{"count":6443,"next":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/search/?cursor=cz0yMy43NjIxOTYmcz04NzI0NjgzJnQ9byZkPTIwMjYtMDktMjUmcD0y&q=INTERFERENCE+WITH+ACCESS+TO+PROPERTY+STREETS+AND+HIGHWAYS&type=o","previous":null,"results":[{"absolute_url":"/opinion/6466429/state-v-lafoga-consolidated-with-case-no-caap-20-0000589/","attorney":"","caseName":"State v. Lafoga. Consolidated With Case No. CAAP-20-0000589.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["151 Haw. 196","510 P.3d 1098"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":6466429,"court":"Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Haw. App.","court_id":"hawapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-04-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"CAAP-20-0000175","docket_id":63293262,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:22:31.696823Z","date_created":"2022-05-06T19:06:12.536062Z","score":{"bm25":32.301636}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[223527,572629,1119472,1133533,1191770,1284402,1316312,1408225,1429485,2067230,2461579,2569923,2614572,2640731,2644498,2718691,4255669,4256853,4285104,4404243,4545250,4646188,4649276,4659221,5134117,6106654,6495039,9487261,9506475,9506522,9796896,9798575,9798935,9835479],"download_url":"https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/CAAP-20-0000175.pdf","id":6338540,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/04/27/state_v._lafoga._consolidated_with_case_no._caap-20-0000589..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-27T20:41:53.044175Z","date_created":"2022-05-06T19:06:12.538466Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"078086acaf39ee5bea07d1595bb46ee90a344a74","snippet":"FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER\n\n\n\n\n                                         Electronically Filed\n                                         Intermediate Court of Appeals\n                                         CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX\n                                         27-APR-2022\n                                         08:39 AM\n                                         Dkt. 131 OP\n            IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS\n                   OF THE STATE OF HAW","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[6338540],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4504309/voters-with-facts-v-city-of-eau-claire/","attorney":"For the plaintiffs-appellants-petitioners, there were briefs filed by Thomas C. Kamenick, Richard M. Esenberg, Brian McGrath, and Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, Milwaukee. There was an oral argument by Richard M. Esenberg., For the defendants-respondents, there was a brief filed by Douglas Hoffer, assistant city attorney, and Stephen C. Nick, city attorney, with whom on the brief was Remzy D. Bitar and Arenz, Molter, Macy, Riffle & Larson S.C., Waukesha. There was an oral argument by Douglas Hoffer., An amicus curiae brief was filed on behalf of Eau Claire Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc. by Ryan J. Steffes and Weld Riley, S.C., Eau Claire., An amicus curiae brief was filed on behalf of Wisconsin REALTORS Association, NAIOP-WI, and the Wisconsin Economic Development Association by Thomas D. Larson and The Wisconsin REALTORS Association, Madison., An amicus curiae brief was filed on behalf of League of Wisconsin Municipalities, City of Milwaukee, City of Madison, and Wisconsin Towns Association by Claire Silverman and League of Wisconsin Municipalities, Madison, with whom on the brief were Mary L. Schanning, deputy city attorney of Milwaukee; Gregg C. Hagopian, assistant city attorney of Milwaukee; Grant F. Langley, city attorney of Milwaukee; Michael May, city attorney of Madison; and Rick Manthe and Wisconsin Towns Association, Shawano., An amicus curiae brief was filed on behalf of the State of Wisconsin by Misha Tseytlin, solicitor general, Brad D. Schimel, attorney general, and Kevin M. LeRoy, deputy solicitor general. There was an oral argument by Misha Tseytlin.","caseName":"Voters with Facts v. City of Eau Claire","caseNameFull":"VOTERS WITH FACTS, Pure Savage Enterprises, LLC, Wisconsin Three, LLC, 215 Farwell LLC, Dewloc, LLC, Leah Anderson, J. Peter Bartl, Cynthia Burton, Corinne Charlson, Maryjo Cohen, Jo Ann Hoeppner Cruz, Rachel Mantik, Judy Olson, Janeway Riley, Christine Webster, Dorothy Westermann, Janice Wnukowski, David Wood and Paul Zank,, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Petitioners, v. CITY OF EAU CLAIRE and City of Eau Claire Joint Review Board, Defendants-Respondents.","citation":["913 N.W.2d 131","2018 WI 63","382 Wis. 2d 1"],"citeCount":28,"cluster_id":4504309,"court":"Wisconsin Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Wis.","court_id":"wis","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2018-06-06","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2015AP001858","docket_id":7059905,"judge":"Ziegler","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:03:25.273463Z","date_created":"2018-06-06T12:52:35.182892Z","score":{"bm25":30.989859}},"neutralCite":"2018 WI 63","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[105244,106366,1246469,1252127,1282355,1306210,1581008,1625555,1648777,1649096,1692962,1701271,1702618,1703516,1725516,1752153,1842687,1848593,1849217,1849373,1850219,1905941,1914196,1917034,1917324,1925525,1935675,1938749,1942673,2006509,2012840,2014068,2018344,2039068,2048759,2072768,2115174,2121168,2123408,2131483,2135711,2151707,2160120,2184166,2195282,2221475,2223069,2224045,4010644],"download_url":"http://wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213959","id":4281562,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2018/06/06/voters_with_facts_v._city_of_eau_claire.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T16:03:35.680975Z","date_created":"2018-06-06T12:52:35.190405Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"3f61ba73b30f24a2368b70e04c1fec1d6b8e0da9","snippet":"\n\n\n  ANNETTE KINGSLAND ZIEGLER, J.