) : : : : : : : : : : LARRY E. KLAYMAN, ET AL.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LARRY E. KLAYMAN, ET AL. v. Plaintiffs, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, ET AL. Defendants................. Docket Nos. CA- CA- (RJL) October, 0 p.m. TRANSCRIPT
More informationThe Courts Are Closed
The Courts Are Closed 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 MR. SCHULZ: We expected for the next line and final line of inquiry that MR. Becraft would be here but he needed to leave to take MR. Benson to the airport. Let me just
More informationThe False Lawsuit Claim That Our Refunds Were Made In Error
The False Lawsuit Claim That Our Refunds Were Made In Error In the complaint in 2006 by which the bogus lawsuit was launched asking Judge Nancy Edmunds to order my wife, Doreen, and I to testify at the
More informationJANICE COLEMAN, CSR 1095, RPR OFFICIAL FEDERAL COURT REPORTER (313)
EXHIBIT 14 First, a trial transcript excerpt in which Robert Metcalfe admits that the Examination Report he presented as evidence supporting his Complaint in United States v. Peter and Doreen Hendrickson,
More information>>> THE NEXT CASE IS MORALES VERSUS ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONORS. MY NAME IS TRACY GUN.
>>> THE NEXT CASE IS MORALES VERSUS ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY. >> MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONORS. MY NAME IS TRACY GUN. I REPRESENT THE APPELLANTS IN THIS CASE AND I HAVE RESERVED FIVE
More informationTHE NEXT CASE ON THE COURT CALENDAR IS FLORIDA BAR V.BEHM. [INAUDIBLE] >> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> GOOD MORNING. FIRST, MAY I PLEASE THE COURT, I WOULD
THE NEXT CASE ON THE COURT CALENDAR IS FLORIDA BAR V.BEHM. [INAUDIBLE] >> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> GOOD MORNING. FIRST, MAY I PLEASE THE COURT, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR AFFORDING ME THE PRIVILEGE OF APPEARING
More informationSOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212)
1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2 ------------------------------x 3 BEACON ASSOCIATES LLC I, et al., 4 Plaintiffs, 5 v. 14 Civ. 2294 AJP 6 BEACON ASSOCIATES MANAGEMENT CORP.,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 20TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 0TH JUDICIL CIRCUIT IN ND FOR LEE COUNTY, FLORID CSE NO. -C-0 BNK OF MERIC, N.., sbm BC Home Loans Servicing LP, Plaintiff, vs. SSET CUISITIONS & HOLDINGS TRUST DTED MY 0, d/b/a
More informationVALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA MEETING OF MAY 31, 2017
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA MEETING OF MAY, 0 AGENDA 0 STEPHEN P. CLARK CENTER COMMISSION CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM, ND FLOOR NW st Street Miami, Florida Wednesday May, 0 0:00 A.M.
More informationPUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * Timberline Four Seasons * WS-C * * * * * * * * *
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * Robert And Janet Deal v. * Timberline Four Seasons * -0-WS-C Utilities, Inc. * * * * * * * * * * David And Jan Rosenau v. * Timberline
More informationMetropolitan Casualty Insurance Co. V. Robert Tepper SC
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ATTALA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
E-Filed Document Jun 30 2016 11:18:49 2015-CA-01772 Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BROOKS V. MONAGHAN VERSUS ROBERT AUTRY APPELLANT CAUSE NO. 2015-CA-01772 APPELLEE APPEAL
More informationLevel 3 Communications, LLC v. E. Leon Jacobs, Jr.
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Civil No (JLL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Civil No. -(JLL) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X : SHARON L. DANQUAH, et al., : TRANSCRIPT OF : PROCEEDINGS Plaintiffs, : : December, -vs- :
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. --o0o--
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA --o0o-- BERENICE THOREAU DE LA SALLE, ) Case No. :0-cv-00-MCE-KJM ) Plaintiff, ) Sacramento, California ) Wednesday, February, vs. ) :0 A.M.
