Order List - Supreme Court of the United States
Order List - Supreme Court of the United States
Order List - Supreme Court of the United States
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
(ORDER LIST: 563 U.S.)<br />
MONDAY, MAY 23, 2011<br />
CERTIORARI -- SUMMARY DISPOSITION<br />
09-784 AMARA, JANICE C., ET AL. V. CIGNA CORP., ET AL.<br />
The <strong>Court</strong> vacated <strong>the</strong> judgment below in CIGNA Corp. v.<br />
Amara, 563 U.S. ___ (2011). Therefore, <strong>the</strong> petition for a writ<br />
<strong>of</strong> certiorari is granted, and <strong>the</strong> case is remanded to <strong>the</strong> <strong>United</strong><br />
<strong>States</strong> <strong>Court</strong> <strong>of</strong> Appeals for <strong>the</strong> Second Circuit for fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />
proceedings. Justice Sotomayor took no part in <strong>the</strong><br />
consideration or decision <strong>of</strong> this petition.<br />
ORDERS IN PENDING CASES<br />
10M110 SEIDEL, ROBERT A., ET UX. V. RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO.<br />
The motion to direct <strong>the</strong> Clerk to file a petition for a writ<br />
<strong>of</strong> certiorari out <strong>of</strong> time is denied.<br />
10-8774 WARREN, MICHAEL J. V. OWENS, RISSIE, ET AL.<br />
The motion <strong>of</strong> petitioner for reconsideration <strong>of</strong> order<br />
denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied.<br />
10-9035 MITTS, TIMOTHY J. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-9637 STANTON, SOLOMAN V. STANTON, CAROL, ET AL.<br />
The motions <strong>of</strong> petitioners for leave to proceed in forma<br />
pauperis are denied. Petitioners are allowed until June 13,<br />
2011, within which to pay <strong>the</strong> docketing fees required by Rule<br />
38(a) and to submit petitions in compliance with Rule 33.1 <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> Rules <strong>of</strong> this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
1
CERTIORARI GRANTED<br />
10-577 KAWASHIMA, AKIO, ET UX. V. HOLDER, ATT'Y GEN.<br />
The petition for a writ <strong>of</strong> certiorari is granted limited to<br />
Question 1 presented by <strong>the</strong> petition.<br />
CERTIORARI DENIED<br />
10-765 ) YOUNG, CYNTHIA V. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL.<br />
)<br />
10-911 ) VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL. V. YOUNG, CYNTHIA<br />
10-828 MEAD, MICHAEL V. COTATI, CA, ET AL.<br />
10-835 TUCKER, KEVIN V. CASON, WARDEN<br />
10-1009 JOHNSON, DONNIE E. V. BELL, WARDEN<br />
10-1041 PARTH, LOUISE V. POMONA VALLEY HOSP. MED. CTR.<br />
10-1143 MONTELLO, SAM V. ACKERMAN, THOMAS<br />
10-1148 MCI SALES AND SERVICE, ET AL. V. HINTON, JAMES, ET AL.<br />
10-1149 JOHNSON, TERRENCE, ET AL. V. HASLAM, GOV. OF TN, ET AL.<br />
10-1154 ROHART, PAUL O. V. MELSAR RISK MANAGEMENT, ET AL.<br />
10-1175 ASHFORD, KEVIN V. RIVERDALE, GA, ET AL.<br />
10-1181 TROUTMAN, LYNETTE V. ESTATE OF ROGER TROUTMAN, ET AL.<br />
10-1182 SIMMONS, DAVID L. V. DEUEL, PETER, ET AL.<br />
10-1194 MARICOPA COUNTY, AZ, ET AL. V. BRAILLARD, JENNIFER, ET AL.<br />
10-1247 ROBLE, HUSSEIN S. V. MINNESOTA<br />
10-1257 KAY, JAMES A., ET AL. V. FCC<br />
10-1266 LEVY, MICHAEL R. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-1282 HOSSAINI, WAHIDULLAH V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-1286 ROGERS, EDDIE B. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-1292 DANIEL CHAPTER ONE, ET AL. V. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION<br />
10-1294 LUKE, IVOR G. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-1323 UHS OF DELAWARE, INC. V. MASTERS, MARY V.<br />
2
10-8580 SHAHIN, NINA V. STROSSER, RICHARD J., ET AL.<br />
10-8641 WILKINS, CHRISTOPHER V. TEXAS<br />
10-8744 CARNEY, LUIS R. V. CARNEY, KELLIE L.<br />
10-8957 GREENE, MASHAWN V. ARNONE, COMM'R, CT DOC<br />
10-9069 MONROE, BROTHER Y. V. KRIPPEL, NANCY, ET AL.<br />
10-9253 EVANS, ABE B. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-9352 POST, RONALD V. BRADSHAW, WARDEN<br />
10-9474 BEATY, DONALD E. V. ARIZONA<br />
10-9533 BROWN, SANDRA V. ILLINOIS<br />
10-9537 ALEXANDER, MICHAEL A. V. GRAMS, WARDEN<br />
10-9538 BRADLEY, JUAN V. CHANDLER, WAYNE, ET AL.<br />
10-9542 DANIELS, KAREN A. V. BALLY'S ATLANTIC CITY, ET AL.<br />
10-9547 SMITH, SHELIA D. V. FAIRVIEW RIDGES HOSPITAL<br />
10-9549 SMITH, ROBERT V. WASHINGTON STATE REFORM, ET AL.<br />