\n \n\n\n   *135\n  \n\n   *8\n  \n  ¶ 1 This case arises out of the approval of a redevelopment project in the City of Eau Claire (the \"City\"), which relied in part on funds derived from two tax in","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4281562],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4381126/whitt-v-american-property-construction-pc/","attorney":"Ursula Werner for appellant., Nicholas Andrews, with whom Amy Leete Leone was on the brief, for appellee American Property Construction, P.C., Troy A. Priest, with whom Jean Marie Sylla, Jr., and Del Wright, Jr., were on the brief, for appellee Washington Gas Light Company.","caseName":"Whitt v. American Property Construction, P.C.","caseNameFull":"Suzanne WHITT, Appellant, v. AMERICAN PROPERTY CONSTRUCTION, P.C., Et Al., Appellees","citation":["157 A.3d 196","2017 WL 1288572","2017 D.C. App. LEXIS 74"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":4381126,"court":"District of Columbia Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"D.C.","court_id":"dc","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2017-04-06","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"15-CV-1199","docket_id":4669686,"judge":"Blackburne-Rigsby, Fisher, Ferren","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T00:28:51.959672Z","date_created":"2017-04-06T04:08:56.165664Z","score":{"bm25":30.158886}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[187099,773122,1165503,1198871,1485927,2068313,2159860,2408850,2411292],"download_url":"http://www.dccourts.gov/internet/documents/15-cv-1199.pdf","id":4158379,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2017/04/06/suzanne_whitt_v._american_construction_p.c..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T14:38:15.643380Z","date_created":"2017-04-06T04:08:56.173872Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"17b99ff37952f3410f779089d8246b7ffb4477e0","snippet":"\n\n\n  Fisher, Associate Judge:\n \n\n  Suzanne Whitt appeals from Superior Court judgments rejecting her claims for tortious interference with business relations, intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”), and negligence. She argues that the trial judge erred by omitting a proposed jury instruction, by dismissing her negligence claim after applying the “economic loss doctrine,” by","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4158379],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/7862153/omni-property-cos-v-sylvania-twp-bd-of-zoning-appeals/","attorney":"","caseName":"OMNI Property Cos. v. Sylvania Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 Ohio 3083"],"citeCount":3,"cluster_id":7862153,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-09-02","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"L-21-1227","docket_id":64945379,"judge":"Pietrykowski","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T16:03:54.129850Z","date_created":"2022-09-02T15:08:47.299297Z","score":{"bm25":29.760899}},"neutralCite":"2022 Ohio 3083","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":8122,"cites":[3697376,4018218,4453023],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/6/2022/2022-Ohio-3083.pdf","id":7806019,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/09/02/omni_property_cos._v._sylvania_twp._bd._of_zoning_appeals.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T13:42:40.403568Z","date_created":"2022-09-02T15:08:47.315681Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"3202fb59ffad9cb4ffbd2573467f27510caf5cb1","snippet":"[Cite as OMNI Property Cos. v. Sylvania Twp. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 2022-Ohio-3083.]\n\n\n\n\n                            IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                                SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                     LUCAS COUNTY\n\n\nOMNI Property Companies                                  Court of Appeals No. L-21-1227\n\n        Appellant                                        Trial Court No. CI0202001961\n\nv.\n\nSylvania Township Board of\nZoning Appeals                     ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[7806019],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"In an R.C. 2506.04 administrative appeal, the lower court did not err in affirming the denial of a conditional use permit where probative and reliable evidence demonstrated that the requested use was not harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood and would negatively impact at least one adjacent property."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4506255/voters-with-facts-v-city-of-eau-claire/","attorney":"","caseName":"Voters with Facts v. City of Eau Claire","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4506255,"court":"Wisconsin Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Wis.","court_id":"wis","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2018-06-06","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2015AP001858","docket_id":7126652,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:04:09.999940Z","date_created":"2018-06-12T07:50:40.979379Z","score":{"bm25":29.620264}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[105244,106366,1246469,1252127,1282355,1306210,1581008,1625555,1648777,1649096,1692962,1701271,1702618,1703516,1725516,1752153,1842687,1848593,1849217,1849373,1850219,1905941,1914196,1917034,1917324,1925525,1935675,1938749,1942673,2006509,2012840,2014068,2018344,2039068,2048759,2072768,2115174,2121168,2123408,2131483,2135711,2151707,2160120,2184166,2195282,2221475,2223069,2224045,4010644],"download_url":"http://wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213959","id":4283508,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2018/06/06/voters_with_facts_v._city_of_eau_claire_1.