1190 search results for query *

Summary: 564 F. Supp. In 1978 the United States Congress, while in the process of drafting new deferral regulations for farm loans in connection with other amendments to the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, enacted 7 U.S.C. Section 1981a. The part of that section which is pertinent here provides: "In addition to any other authority that the Secretary may have to defer principal and interest and forego foreclosure, the Secretary may permit, at the request of the borrower, the deferral of more.

Summary: 394 F. Supp. *229 W. H. Dillahunty, U. S. Atty., John F. Forster, Jr., Sam Perroni, Asst. U. S. Attys., Little Rock, Ark., for plaintiff. This case is now before the Court on the defendant's motion to suppress all evidence gained by the government as a result of certain wiretaps placed *230 on the defendant's telephone by the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company during a "blue box" investigation. There is no evidence that the company and the F.B.I communicated about this matter prior to more.

Summary: 577 F. Supp. Plaintiff asks this Court to decide as a matter of law that PCC is the successor corporation of UNARCO, that Nicolet is the successor corporation of Keasbey & Mattison (K & M), and that as successor corporations, PCC and Nicolet are liable for any damages caused to plaintiff by his exposure to the various asbestos-containing products of their predecessors, UNARCO and K & M. Both PCC and Nicolet oppose the motions and Nicolet has counter-moved for summary judgment on the issue of more.

Summary: 474 F. Supp. 1276 (1979) Thomas ANDREWS, Plaintiff, v. MOHAWK RUBBER COMPANY, Defendant. It is further alleged that agents of defendant, while acting within the course and scope of their employment, did communicate among themselves and to other agents and employees of the defendant corporation false and defamatory statements, with malicious intent, which resulted in the plaintiff being fired as industrial relations manager of defendant's manufacturing facility at Helena, Arkansas. Defendant more.

Summary: 79 F. Supp. [1] *1031 Motions to Dismiss RICO Count or Alternative Motions for Bill of Particulars To establish a violation of RICO, the government must prove the existence of an enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce; that the defendants associated with the enterprise; and the defendants participated directly or indirectly in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity by committing at least two racketeering (or predicate) acts. United more.

Summary: 577 F. Supp. On February 23, 1983, the Governor of Arkansas signed into law Act 245 of 1983, entitled, "An Act to Provide for Religious Exemptions for Religious Child Care Facilities that are now required to be Licensed Under the Child Care Facility Licensing Act; to Provide Procedures by which Religious Child Care Facilities May be Exempt From the Child Care Facility Licensing and for Other Purposes." The Texarkana Baptist Orphanage, a religious child care facility exempt under Act 518 of 1981, more.

Summary: 889 F. Supp. Cobb v. National Lead Co., 215 F. Supp. The plaintiffs filed in Pulaski County and effected service on the Bank's designated agent by mailing the summons and petition to him in Miller County, Arkansas.The underlying policy as to venue in this state is that every defendant should be liable to suit only in the county of his residence or place of business, unless for other policy reasons there are statutes to the contrary. Section 16-60-108 does provide that actions "against ... a more.

Summary: 145 B.R. 277 (1992) In re COLLINS SECURITIES CORPORATION. Harvey L. BELL, Trustee for the Liquidation of the Business of Collins Securities Corporation, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION as Successor to Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation as Receiver for FirstSouth Federal Savings and Loan Association; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Successor to Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; Insurance Division, Appellees/Defendants. Therefore, more.

Summary: 137 F. Supp. 364 (1956) HOXIE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 46 OF LAWRENCE COUNTY, ARKANSAS, a body corporate under the laws of the State of Arkansas, L. R. Howell, L. L. Cochran, Howard Vance, Guy Floyd and Leo Robert, individually and as Directors of Hoxie School District No. 46 of Lawrence County, Arkansas, and K. E. Vance, Plaintiffs, v. Herbert BREWER; Amis Guthridge, White America, Inc., a corporation organized and operating under the laws of the State of Arkansas, Citizens Committee Representing more.