More informationNO CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. BRADFORD D. SIMS, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
NO. 05 10 00460 CR The State Requests Oral Argument if Appellant Requests Oral Argument. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS BRADFORD D. SIMS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS,
More informationCLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 111 NW 1 Street, Commission Chambers Miami-Dade County, Florida Thursday, April 28, 3:30 p.m.
CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NW Street, Commission Chambers Miami-Dade County, Florida Thursday, April, 0 @ :0 p.m. VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING 0 BOARD MEMBERS (Present) Commissioner Jose
More informationUNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC ORDER AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
24 RS UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC 20217 JOHN M. CRIM, Petitioner(s, v. Docket No. 1638-15 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. ORDER AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
More informationReal Estate Private Equity Case Study 3 Opportunistic Pre-Sold Apartment Development: Waterfall Returns Schedule, Part 1: Tier 1 IRRs and Cash Flows
Real Estate Private Equity Case Study 3 Opportunistic Pre-Sold Apartment Development: Waterfall Returns Schedule, Part 1: Tier 1 IRRs and Cash Flows Welcome to the next lesson in this Real Estate Private
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NUMBER 09-CV KMW
0 TRILOGY PROPERTIES, LLC, et al. vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NUMBER 0-CV-0-KMW Plaintiffs SB HOTEL ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al. Defendants MOTION HEARING
More informationAdvisory Opinion to the Attorney General: Slot Machines
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationmg Doc Filed 05/10/18 Entered 05/17/18 11:47:19 Main Document Pg 1 of 11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Pg 1 of 11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Case No. 09-50026-mg IN RE:. Chapter 11. MOTORS LIQUIDATION COMPANY,. (Jointly administered) et al., f/k/a GENERAL. MOTORS CORP.,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS STATE OF MISSOURI Honorable Rex M. Burlison, Judge. ) Cause No CR00642
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS STATE OF MISSOURI Honorable Rex M. Burlison, Judge STATE OF MISSOURI, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ERIC GREITENS, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Cause No. -CR00 ) TRANSCRIPT
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA City of Philadelphia : : v. : No. 2178 C.D. 2013 : Submitted: October 6, 2014 John Hummel, Jr., : Appellant : BEFORE: HONORABLE BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER, Judge
More informationUnreported Opinion. G.G., appellant, filed, in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, a petition for
Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Case No. C-02-FM-17-003630 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2475 September Term, 2017 IN RE GUARDIANSHIP OF A.M. & A.M Meredith, Shaw Geter,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. August 23, 2010 v. Emergency Motion for TRO CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant.
0:: 0 0 RHONDA EZELL, et al., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Case No. :0-cv-0 Plaintiffs, Chicago, Illinois August, 00 v. Emergency Motion for TRO CITY OF CHICAGO,
More informationSeptember 10, 1998 N.G.I.S.C. Biloxi Meeting. CHAIRMAN JAMES: With that, I'll open it up to. COMMISSIONER DOBSON: Mayor Short, you just mentioned
September 0, N.G.I.S.C. Biloxi Meeting 0 CHAIRMAN JAMES: With that, I'll open it up to questions from commissioners. Commissioner Dobson? COMMISSIONER DOBSON: Mayor Short, you just mentioned the money
More informationCaroline Weiss v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-07-258-CR RODNEY PERKINS APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ------------ FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM
More informationIRS Violates Citizen s Due Process Rights
IRS Violates Citizen s Due Process Rights 1 MR. SCHULZ: Well, thank you very much. Panel, thank you very much. I would like to call MR. CHAPPELL and MR. Turner; remind you you're still under oath, and
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT, PRETORIA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT, PRETORIA DELETE WHICH I S NOT APPLICABLE [1] REPORTABLE: YES /~ [2] OF I NTEREST TO OTHER Q JUDGES: YES / ~ [ 3] REVI SED,...J DATE Jr)./~(/
More informationHome Mortgage Foreclosures in Maine
Home Mortgage Foreclosures in Maine Find more easy-to-read legal information at www.ptla.org Important Note: This is very general information about home mortgage and foreclosure rules in Maine. It is not
More informationIB Interview Guide: Case Study Exercises Three-Statement Modeling Case (30 Minutes)
IB Interview Guide: Case Study Exercises Three-Statement Modeling Case (30 Minutes) Hello, and welcome to our first sample case study. This is a three-statement modeling case study and we're using this
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT x x. U.S.