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T16:04:55.249574Z","date_created":"2018-06-12T07:50:40.986643Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"8d38ac17f5fa076795c11c1b09910228cf869150","snippet":"                                                         2018 WI 63\n\n                  SUPREME COURT             OF   WISCONSIN\nCASE NO.:               2015AP1858\nCOMPLETE TITLE:         Voters with Facts, Pure Savage Enterprises, LLC,\n                        Wisconsin Three, LLC, 215 Farwell LLC, Dewloc,\n                        LLC, Leah Anderson, J. Peter Bartl, Cynthia\n                        Burton, Corinne Charlson, Maryjo Cohen, Jo Ann\n                        Hoeppner Cruz, Rachel Mantik, ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4283508],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9410293/wisconsin-property-taxpayers-inc-v-town-of-buchanan/","attorney":"","caseName":"Wisconsin Property Taxpayers, Inc. v. Town of Buchanan","caseNameFull":"","citation":["992 N.W.2d 100","408 Wis. 2d 287","2023 WI 58"],"citeCount":6,"cluster_id":9410293,"court":"Wisconsin Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Wis.","court_id":"wis","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-06-29","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2022AP001233","docket_id":67538467,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:10:38.637577Z","date_created":"2023-06-29T13:10:49.616050Z","score":{"bm25":29.364342}},"neutralCite":"2023 WI 58","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[85272,1581008,1629878,1650261,1703804,1752283,1801735,1849698,1880911,1918147,2081495,2115174,3241974,4406325,4668204,4694217,6221781,6226222,6320121,6352829,6557409,6597879,6597941,8188534,8192917,8197656,8203431,8204331,9420862,9422000,9434047,9526789,9684808,9690417,9725557,9824704,9876903,9885970,9886288],"download_url":"http://wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=674589","id":9405769,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/06/29/wisconsin_property_taxpayers_inc._v._town_of_buchanan.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-28T21:18:32.534357Z","date_created":"2023-06-29T13:10:49.618652Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"b93e369fad799ae2431953dd2ec062cc6f00e4ae","snippet":"                                                                  2023 WI 58\n\n                  SUPREME COURT            OF   WISCONSIN\nCASE NO.:               2022AP1233\n\n\nCOMPLETE TITLE:         Wisconsin Property Taxpayers, Inc.,\n                                  Plaintiff-Respondent,\n                             v.\n                        Town of Buchanan,\n                                  Defendant-Appellant.\n\n                               ON BYPASS FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS\n\nOPINION FILED","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9405769],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4394470/starling-v-lake-meade-property-owners-assn/","attorney":"Ronald L. Finck, Esq., Mette, Evans & Woodside, for W. Lowell Starling and Nancy Starling, Appellees., Loudon L. Campbell, Esq., Robert B. Hoffman, Esq., Kevin M. Skjoldal, Esq., Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, for Lake Meade Property Owners Association, Inc., Appellant., Nicholas Charles Haros, Esq., Gregory David Malaska, Esq., Young & Haros, L.L.C., for PA/Delaware Valley Chapter of the Community Associations Institute, Amicus Curiae.","caseName":"Starling v. Lake Meade Property Owners Ass'n","caseNameFull":"W. Lowell STARLING and Nancy Starling, Appellees v. LAKE MEADE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant","citation":["162 A.3d 327","2017 WL 2291756","2017 Pa. LEXIS 1209"],"citeCount":42,"cluster_id":4394470,"court":"Supreme Court of Pennsylvania","court_citation_string":"Pa.","court_id":"pa","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2017-05-25","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"Starling, W. v. Lake Meade Prop., Aplt. - No. 30 MAP 2016","docket_id":6065976,"judge":"Saylor, Baer, Todd, Donohue, Dougherty, Wecht, Mundy","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T00:32:24.790492Z","date_created":"2017-05-25T15:17:12.475213Z","score":{"bm25":29.127653}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1511294,1523182,1536518,1542665,1886289,1899337,1975105,2055410,2209442,3850912],"download_url":"http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-91-2016mo - 10311415817546105.pdf","id":4171723,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2017/05/25/starling_w._v._lake_meade_prop._aplt..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T14:47:27.489717Z","date_created":"2017-05-25T15:17:12.480932Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"efb20795f0afcdb405f558607b0736507a3bb376","snippet":"                                 [J-91-2016]\n                  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA\n                              MIDDLE DISTRICT\n\n    SAYLOR, C.J., BAER, TODD, DONOHUE, DOUGHERTY, WECHT, MUNDY, JJ.\n\n\nW. LOWELL STARLING AND NANCY                :   No. 30 MAP 2016\nSTARLING,                                   :\n                                            :   Appeal from the Order of the Superior\n                    Appellees               :   Court at No. 1779 MDA 2014 dated\n      ","type":"combined-opinion"},{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":9875830,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T22:55:15.172656Z","date_created":"2023-09-26T22:43:04.103783Z"},"ordering_key":1,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\n*330OPINION\nJUSTICE WECHT\nIn Pennsylvania, planned communities are sufficiently common that twenty years ago our General Assembly adopted a uniform act regulating aspects of their inception, organization, and management.1 This case involves a dispute in one such community between property owners and their governing