Summary: 676 F. Supp. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (docket entry # 76) is GRANTED IN PART, and DENIED IN PART, such that: (a) Plaintiff shall PROCEED with his failure to protect and free exercise of religion claims against Defendants in their individual capacities only; and (b) all other claims are DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE. 2d 798 (2007) (providing that an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies is an affirmative defense that must be pled and proven by the defendants); Nerness v. more.

Summary: 231 F. Supp. 2d 852 (2002) In re AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT AT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS, JUNE 1, 1999. *853 Michael E. Hale, Glenn W. Jones, D. Keith Fortner, Barber, McCaskill, Jones & Hale, P.A., Philip E. Kaplan, Regina Haralson, Kaplan, Brewer & Maxey, P.A., Michael Norris Shannon, Scott J. Lancaster, J. Phillip Malcom, William H. Sutton, Friday, Eldredge & Clark, Byron L. Freeland, Marshall S. Ney, Mitchell, Williams, Selog, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C., Little Rock, AR, Ted Boswell, James Ralph Jackson, more.

Summary: 651 F. Supp. Defendants allege that plaintiff's cause of action is a suit for violation of a collective bargaining agreement which can only be brought pursuant to § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.

Summary: 519 F. Supp. On October 20, 1978, AP&L instituted an action in the Circuit Court of Independence County, Arkansas, to condemn several tracts of land owned by plaintiffs, Ray Edwards and Louise Edwards, husband and wife, for the purpose of constructing an electric generating plant, an associated fuel supply facility and transmission lines.Plaintiffs further alleged, in their counterclaim, that in view of the statutory authority granting AP&L the power of eminent domain, AP&L is an arm of the more.

Summary: 388 F. Supp. Plaintiff asks this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 to declare that Milnot does not come within the purview of the Arkansas Filled Milk Act or, in the alternative, to declare the statute unconstitutional on the ground that it violates the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See, United States v. Carolene Products Co., 51 F. Supp. Milnot Co. v. Richardson, 350 F. Supp.

Summary: 223 F. Supp. The motion to remand is based on the construction given to section 16(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), by the Court of Appeals for this Circuit in Johnson v. Butler Brothers, 8 Cir., 162 F.2d 87, 172 A.L.R. 1157, decided in 1947.

Summary: 522 F. Supp. 1087 (1981) BASSO CHEMICALS, INC., Plaintiff, v. William T. SCHMIDT and Ozark Chemical Company, Defendants. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT This is a diversity case brought by Basso Chemicals, Inc. a Florida corporation, against Ozark Chemical Company, an Arkansas corporation, and William T. Schmidt, an Arkansas resident presently employed by Ozark and formerly employed by Basso. At the time of his employment, he signed an employment contract which provided in part that he would not (1) " more.

Summary: 621 F. Supp. 610 (1985) J.I. CASE CREDIT, Plaintiff, v. Bill BARTON a/k/a William Franklin Barton, Jr., a/k/a W.F. Barton, Jr., a/k/a William F. Barton d/b/a Barton Farms; Floran Miller and Audrey Miller, His Wife; and Citizens Bank of Jonesboro, Defendants, Citizens Bank of Jonesboro, Floran Miller, and Audrey Miller, Third Party Plaintiffs, Hornor-Morris Abstract Company, Third Party Defendant. Plaintiff J.I. Case Credit obtained a judgment entered August 24, 1982 against Bill Barton d/b/a more.

Summary: 272 F. Supp. The defendants in that case, hereinafter at times called simply the defendants, were Vance M. Thompson of McCrory, Arkansas, and his adult children, Elizabeth T. Russell, H. Ripley Thompson, John G. Thompson, Ruth T. Trammell, William H. Thompson, and Vance M. Thompson, Jr., partners doing business as The Summit House Apartments. In No. 60, as it now stands, the Government seeks to foreclose liens on the Summit House real estate, including certain appliances specifically described more.