1 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Case No. 09-50026 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x In the Matter of: GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Debtor. - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationCitation: Mercier v. Trans-Globe Date: File No: Registry: Vancouver. In the Provincial Court of British Columbia (CIVIL DIVISION)
Citation: Mercier v. Trans-Globe Date: 20020307 File No: 2001-67384 Registry: Vancouver In the Provincial Court of British Columbia (CIVIL DIVISION) BETWEEN: MARY MERCIER CLAIMANT AND: TRANS-GLOBE TRAVEL
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE STEAMFITTERS LOCAL UNION 447, : on Behalf of Itself and All : Other Similarly Situated : Shareholders of inventiv : Health, Inc., : : Plaintiff, : : vs.
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00393-CR Merril Leroy Jessop, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SCHLEICHER COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
More informationFollow this and additional works at:
2013 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-3-2013 USA v. Edward Meehan Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 11-3392 Follow this and additional
More informationFORECLOSURES. I m behind in my mortgage payments, what should I do?
FORECLOSURES This flyer was prepared by Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc.(LSGMI) with support from the Institute for Foreclosure Legal Assistance. LSGMI represents homeowners in foreclosure and homeowners
More informationDECISION. 1 The complainant, Ms JN, first made a complaint to the Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO) on 28 May 2012, as follows: 1
DECISION Background 1 The complainant, Ms JN, first made a complaint to the Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO) on 28 May 2012, as follows: 1 My name is [JN] govia account ****170. I live in [Town, State].
More informationTHOMSON REUTERS STREETEVENTS PRELIMINARY TRANSCRIPT. IVZ - Invesco Ltd. to Hold Analyst Call To Discuss The Acquisition Of Atlantic Trust By CIBC
THOMSON REUTERS STREETEVENTS PRELIMINARY TRANSCRIPT IVZ - Invesco Ltd. to Hold Analyst Call To Discuss The Acquisition Of Atlantic Trust EVENT DATE/TIME: APRIL 11, 2013 / 8:30PM GMT TRANSCRIPT TRANSCRIPT
More informationPUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * HEARING TRANSCRIPT * * * * * * * * *
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON * * * * * * * * * KENTUCKY FUEL CORPORATION * --COAL-SC-GI * * * * * * * * * * HEARING TRANSCRIPT * * * * * * * * * BEFORE: MICHAEL A. ALBERT, Chairman
More informationECO LECTURE TWENTY-FOUR 1 OKAY. WELL, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD
ECO 155 750 LECTURE TWENTY-FOUR 1 OKAY. WELL, WE WANT TO CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD STARTED LAST TIME. WE SHOULD FINISH THAT UP TODAY. WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMY'S LONG-RUN EQUILIBRIUM
More informationValuation Public Comps and Precedent Transactions: Historical Metrics and Multiples for Public Comps
Valuation Public Comps and Precedent Transactions: Historical Metrics and Multiples for Public Comps Welcome to our next lesson in this set of tutorials on comparable public companies and precedent transactions.
More informationTRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE GRAHAM C. MULLEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE OCTOBER 24, 2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ) COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) No. 3:06-CV-531 ) vs. ) ) JOHN F. MANGAN, JR., and ) HUGH
More information>>>THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS THE FLORIDA BAR V. JOSE CARLOS MARRERO. COUNSEL? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONORS. IF IT PLEASE THE COURT, MY NAME IS
>>>THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS THE FLORIDA BAR V. JOSE CARLOS MARRERO. COUNSEL? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONORS. IF IT PLEASE THE COURT, MY NAME IS JENNIFER FALCONE, I'M REPRESENTING THE FLORIDA BAR
More informationPolicy Note 04/07. CFEPS Center for Full Employment and Price Stability AN INTERVIEW WITH THE CHAIRMAN
CFEPS Center for Full Employment and Price Stability Policy Note 04/07 AN INTERVIEW WITH THE CHAIRMAN TAXES, SPENDING, DEFICITS, INFLATION: THE WORKINGS OF FEDERAL FINANCE BY WARREN MOSLER APRIL 26, 2007
More informationPages 1-17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER Pages - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) NO. CR -0 CRB ) ALEXANDER VASSILIEV, et al,
More informationHome Mortgage Foreclosures in Maine
Home Mortgage Foreclosures in Maine Find more easy-to-read legal information at www.ptla.org Important Note: This is very general information about home mortgage and foreclosure rules in Maine. It is not
More informationThe Florida Bar v. Alan Ira Karten
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR 09-318 Opinion Delivered March 17, 2011 LARRY DONNELL REED Appellant v. STATE OF ARKANSAS Appellee PRO SE APPEAL FROM PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CR 2006-1776, HON. BARRY
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 04-3376 JAMES A. KOKKINIS, v. Petitioner,
More informationThe only way to get a payment. NO LATER THAN MARCH 10, 2011 EXCLUDE YOURSELF NO LATER THAN MARCH 10, 2011 SUBMIT A CLAIM FORM
United States District Court Southern District Of New York IN RE FUWEI FILMS SECURITIES LITIGATION Case No. 07-CV-9416 (RJS) NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION If you purchased or otherwise
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Petitioners : v. : No Washington, D.C. The above-entitled matter came on for oral
0 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x ESTHER HUI, ET AL., : Petitioners : v. : No. 0- YANIRA CASTANEDA, AS PERSONAL : REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF : FRANCISCO
More informationUnited States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT A court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation from a lawyer. Please read this Notice carefully.
More informationGILBANE BUILDING CO./TDX CONSTRUCTION CORP., A JOINT VENTURE, ET AL., Appellants, -against-
COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------- GILBANE BUILDING CO./TDX CONSTRUCTION CORP., A JOINT VENTURE, ET AL., 0 Appellants, -against- ST. PAUL FIRE And MARINE INSURANCE
More informationNo CR No CR. FREDDY GONZALEZ, Appellant. vs. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee APPELLANT S BRIEF
No. 05-12-00071-CR No. 05-12-00072-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, TEXAS 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 06/27/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk FREDDY GONZALEZ, Appellant vs.
More informationIf you owned property repossessed by Anheuser-Busch Employees Credit Union, you could get valuable benefits from a class-action settlement.
TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT FOR ST. LOUIS CITY, MISSOURI If you owned property repossessed by Anheuser-Busch Employees Credit Union, you could get valuable benefits from a class-action settlement.
More informationCarole M. Siegle v. Progressive Consumers Insurance Co.
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationVAT on inter-company transactions and management charges and other day to day transactions. Introduction
VAT on inter-company transactions and management charges and other day to day transactions Dealing with VAT on transactions with associated businesses and much more Introduction Most businesses are pretty
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 12, 2014 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 12, 2014 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHARLES GODSPOWER Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. F-67377 David Bragg,
More informationNOVEL. UNDER MY HYPO, THERE IS ONE ACCIDENT.
The following is a real-time transcript taken as closed captioning during the oral argument proceedings, and as such, may contain errors. This service is provided solely for the purpose of assisting those
More informationPRE-SUBMISSION CONFERENCE MEETING AND SITE VISIT CITY OF MIAMI. City of Miami Miami Riverside Center 236 S.W. North River Drive Miami, Florida 33130
Page 1 PRE-SUBMISSION CONFERENCE MEETING AND SITE VISIT CITY OF MIAMI June 30th, 2015 10:00 a.m. City of Miami Miami Riverside Center 236 S.W. North River Drive Miami, Florida 33130 CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DENNIS OBDUSKEY, ) Petitioner, ) v. ) No. -0 McCARTHY & HOLTHUS LLP, ) Respondent. ) - -
More informationPamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Giselle D. Lylen, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA ERNEST ARCHIE, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D14-5298
More informationCPA Australia Podcast Transcript - Episode 36
CPA Australia Podcast Transcript - Episode 36 Intro: Hello and welcome to the CPA Australia Podcast, your source for business, leadership, and public practise accounting information. Welcome to the CPA
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI FILED MAY Of nee of the Clerk Suprorne Court Court of Appalll..