homeown","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4171723,9875830,9875831,9875832],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/8434955/in-re-amendments-to-oklahoma-uniform-jury-instructions-civil/","attorney":"","caseName":"IN RE AMENDMENTS TO OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 OK 75"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":8434955,"court":"Supreme Court of Oklahoma","court_citation_string":"Okla.","court_id":"okla","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-09-20","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"","docket_id":65633703,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-09-23T22:30:57.822921Z","date_created":"2022-10-25T20:09:23.665073Z","score":{"bm25":28.578384}},"neutralCite":"2022 OK 75","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":"http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=492917","id":8405316,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"html/2022/09/20/in_re_amendments_to_oklahoma_uniform_jury_instructions-civil_6.html","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-28T09:03:40.584882Z","date_created":"2022-10-25T20:09:23.666396Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"eb9913fb430eae1ebcf88b94a29fae4d0e794147","snippet":"\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\tIN RE AMENDMENTS TO OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL2022 OK 75Decided: 09/20/2022THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA\nCite as: 2022 OK 75, __ P.3d __\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\n \n\n\n\nORDER ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO \nOKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL\n\n\n","type":"combined-opinion"},{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":"http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=492917","id":8207904,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"html/2022/09/20/in_re_amendments_to_oklahoma_uniform_jury_instructions-civil.html","meta":{"timestamp":"2026-05-13T01:36:35.326539Z","date_created":"2022-09-21T03:08:14.489601Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"616b73758672c0e8642179bf2c871d9a1e15f248","snippet":"\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\tIN RE AMENDMENTS TO OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL2022 OK 75Decided: 09/20/2022THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA\nCite as: 2022 OK 75, __ P.3d __\n\n\t\t\t\t\nORDER ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO \nOKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL\n¶1 The Court has reviewed the report and recommendations of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Co","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[8207904,8405316],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/2649542/public-lands-access-assn-v-board-of-county-commissioners/","attorney":"For Appellant: J. Devlan Geddes (argued), Goetz, Gallik & Baldwin, P.C.; Bozeman., For Appellees: Susan B. Swimley (argued), Attorney and Counselor at Law; Bozeman; Tara DePuy, Attorney and Counselor at Law; Livingston., For Appellee and Cross-Appellant: Colleen M. Dowdall, Worden Thane P.C.; Missoula; Peter D. Coffman (argued), Matthew T. Parrish, Dow Lohnes PLLC; Atlanta, Georgia., For Intervenor State of Montana: Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General, Matthew T. Cochenour (argued), Assistant Attorney General; Helena., For Amici: Rebecca R. Swandal, Swandal, Douglass & Gilbert, P.C.; Livingston {Attorney for Property and Environment Center)-, Matthew O. Clifford, Attorney at Law; Oakland, California {Attorney for Montana Council of Trout Unlimited)-, Margo B. Ogburn, Wittich Law Firm, P.C.; Bozeman {Attorney for United Property Owners of Montana).","caseName":"Public Lands Access Ass'n v. Board of County Commissioners","caseNameFull":"PUBLIC LANDS ACCESS ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner and Appellant, v. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MADISON COUNTY, STATE OF MONTANA, and C. TED COFFMAN, FRANK G. NELSON and DAVID SCHULTZ, Constituting Members of Said Commission; And ROBERT R. ZENKER, in His Capacity as the County Attorney for Madison County, State of Montana, Respondents and Appellees. JAMES C. KENNEDY, MONTANA STOCKGROWERS ASSOCIATION and HAMILTON RANCHES, INC., Respondent/Intervenor and Cross-Appellant","citation":["2014 MT 10","373 Mont. 277","321 P.3d 38"],"citeCount":16,"cluster_id":2649542,"court":"Montana Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Mont.","court_id":"mont","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2014-01-16","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"DA 12-0312","docket_id":75664,"judge":"Wheat, McKinnon, Rice, Cotter, Baker, Krueger, Morris, Menahan, McGrath","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T13:35:25.534745Z","date_created":"2014-10-30T06:23:41.742269Z","score":{"bm25":28.342993}},"neutralCite":"2014 MT 10","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":9798591,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T22:31:49.376953Z","date_created":"2023-08-31T05:11:37.288642Z"},"ordering_key":1,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nJUSTICE WHEAT\ndelivered the Opinion of the Court.\n¶1 Public Lands Access Association, Inc. (PLAA) appeals from a 2012 *281judgment of the Fifth Judicial District Court, Madison County, denying the public access to the Ruby River at Seyler Lane and Seyler Bridge.\n¶2 James Kennedy (Kenne","type":"lead-opinion"},{"author_id":null,"cites":[93449,104300,110161,110783,118317,148798,875899,877241,878482,878525,879703,880379,880634,882872,882880,883235,883820,884033,884425,884520,884665,885148,885228,885365,885570,885785,886069,886323,886430,886661,887786,887902,888167,888888,888890,889654,889702,889968,889988,890280,890336,890386,1133299,1191089,1216400,1260293,1361452,1382053,1395156,1395348,1420481,1979098,2011925,2069304,2228245,2234419,2611589,2612438,2612673,3279688,3306826,3518437,3540963,3541755,3541858,3542415,3542595,3543165,3543426,3904001],"download_url":"http://searchcourts.mt.gov/getDocument?vid={57D05FBD-DBF0-40F0-A4DA-F78FBD0CF21E}","id":2649542,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2014/01/16/public_lands_v._madison_co..