Jimmy W. Joiner and Donald Williamson appeal jury convictions for conspiring to injure judicial officers in their property in violation 18 U.S.C. § 372. Williamson also appeals a jury conviction for corruptly endeavoring to intimidate a federal prosecutor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503 (a). The convictions arise out of Williamson and Joiner's attempts to place liens on the real property of …
Aug 06, 2015 · 5. Defendant City of Willis, Texas, has discriminated against Jimmy D. Fletcher, on the basis of his race, Black, in violation of § 703(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), among other ways, by:
The Local 100 union family is mourning the untimely death of retired Conductor Jimmy Willis, who may be the first transit worker to suffer a service-related death resulting from the World Trade Center disaster. His wife of 15 years, Christy, reported that Jimmy had a fatal heart attack on Tuesday, June 24 th. She posted on Facebook: “He was the most wonderful man and my soul …
Jan 10, 2020 · Joiner v. United States, No. 19-10202 (5th Cir. 2020) The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal, based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, of plaintiff's action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). Plaintiff, a security guard, was shot in the leg while on duty by a pair of Islamic ...
However, as reported in the Liverpool Echo, Willis had scored for Darlington in both the Conference and the Fourth Division, for Bradford in the Third Division and for Leicester in the First Division (second tier of football) and the Premier League.
However, a year later, Willis was forced to retire from the game because of injury.
Born in Liverpool, Willis served his apprenticeship at Blackburn Rovers, before he signed for Halifax Town in 1986.
The husband owned a business, and then quickly remarried. After the husband’s business began to deteriorate, he stopped paying spousal support and the husband’s new wife filed for divorce . The first ex-wife obtained a judgment for spousal support arrears against the husband.
The first ex-wife filed a joinder motion in the first divorce case, seeking to join the second ex-wife and her business, alleging that the husband and second ex-wife were conspiring to shift assets so that husband to avoid his obligations. The trial court denied the motion, and the Court of Appeal agreed.
In family law cases (as well as “civil” cases generally), either party is allowed to request that the court “join” someone or some entity to the family law case. When the court “joins” a person or entity to a case it has the effect of that person/entity becoming a party to the case.
But only three reasons exist for joinder of a third party to a family law proceeding: California Rule of Court 5.154 (a) states that the husband or the wife in a family law proceeding may request an order joining a person “who has in his or her possession … or claims to own any property subject to the jurisdiction of the court ….”. ...