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI (\) DOUGLAS MILLER FILED APPELLANT VS. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MAY 2 1 2010 Of nee of the Clerk Suprorne Court Court of Appalll.. NO.2009-CP-1907-COA APPELLEE
More informationCase No. SCSL T THE PROSECUTOR OF THE SPECIAL COURT V. CHARLES GHANKAY TAYLOR FRIDAY, 27 FEBRUARY A.M. TRIAL TRIAL CHAMBER II
Case No. SCSL-00-0-T THE PROSECUTOR OF THE SPECIAL COURT V. CHARLES GHANKAY TAYLOR FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 00.0 A.M. TRIAL TRIAL CHAMBER II Before the Judges: Justice Richard Lussick, Presiding Justice Teresa
More informationMatter of Moore v City of N.Y NY Slip Op 30164(U) January 23, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Peter H.
Matter of Moore v City of N.Y. 2013 NY Slip Op 30164(U) January 23, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 102874/12 Judge: Peter H. Moulton Republished from New York State Unified Court System's
More information137 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. KENNETH WILLIAM KASPER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
137 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT KENNETH WILLIAM KASPER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 13399-10W. Filed July 12, 2011. On Jan. 29, 2009, P filed with R a claim
More informationESCRIBERS, LLC 700 West 192nd Street, Suite #607 New York, NY 10040
0 KNOX COUNTY, ss. CIVIL ACTION EDWARD HARSHMAN, Plaintiff, VS. SHEILA HARSHMAN, Defendant. STATE OF MAINE DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT NO. VI DOCKET NO. ROCDC-FM-0-0 APPEAL NO. KNO--0 DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Braden v. Sinar, 2007-Ohio-4527.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) CYNTHIA BRADEN C. A. No. 23656 Appellant v. DR. DAVID SINAR, DDS., et
More informationMEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-DGW Document 37 Filed 07/11/18 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #186 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. IYMAN FARIS,
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2013 EMMETT B. HAGOOD, III, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
More informationARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-13-457 KENT SMITH, D.V.M., Individually and d/b/a PERRY VET SERVICES APPELLANT V. KIMBERLY V. FREEMAN and ARMISTEAD COUNCIL FREEMAN, JR. APPELLEES Opinion
More informationCircuit Court for Frederick County Case No.: 10-C UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2017
Circuit Court for Frederick County Case No.: 10-C-02-000895 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1100 September Term, 2017 ALLAN M. PICKETT, et al. v. FREDERICK CITY MARYLAND, et
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
[Cite as McIntyre v. McIntyre, 2005-Ohio-6940.] STATE OF OHIO, COLUMBIANA COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT JANE M. MCINTYRE N.K.A. JANE M. YOAKUM, VS. PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, ROBERT R. MCINTYRE,
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 12-1408 In the Supreme Court of the United States UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PETITIONER v. QUALITY STORES, INC., ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
More informationADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS & APPEALS ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION IN THE MATTER OF (ACCT. NO.: ) INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT DOCKET NO.: 17-061 TAX YEAR
More informationTelephony and Voic
To the Point: Telephony and Voicemail Copyright 2013 insidearm.com. All rights reserved. NOTICE: This transcript is offered for sale by insidearm.com. Purchase of this transcript entitles the buyer to
More informationAppellant, CASE NO.: CVA v. Lower Court Case No.: 2006-SC-922 FINAL ORDER AFFIRMING TRIAL COURT
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA GLORIA METCALF, Appellant, CASE NO.: CVA1 07-10 v. Lower Court Case No.: 2006-SC-922 CRYSTAL ORTIZ, Appellee. / Appeal
More informationUNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2015 ARTHUR LAMAR RODGERS STATE OF MARYLAND
UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2879 September Term, 2015 ARTHUR LAMAR RODGERS v. STATE OF MARYLAND Beachley, Shaw Geter, Thieme, Raymond G., Jr. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned),
More informationSUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No CP-018S2 JOAN HANKINS RICKMAN
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2013-CP-018S2 FILED AUG 2 2 2014 \ DAVID H. VINCENT Vs. JOAN HANKINS RICKMAN APPELLANT APPELLEE ANSWER TO RESPONSE BRIEF OF
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA In Re: Petition of the Venango County : Tax Claim Bureau for Judicial : Sale of Lands Free and Clear : of all Taxes and Municipal Claims, : Mortgages, Liens, Charges
More informationSTRAUSS PAINTING, INC., Appellant-Respondent, MT. HAWLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent-Appellant.
COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------- STRAUSS PAINTING, INC., Appellant-Respondent, -against- MT. HAWLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent-Appellant. No. -------------------------------------
More informationpartnership to push out the adjustment up one tier, where the liability then stops. (Prior coverage (Doc ).)
WARREN: IRS MAY OK TIERED PARTNERSHIP AUDIT PUSH-OUT WITH A COST (Section 6221 -- Partnership Level Tax Treatment) See 2016 TNT 139-1 Full Text The push-out method or something similar might be made available
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. v. : No Washington, D.C. argument before the Supreme Court of the United States
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x LINDA A. WATTERS, COMMISSIONER, MICHIGAN OFFICE OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES, Petitioner : : : : : 0 v. : No. 0- WACHOVIA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Petitioner, : v. : No The above-entitled matter came on for oral
1 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X GARY KENT JONES, : Petitioner, : v. : No. 0- LINDA K. FLOWERS, ET AL. : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X Washington, D.C.
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
(IMPORTANT TIP: This motion is NOT recommended for filing unless client states intention to file own brief COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT In re [JANE D.], Law. A Person
More informationTranscript - The Money Drill: Where and How to Invest for Your Biggest Goals in Life
Transcript - The Money Drill: Where and How to Invest for Your Biggest Goals in Life J.J.: Hi, this is "The Money Drill," and I'm J.J. Montanaro. With the help of some great guest, I'll help you find your
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. :-mj-0000- ) v. ) ) January, 0 SHAWNA COX, ) ) Defendant. ) Portland,
More information1 of 43 COUNTY OF NEW YORK - CIVIL TERM - PART 60 WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, U.S. BANK USA, N.A., and DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST
â FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/26/2017 03:16 PM INDEX NO. 657387/2017 â 1 1 10 2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - CIVIL TERM - PART 60 3 -X 4 In the matter of the application
More informationBoard of Disciplinary Appeals
e BEFORE THE BOARD OF DISCIPLINARY APPEALS Fl LED APPOINTED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS NOV 13 2017 MARK L. HONSAKER State Bar of Texas Card No. 00795425 v.. COMMISSION FOR LA WYER DISCIPLINE OF THE
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE TAX COURT COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE TAX COURT COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS : MERRILL LYNCH CREDIT : TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, : DOCKET NO: 004230-2017 : Plaintiff, : : vs. : : DIRECTOR, DIVISION
More informationBEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS DECISION
BEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS In the Matter of ) ) HALLIBURTON ENERGY ) SERVICES, INC ) ) OAH No. 15-0652-TAX Oil and Gas Production Tax ) I. Introduction DECISION The Department
More informationChapter 3 Preparing the Record
Chapter 3 Preparing the Record After filing the Notice of Appeal, the appellant next needs to specify what items are to be in the record (the official account of what went on at the hearing or the trial
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of decision: 16th December, 2013 RFA No.581/2013.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of decision: 16th December, 2013 RFA No.581/2013 SUNIL GUPTA Through: Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Adv.... Appellant Versus HARISH
More information