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-24T21:35:41.755696Z","date_created":"2014-01-16T16:53:57.811316Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"deeb8b649c72928e0d07957da09c8e83f800c8ce","snippet":"                                                                                    January 16 2014\n\n\n                                       DA 12-0312\n\n              IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA\n\n                                       2014 MT 10\n\n\n\nPUBLIC LANDS ACCESS ASSOCIATION, INC.,\n\n          Petitioner and Appellant,\n\n     v.\n\nTHE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF\nMADISON COUNTY, STATE OF MONTANA, and\nC. TED COFFMAN, FRANK G. NELSON and\nDAVID SCHULTZ, constituting members o","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9798591,9798592,9798593,9798594,2649542],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"Direct Appeal","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/3049797/the-access-fund-v-department-agriculture/","attorney":"","caseName":"The Access Fund v. Department Agriculture","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":3049797,"court":"Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","court_citation_string":"9th Cir.","court_id":"ca9","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2007-08-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"05-15585","docket_id":2907223,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T17:10:14.803576Z","date_created":"2015-10-14T00:24:34.762316Z","score":{"bm25":26.820625}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[106496,108380,108862,110991,111113,111826,112271,112331,118133,118377,121168,560568,672917,787656,797126,799990,799993,2425214,2486784],"download_url":"http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2007/08/27/0515585.pdf","id":3049797,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2007/08/27/the_access_fund_v._department_agriculture.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T02:27:12.732950Z","date_created":"2015-10-13T23:28:37.464681Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"60de9c4ad1194457d3fbc12fc32879200917c2ba","snippet":"                    FOR PUBLICATION\n  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS\n       FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT\n\nTHE ACCESS FUND,                          \n                Plaintiff-Appellant,\n                                                 No. 05-15585\n                v.\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF                       D.C. No.\n                                               CV-03-00687-HDM\nAGRICULTURE; UNITED STATES\n                                                     OPINION\nFOREST SERVICE; MIKE JOHANNS","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[3049797],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"Civil","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/1363172/access-fund-v-united-states-department-of-agriculture/","attorney":"Laurence K. Gustafson, Ashley B. Duf-fle, and Jeremy K. Kernodle, Haynes and Boone, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, and Marte D. Lightstone, Miller Stratvert, P.A., Albuquerque, NM, for the appellant., Sharon Swingle, Michael Jay Singer, Appellate Staff, Civil Division; Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General; Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney; Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for the appellees.","caseName":"Access Fund v. United States Department of Agriculture","caseNameFull":"The ACCESS FUND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; United States Forest Service; Mike Johanns, Defendants-Appellees","citation":["499 F.3d 1036","37 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20223","2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20449","2007 WL 2410135"],"citeCount":16,"cluster_id":1363172,"court":"Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","court_citation_string":"9th Cir.","court_id":"ca9","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2007-08-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"05-15585","docket_id":1970600,"judge":"Wallace, Cudahy, McKeown","lexisCite":"2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20449","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T03:26:12.259061Z","date_created":"2015-10-14T23:37:25.331559Z","score":{"bm25":25.763704}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[106496,108380,110991,111113,111826,112271,112331,118133,118377,121168,799990,799993,2425214,2486784,3048949,6931243,8409105,8990588,9424657],"download_url":null,"id":9601832,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T21:29:43.136176Z","date_created":"2023-08-22T01:50:02.530485Z"},"ordering_key":1,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\n*1039OPINION\nMcKEOWN, Circuit Judge:\nCave Rock, a large rock formation on the eastern shore of Lake Tahoe, is many things to many people. To the Washoe Tribe, it is a site of powerful religious and cultural significance. To historians and archaeologists, it sheds light both on historical Washoe culture and on the history of American transportation","type":"lead-opinion"},{"author_id":3351,"cites":[106496,108380,108862,110991,111113,111826,112271,112331,118133,118377,121168,560568,672917,749842,763637,787656,797126,798142,799990,799993,2425214,2486784],"download_url":null,"id":1363172,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-24T07:34:55.005825Z","date_created":"2013-10-30T05:47:38.649281Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"8fa8fec600f1e32d1ed9d9fa32c0df5e0f32e0e5","snippet":"\n499 F.3d 1036 (2007)\nThe ACCESS FUND, Plaintiff-Appellant,\nv.