10-9556 DREW, ROBIN A. V. MANPOWER OF SOUTHERN NEVADA<br />
10-9558 WILLIAMS, CALVIN V. CAIN, WARDEN<br />
10-9567 BRADLEY, JUAN V. HARRIET, OSCAR, ET AL.<br />
10-9572 HEINONEN, MARK V. SCOTT, ARTHUR<br />
10-9576 RAHEEM, MUSTAFA A. V. HALL, WARDEN<br />
10-9578 SIMON, STEVEN D. V. GEORGIA, ET AL.<br />
10-9579 SANFORD, DANIEL C. V. MASON, WILLIAM D., ET AL.<br />
10-9586 HAMILTON, WALTER A. V. TEXAS<br />
10-9587 FLINN, JAMES M. V. CORBITT, WILLIAM A., ET AL.<br />
10-9591 FULTON, ALVIN V. LaVALLEY, SUPT., GREAT MEADOW<br />
10-9592 GUTIERREZ, RICARDO V. TEXAS<br />
10-9602 MONACELLI, KATHALINA V. FORD MOTOR CO.<br />
10-9606 WIGGINS, PAUL V. GEORGIA<br />
10-9607 WILLIAMS, FRANCIS I. V. BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, ET AL.<br />
3
10-9609 WEEMS, CALVIN L. V. FLORIDA<br />
10-9610 WELLER, SHAWN H. V. MAHONEY, WARDEN, ET AL.<br />
10-9612 NELSON, AMERICA E. V. LEWIS, ALPHONSE, ET AL.<br />
10-9623 BLANKENSHIP, LAWRENCE L. V. SIMON, JUDGE, ETC., ET AL.<br />
10-9630 MILTON, JESSIE V. RICHARDS, T.<br />
10-9633 MILLER, DAMEN V. ILLINOIS<br />
10-9639 SMITHSON, WILLIAM V. PENNSYLVANIA<br />
10-9641 DOWNS, GREGORY V. CALIFORNIA<br />
10-9642 CAVENDER, EMORY J. V. MUDD, CAROLINE, ET AL.<br />
10-9648 WASHINGTON, DARNELL V. OHIO, ET AL.<br />
10-9687 McINTIRE, JOHN V. MASSACHUSETTS<br />
10-9710 GOODMAN, FREDERICK V. MSPB<br />
10-9722 DePACE, PASQUALINO V. MASSACHUSETTS<br />
10-9733 STEVENSON, DARRYL V. YATES, WARDEN<br />
10-9734 KOYNOK, GEORGE L. V. LLOYD, THOMAS R., ET AL.<br />
10-9802 ABIDAOUD, TANIOS V. HOLDER, ATT'Y GEN.<br />
10-9819 HAYWOOD, CLARENCE V. HILLMAN, JUDGE, USDC CD CA<br />
10-9843 CENTENO, MELVIN V. HARDY, WARDEN<br />
10-9866 ENGLE, RAYMOND V. OHIO<br />
10-9879 BARKSDALE, JAMES V. TAYLOR, DIR., IL DOC, ET AL.<br />
10-9890 HEARNS, DANNY V. ARTUS, SUPT., CLINTON<br />
10-9896 NORWOOD, MARILYN M. V. UNIV. OF AR, BD. OF TRUSTEES<br />
10-9897 SANDOVAL, JOSE V. NEBRASKA<br />
10-9912 FITZGERALD, ALLEN O. V. WALSH, SUPT., DALLAS, ET AL.<br />
10-9923 ROGERS, WILLIAM J. V. KENTUCKY<br />
10-9930 T. G. V. NJ FAMILY SERVICES<br />
10-9936 CHARLTON, GEORGIA V. PEREZ, SUPT., BEDFORD HILLS<br />
10-9949 MARTINEZ, ADOLFO V. RUNNELS, WARDEN<br />
4
10-9965 MIRANDA, DAVID V. CHANDLER, WARDEN<br />
10-9997 WARREN, DENNIS C. V. HOBBS, DIR., AR DOC<br />
10-10000 RICHARDSON, ANTONIO J. V. SOUTH CAROLINA, ET AL.<br />
10-10014 PALMER, VAUGHN V. RYAN, DIR., AZ DOC, ET AL.<br />
10-10030 DURHAM, SPENCER V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10058 HURTADO, TELMO H. V. HOLDER, ATT'Y GEN., ET AL.<br />
10-10061 CRIPPEN, WILLIAM J. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10064 DAVIDSON, BRIDGETTE L. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10065 REGAN, DIXON V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10073 BARNES, KHALID V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10078 LOPEZ, RAFAEL V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10081 SELF, EUGENE D. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10082 ABELL, ROSCOE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10083 BUTLER, JAMES A. V. JETT, WARDEN, ET AL.<br />
10-10086 YOUNG, RONALD S. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10089 RICHARDSON, KAREEM V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10092 FUENTES, VERONICA V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10093 PRESBERRY, KEVIN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10098 FARRINGTON, FREDERICK W. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10099 McCOLLOUGH, WALTER V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10103 BLANCHARD, RICHARD V. BENNETT, J., ET AL.<br />
10-10107 ARCHULETA, RUBEN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10113 REYNOSO, JOSE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10116 RAHIM, RAS V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10118 PALACIOS-HERRERA, HUMBERTO V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10128 DAVIS, RAYMOND V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10129 CAMPOS-PADILLA, ALFREDO V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10130 DIAZ-LOPEZ, LUIS M. V. UNITED STATES<br />
5