\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; United States Forest Service; Mike Johanns,[*] Defendants-Appellees.\nNo. 05-15585.\nUnited States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.\nArgued and Submitted February 15, 2007.\nFiled August 27, 2007.\n*1037 <","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[1363172,9601832,9601834],"source":"LU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/8715464/coalition-to-preserve-mcintire-park-v-mendez/","attorney":"James Dickson Brown, Law Office of James Brown, Charlottesville, YA, James Bryan Dougherty, Law Office of J.B. Dougherty, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs., Thomas L. Eckert, United States Attorneys Office, Roanoke, VA, Sharon Yvette Vaughn-Fair, U.S. Department of Transportation, Baltimore, MD, for Defendant.","caseName":"Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park v. Mendez","caseNameFull":"COALITION TO PRESERVE McINTIRE PARK and Daniel Bluestone v. Victor MENDEZ, Administrator for the Federal Highway Administration","citation":["862 F. Supp. 2d 499","2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73514","2012 WL 1935422"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":8715464,"court":"District Court, W.D. Virginia","court_citation_string":"W.D. Va.","court_id":"vawd","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2012-05-29","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"Case No. 3:11-cv-00015","docket_id":65981379,"judge":"Moon","lexisCite":"2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73514","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T21:06:35.195320Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T05:18:44.675707Z","score":{"bm25":25.585781}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":8698657,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T03:54:24.596975Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T05:18:44.685709Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\n\nMEMORANDUM OPINION\n\nNORMAN K. MOON, District Judge.\nIn this action, the Coalition to Preserve Mclntire Park1 and Daniel Bluestone2 (collectively “Plaintiffs”) seek declaratory and injunctive relief for purported violations of federal law by Defendant Victor Mendez, Administrator for the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”),3","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[8698657],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9500153/tony-paletta-v-neslon-phillips-iii-nathan-phillips-robert-nelson/","attorney":"","caseName":"Tony Paletta v. Neslon Phillips, III, Nathan Phillips, Robert Nelson Phillips, II, and West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":9500153,"court":"West Virginia Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"W. Va.","court_id":"wva","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-05-07","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"22-0380","docket_id":68507929,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:31:24.087822Z","date_created":"2024-05-07T19:14:54.840332Z","score":{"bm25":25.378391}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1283729,1318121,1327873,1334344,4003819,6595771,6596579,8178536,8181389,8695570],"download_url":"https://www.courtswv.gov/sites/default/pubfilesmnt/2024-05/22-0380-armstead-p.pdf","id":9966766,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/05/07/tony_paletta_v._neslon_phillips_iii_nathan_phillips_robert_nelson.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-07-09T05:13:49.203176Z","date_created":"2024-05-07T19:14:54.844505Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"dbc1dd55b28b97a3a0cf14dca97d6b6f6e5090da","snippet":"         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA\n                                                                                      FILED\n                               January 2024 Term\n                               _______________                                      May 7, 2024\n                                                                                   released at 3:00 p.m.\n                                                                                C. CASEY FORBES, CLE","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9966766],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"Tort, Contract, and Real Property","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10683566/state-ex-rel-otr-v-columbus/","attorney":"","caseName":"State ex rel. OTR v. Columbus","caseNameFull":"","citation":["1996 Ohio 411","76 Ohio St. 3d 203"],"citeCount":21,"cluster_id":10683566,"court":"Ohio Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Ohio","court_id":"ohio","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1996-07-31","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"1995-0611","docket_id":71511569,"judge":"Douglas, J.","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-01T13:20:18.395871Z","date_created":"2025-10-01T13:20:18.200367Z","score":{"bm25":25.3695}},"neutralCite":"1996 Ohio 411","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":5365,"cites":[3694921,3706864,3715056,3735809,3785411,6755524,6757617,6757784,6774438],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/1996/1996-Ohio-411.pdf","id":11150153,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/1996/07/31/state_ex_rel._otr_v._columbus.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-24T04:29:41.275275Z","date_created":"2025-10-01T13:20:18.255381Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"fc6cd69f51d0763c3b53c41568b30068cf69e235","snippet":"[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 76 Ohio St.3d 203.]\n\n\n\n\n THE STATE EX REL. OTR ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. CITY OF COLUMBUS ET AL.,\n                                       APPELLEES.\n             [Cite as State ex rel. OTR v. Columbus, 1996-Ohio-411.]