10-10131 DE PAZ-FLORES, JOSE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10134 RIVERS, DEANGELO S. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10136 SCHAFER, DALE, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10144 HAMBRICK, ANGELO L. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10145 WOODS, ISSAC L., ET UX. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10146 CASTANEDA-PINEDA, RICARDO V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10148 LANDRY, MARY L. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10149 LEYVA-MARTINEZ, JOSE A. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10154 TARIN, MARICELA V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10157 ANDERSON, LASHAWN L. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10161 ANDERSON, ROBERT A. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10168 RICHARTE, RAFAEL V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10169 WILCOX, KENNETH M. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10171 CARMICHAEL, DOMINIQUE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10174 MOORE, SHERMAN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10176 LEE, QUENTIN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10179 MUELLER, MARTIN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10183 WILKINSON, STEPHEN V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10184 ZAMORA-VILLELA, FELIPE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10185 VARA-DAVILA, JULIO C. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10188 WESTCOTT, DAVID V. OUTLAW, WARDEN<br />
10-10190 PENA, OSCAR V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10195 CARNEGLIA, CHARLES V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10196 THOMAS, COREY, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10198 CARTER, JOSHUA R. V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-10214 WILLIAMS, ERIC V. UNITED STATES<br />
The petitions for writs <strong>of</strong> certiorari are denied.<br />
6
10-751 KHADR, OMAR, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.<br />
The petition for a writ <strong>of</strong> certiorari is denied. Justice<br />
Breyer and Justice Sotomayor would grant <strong>the</strong> petition for a writ<br />
<strong>of</strong> certiorari. Justice Kagan took no part in <strong>the</strong> consideration<br />
or decision <strong>of</strong> this petition.<br />
10-854 ROSARIO, RICHARD V. GRIFFIN, SUPT., SOUTHPORT<br />
10-1208 BENGIS, ARNOLD M., ET AL. V. UNITED STATES<br />
The petitions for writs <strong>of</strong> certiorari are denied. Justice<br />
Sotomayor took no part in <strong>the</strong> consideration or decision <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se<br />
petitions.<br />
10-9603 MONACELLI, KATHALINA V. FL DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES<br />
10-9604 MONACELLI, KATHALINA V. FL DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES<br />
10-9636 SPAIN, CONNELL V. BLACK, CHARLES T., ET AL.<br />
The motions <strong>of</strong> petitioners for leave to proceed in forma<br />
pauperis are denied, and <strong>the</strong> petitions for writs <strong>of</strong> certiorari<br />
are dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As <strong>the</strong> petitioners have<br />
repeatedly abused this <strong>Court</strong>'s process, <strong>the</strong> Clerk is directed<br />
not to accept any fur<strong>the</strong>r petitions in noncriminal matters from<br />
petitioners unless <strong>the</strong> docketing fees required by Rule 38(a) are<br />
paid and <strong>the</strong> petitions are submitted in compliance with Rule<br />
33.1. See Martin v. District <strong>of</strong> Columbia <strong>Court</strong> <strong>of</strong> Appeals, 506<br />
U.S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).<br />
10-9732 HAQUE, SERAJUL V. IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS<br />
10-9737 HAQUE, SERAJUL V. DEPT. OF HOMELAND SEC., ET AL.<br />
10-9744 ROSSATY, GILBERTO V. HOLDER, ATT'Y GEN.<br />
The petitions for writs <strong>of</strong> certiorari are denied. Justice<br />
Kagan took no part in <strong>the</strong> consideration or decision <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se<br />
petitions.<br />
7
10-10123 SUKUP, THOMAS M. V. UNITED STATES<br />
The motion <strong>of</strong> petitioner for leave to proceed in forma<br />
pauperis is denied, and <strong>the</strong> petition for a writ <strong>of</strong> certiorari is<br />
dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As <strong>the</strong> petitioner has repeatedly<br />
abused this <strong>Court</strong>'s process, <strong>the</strong> Clerk is directed not to accept<br />
any fur<strong>the</strong>r petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner<br />
unless <strong>the</strong> docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and <strong>the</strong><br />
petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin<br />
v. District <strong>of</strong> Columbia <strong>Court</strong> <strong>of</strong> Appeals, 506 U.S. 1 (1992) (per<br />
curiam). Justice Kagan took no part in <strong>the</strong> consideration or<br />
decision <strong>of</strong> this motion and this petition.<br />
10-9616 IN RE CARY M. LAMBRIX<br />
10-10206 IN RE MICHAEL C. WARD<br />
10-10213 IN RE STANLEY L. WILLIAMS<br />
10-10247 IN RE RALPH BAKER<br />
HABEAS CORPUS DENIED<br />
The petitions for writs <strong>of</strong> habeas corpus are denied.<br />
10-9635 IN RE SHIRLEY REMMERT<br />
MANDAMUS DENIED<br />
The petition for a writ <strong>of</strong> mandamus is denied.<br />
10-9628 IN RE LOUIS J. CLAY, JR.<br />
10-9629 IN RE LOUIS J. CLAY, JR.<br />
The motions <strong>of</strong> petitioner for leave to proceed in<br />
forma pauperis are denied, and <strong>the</strong> petitions for writs <strong>of</strong><br />
mandamus and/or prohibition are dismissed. See Rule 39.8.<br />
REHEARINGS DENIED<br />
10-887 DIXON, JOSEPH V. EASTCOAST MUSIC MALL<br />
10-973 SMITH, WILLIAM V. FRIEDMAN, ALVIN, ET AL.<br />
8
10-1071 AHMADI, REZA H. V. TEXAS<br />
10-8454 BENSON, RICKY V. LUTTRELL, MARK, ET AL.<br />
10-8495 YATES, PIERRE V. OHIO<br />
10-8513 JONES, WALLACE C. V. ROTHENBERG, JUDGE, ETC.<br />
10-8518 JUDD, KEITH R. V. NEW MEXICO<br />
10-8771 WHITE, NEKITA A. V. JONES, S., ET AL.<br />
10-9199 MYTON, RASENE V. UNITED STATES<br />
10-9479 JONES, JIMMY A. V. UNITED STATES<br />
The petitions for rehearing are denied.<br />
10-7328 MANN, JOHN W. V. McNEIL, SEC., FL DOC<br />
The motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing<br />
is denied.<br />
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE<br />
D-2523 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF JOEL CHASNOFF<br />
Joel Chasn<strong>of</strong>f, <strong>of</strong> Ashton, Maryland, having been suspended<br />
from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong> October 4,<br />
2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to show cause<br />
why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response<br />
having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Joel Chasn<strong>of</strong>f is disbarred from <strong>the</strong><br />
practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2525 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF FREDERIC MICHAEL BRANDES<br />
Frederic Michael Brandes, <strong>of</strong> Timonium, Maryland, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to<br />
show cause why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file<br />
a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Frederic Michael Brandes is disbarred<br />
9
from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2526 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF ROBERT LEE EHRLICH<br />
Robert Lee Ehrlich, <strong>of</strong> Calabasas, California, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to<br />
show cause why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file<br />
a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Robert Lee Ehrlich is disbarred from <strong>the</strong><br />
practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2527 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF ROBERT ALAN HEGHMANN<br />
Robert Alan Heghmann, <strong>of</strong> Darham, New Hampshire, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon<br />
him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Robert Alan Heghmann is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2528 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF ROBERT G. UDELL<br />
Robert G. Udell, <strong>of</strong> Stuart, Florida, having been suspended<br />
from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong> October 4,<br />
2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon him<br />
requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred; and<br />
<strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Robert G. Udell is disbarred from <strong>the</strong><br />
practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2529 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF WILLIAM A. FITZPATRICK<br />
William A. Fitzpatrick, <strong>of</strong> Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,<br />