\nReal property—Owner of property abutting highway has right of access to street\n        it abuts—Any governmental action that substantially and unreasonably\n        interferes with this right constitutes a taking of private pr","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[11150153],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Real property—Owner of property abutting highway has right of access to street it abuts—Any governmental action that substantially and unreasonably interferes with this right constitutes a taking of private property within meaning of Section 19, Article I of Ohio Constitution and Fifth Amendment to United States Constitution."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/8913419/white-v-northwest-property-group-hendersonville-1-llc/","attorney":"\nPrince, Youngblood & Massagee, PLLG by Sharon B. Alexander, for plaintiff-appellant.\n, \nNo defendant-appellees brief filed.\n","caseName":"White v. Northwest Property Group-Hendersonville 1, LLC","caseNameFull":"MARK WHITE and TANIS T. DUFFIE v. NORTHWEST PROPERTY GROUP-HENDERSONVILLE 1, LLC","citation":["225 N.C. App. 810","739 S.E.2d 572","2013 WL 791524","2013 N.C. App. LEXIS 219"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":8913419,"court":"Court of Appeals of North Carolina","court_citation_string":"N.C. Ct. App.","court_id":"ncctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2013-03-05","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"No. COA12-1037","docket_id":66179624,"judge":"Davis, Hunter, Robert, Stroud","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T22:23:04.739848Z","date_created":"2022-11-27T01:09:05.536084Z","score":{"bm25":25.307108}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":8901349,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T19:31:00.760353Z","date_created":"2022-11-27T01:09:05.542111Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nSTROUD, Judge.\nMark White and Tanis T. Duffie (“plaintiffs”) appeal from judgment entered 17 May 2010 in Superior Court, Henderson County, granting a motion for partial summary judgment filed by Northwest Property Group-Hendersonville #1, LLC (“defendant”). Plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because defendant is not entitled to governmental immunity. For the following reasons, we affirm ","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[8901349],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10708933/save-our-access-v-city-of-san-diego/","attorney":"","caseName":"Save Our Access v. City of San Diego","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":10708933,"court":"California Court of Appeal","court_citation_string":"Cal. Ct. App.","court_id":"calctapp","court_jurisdiction":"SA","dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2025-10-17","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"D084132A","docket_id":71722122,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-22T18:04:37.865273Z","date_created":"2025-10-22T18:04:37.621439Z","score":{"bm25":25.019249}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1161804,2244619,2272381,2585012,4190211,4354118,5452479,9520271,9796676],"download_url":"https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/D084132A.PDF","id":11175520,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2025/10/17/save_our_access_v._city_of_san_diego_1.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T20:43:23.644017Z","date_created":"2025-10-22T18:04:37.626790Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"397a2306f3b6b94fe26d5a45ff5473a9b8da6bc9","snippet":"Filed 10/17/25 (reposting correct version)\n                             CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION\n\n\n               COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n                                             DIVISION ONE\n\n                                  STATE OF CALIFORNIA\n\n\n\n SAVE OUR ACCESS,                                    D084132\n\n         Plaintiff and Appellant,\n\n         v.                                          (Super. Ct. No. 37-2022-\n                                                  ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[11175520],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10705991/save-our-access-v-city-of-san-diego/","attorney":"","caseName":"Save Our Access v. City of San Diego","caseNameFull":"","citation":[],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":10705991,"court":"California Court of Appeal","court_citation_string":"Cal. Ct. App.","court_id":"calctapp","court_jurisdiction":"SA","dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2025-10-17","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"D084132","docket_id":71681193,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-17T23:03:04.527238Z","date_created":"2025-10-17T23:03:04.380731Z","score":{"bm25":24.275894}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1161804,2244619,2272381,2585012,4190211,4354118,5452479,9520271,9796676],"download_url":"https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/D084132.PDF","id":11172578,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2025/10/17/save_our_access_v._city_of_san_diego.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-24T04:46:16.020994Z","date_created":"2025-10-17T23:03:04.383425Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"5b4ccf582f6d70ceb81b30e4a11ac577386dcd84","snippet":"Filed 10/17/25\n                        CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION\n\n\n                 COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n                                  DIVISION ONE\n\n                           STATE OF CALIFORNIA\n\n\n\nSAVE OUR ACCESS,                           D084132\n\n       Plaintiff and Appellant,\n\n       v.                                  (Super. Ct. No. 37-2022-\n                                           00035094-CU-TT-CTL)\nCITY OF SAN DIEGO,\n\n       Defendant and Respondent.\n\n\n   ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[11172578],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4731999/in-re-amendments-to-the-oklahoma-uniform-jury-instructions-civil/","attorney":"","caseName":"IN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2020 OK 3"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4731999,"court":"Supreme Court of Oklahoma","court_citation_string":"Okla.","court_id":"okla","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2020-01-13","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"","docket_id":16921848,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T02:09:30.127062Z","date_created":"2020-03-03T20:10:27.468214Z","score":{"bm25":24.057987}},"neutralCite":"2020 OK 3","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[278894,566448,1168361,1565716,2204443,2368060,2510363,2626585,2627166,2631225,2634529,2640464,2716723,3802757,3803076,3805659,3820267,3821577,3825742,3825784,3827253,3835000,4282425,4501783],"download_url":"http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=486387","id":4512346,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"html/2020/01/13/in_re_amendments_to_the_oklahoma_uniform_jury_instructions_-_civil_4.html","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-22T22:35:38.757541Z","date_created":"2020-03-03T20:10:27.483029Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"d7b813a79112cc3b9a09a25406d2c5183126ab2e","snippet":"\n\t\tOSCN Found Document:IN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\n  \n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tIN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL2020 OK 3Decided: 01/13/2020THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA\nCite as: 2020 OK 3, __ P.3d __\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\nIN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4512346],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4694655/in-re-amendments-to-the-oklahoma-uniform-jury-instructions-civil/","attorney":"","caseName":"IN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2020 OK 3"],"citeCount":4,"cluster_id":4694655,"court":"Supreme Court of Oklahoma","court_citation_string":"Okla.","court_id":"okla","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2020-01-13","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":null,"docket_id":16687088,"judge":"","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:57:53.240235Z","date_created":"2020-01-13T22:09:37.892659Z","score":{"bm25":24.040049}},"neutralCite":"2020 OK 3","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[278894,566448,1111095,1118772,1164526,1168361,1168559,1173160,1186489,1196510,1202805,1206569,1219617,1243775,1275109,1282472,1351672,1361600,1365472,1367790,1415475,1421075,1421187,1423577,1439395,1452118,1455975,1565716,2204443,2368060,2510363,2615017,2619994,2626585,2627166,2631225,2634529,2640464,2716723,3217784,3799410,3802757,3803076,3805659,3820153,3820267,3821576,3825742,3825784,3826339,3827046,3827253,3828603,3835000,4253751,4472667],"download_url":"http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=486387","id":4471986,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"html/2020/01/13/in_re_amendments_to_the_oklahoma_uniform_jury_instructions_-_civil.html","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-22T22:34:01.575779Z","date_created":"2020-01-13T22:09:37.901359Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"f9adb2a8250127ca5a42fb0ecbf38808e879a1fa","snippet":"\n\t\tOSCN Found Document:IN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\n  \n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tIN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL2020 OK 3Decided: 01/13/2020THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA\nCite as: 2020 OK 3, __ P.3d __\n\n\t\t\t\t\n\nIN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE OKLAHOMA UNIFORM JURY INSTRUCT","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4471986],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/8724683/hillcrest-property-llp-v-pasco-county/","attorney":"David Smolker, Ethan Jerome Loeb, Jacob T. Cremer, Smolker, Bartlett, Schlosser, Loeb & Hinds, P.A., Kristin Marie Tolbert, Kristin M. Tolbert, Attorney at Law, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff., April Justus Bristow, Donald Edward Hemke, H. Ray Allen, II, Carlton Fields, PA, Tampa, FL, Nicki H. Spirtos, New Port Richey, FL, for Defendant.","caseName":"Hillcrest Property, LLP v. Pasco County","caseNameFull":"HILLCREST PROPERTY, LLP v. PASCO COUNTY","citation":["939 F. Supp. 2d 1240","2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53325","2013 WL 1502627"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":8724683,"court":"District Court, M.D. Florida","court_citation_string":"M.D. Fla.","court_id":"flmd","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2013-04-12","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"Case No. 8:10-cv-819-T-23TBM","docket_id":65990606,"judge":"Merryday","lexisCite":"2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53325","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T21:10:03.924701Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T06:37:19.864737Z","score":{"bm25":23.762196}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":8707880,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T03:57:38.864284Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T06:37:19.874392Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\n\nORDER\n\nSTEVEN D. MERRYDAY, District Judge.\nBefore 2025 Pasco County must build more and larger roads to accommodate the inevitable increase in automobile traffic. Preferring to avoid the payment of “just compensation” after acquiring the necessary land by eminent domain, Pasco County has hatched a novel and effective but constitutionally problematic idea, a most uncommon regulatory regime that i","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[8707880],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""}]}