having been suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by<br />
10
order <strong>of</strong> October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued<br />
requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that William A. Fitzpatrick is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2530 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF ROBERT WAYNE HALLOCK<br />
Robert Wayne Hallock, <strong>of</strong> Barrington, Illinois, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to<br />
show cause why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file<br />
a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Robert Wayne Hallock is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2531 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF CARLETON WAYNE KEITH DAVIS<br />
Carleton Wayne Keith Davis, <strong>of</strong> St. Louis, Missouri, having<br />
been suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order<br />
<strong>of</strong> October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served<br />
upon him requiring him to show cause why he should not be<br />
disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Carleton Wayne Keith Davis is disbarred<br />
from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2532 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF GARY ROBERT DeFILIPPO<br />
Gary Robert DeFilippo, <strong>of</strong> Brooklyn, New York, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon<br />
him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Gary Robert DeFilippo is disbarred from<br />
11
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2533 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF RICHARD PAUL CONDON<br />
Richard Paul Condon, <strong>of</strong> Kissimmee, Florida, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to<br />
show cause why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file<br />
a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Richard Paul Condon is disbarred from <strong>the</strong><br />
practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2534 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF STUART LEONARD STEIN<br />
Stuart Leonard Stein, <strong>of</strong> Santa Fe, New Mexico, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon<br />
him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Stuart Leonard Stein is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2535 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF JAMES HARVEY TIPLER<br />
James Harvey Tipler, <strong>of</strong> Mary Es<strong>the</strong>r, Florida, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued requiring him to<br />
show cause why he should not be disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file<br />
a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that James Harvey Tipler is disbarred from <strong>the</strong><br />
practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2536 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF IRA CARLTON HATCH, JR.<br />
Ira Carlton Hatch, Jr., <strong>of</strong> Vero Beach, Florida, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
12
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon<br />
him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Ira Carlton Hatch, Jr. is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2537 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF NICHOLAS ANDRES MANZINI<br />
Nicholas Andres Manzini, <strong>of</strong> Miami, Florida, having been<br />
suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order <strong>of</strong><br />
October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served upon<br />
him requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Nicholas Andres Manzini is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
D-2538 IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT OF STEPHEN LEONARD ZIEGLER<br />
Stephen Leonard Ziegler, <strong>of</strong> Fort Lauderdale, Florida, having<br />
been suspended from <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong> by order<br />
<strong>of</strong> October 4, 2010; and a rule having been issued and served<br />
upon him requiring him to show cause why he should not be<br />
disbarred; and <strong>the</strong> time to file a response having expired;<br />
It is ordered that Stephen Leonard Ziegler is disbarred from<br />
<strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> law in this <strong>Court</strong>.<br />
13