Houston, Texas, employment law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on job discrimination theories.

Kelli Smith sued her former employer, United Parcel Service, Incorporated (UPS), under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) alleging race, gender, and disability discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment.

Under McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff bear

Columbia, South Carolina, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2).

or a criminal sentence to be procedurally reasonable, “a district court must begin its sentencing proceeding by correctly calculating the applicable Guidelines range.” United States v.

Orlando, Florida personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff on a Federal Tort Claims Act claim.

On June 23, 2022, Plaintiff Elisabeth Koletas was traveling
through Southwest Florida International Airport. Upon arriving at
the security screening area, Koletas, four months pregnant, re
quested to undergo a pat-down instead of walking through a body
scanner. She e

Boston, Massachusetts employment law lawyers represented the Plaintiff on a Fair Labor Standard Act violation theory.

New Haven, Connecticut, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with conspiracy to distribute drugs.

Google A.I.:

Federal conspiracy to distribute controlled substances is a serious criminal charge under
21 U.S.C. § 846 that targets an agreement between two or more individuals to violate federal drug laws, such as manufacturing or distributing illegal drugs

New Haven, Connecticut, employment law lawyer represented the Plaintiff on a
Family & Medical Leave Act violation theory.

Google A.I.:

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is a federal law that offers eligible employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave annually for certain family and medical situations, along with continued group health benefits. The FMLA app

Rutland, Vermont, employment law lawyer represented the Plaintiff on a civil rights employment discrimination theory.

Google, A.I.:

Employment discrimination law
prohibits unfair treatment in the workplace based on characteristics like race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older), disability, or genetic information. Key federal laws, such as Title VII of the

Sapulpa, Oklahoma, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with:

1. DOMESTIC ASSAULT AND BATTERY BY STRANGULATION

2. THREATEN TO PERFORM ACT OF VIOLENCE

3. DISRUPT/PREVENT/INTERRUPT/EMERGENCY TELEPHONE CALL

Reported by: Criminal Defense Lawyer Kent Morlan

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with a Hobbs Act robbery and brandishing and discharging a firearm in relation to a crime of violence.

Sapulpa, Oklahoma criminal defense lawyer will be representing the Defendant charged with:

1. BATTERY/ASSAULT & BATTERY ON POLICE OFFICER

2. THREATEN TO PERFORM ACT OF VIOLENCE

3. RESISTING AN OFFICER

Reported by Kent Morlan

Las Vegas, Nevada, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with two counts of first-degree murder with the use of a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder with the use of a deadly weapon, and two firearm discharge offenses.

Brandon Morales and two friends, Joshua Nunez and Humberto Oceguedo-Ramos, drove to a Las Vegas gas station, where they met Ca

Las Vegas, Nevada commercial litigation lawyers represented the Plaintiffs seeking a writ of prohibition or, alternatively, mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim in a consumer protection action.

The State of Nevada filed a complaint against petitioners TikTok, Inc., and its related entiti

San Francisco, California personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs in Gonzalez v. Google are relatives of a U.S. citizen murdered by ISIS terrorists in France. They alleged that Google violated the Anti-Terrorism Act when it affirmatively recommended ISIS-produced terrorist videos to its users, thereby aiding, abetting, and/or providing substantial assistance to I

Las Vegas, Nevada criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3.

A claim of retaliation under Title VII is governed by the three-step
burden-shifting framework under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S.
792, 802–05 (1973). First, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie c

Pierre, South Dakota, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with assault and battery.

Assault is an act that causes someone to fear imminent physical harm, while battery is the physical act of applying force to another person. The key difference is that battery requires physical contact, which can be offensive or harmful, whereas assault does not, according to some jur

Pierre, South Dakota, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with failing to appear in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 3146(a)(l) and 3146(b)(l)(A)(ii).

8 U.S.C. § 3146(a)(1) is a section of the U.S. Code that defines the crime of
failure to appear, which is committed by anyone who knowingly fails to appear in court as required by the conditions of their release. To be

Omaha, Nebraska, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with sex trafficking a minor in violation of 18 U.S. 1591.

Federal and state laws treat
trafficking a minor as a severe felony, defining a minor as anyone under the age of 18. A key component of these laws is that a minor cannot legally consent to commercial sex acts or forced labor, meaning prosecutors do not

Fayetteville, Arkansas insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a E.R.I.S.A. law theory.

The Plaintiff request health care benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act from the Defendant.

Saucedo's ERISA claim is premature. His claim for statutory ERISA penalties is also subject to dismissal because the facts fail to plausibly show that United negl

Justin Hooper and the City of Tulsa dispute whether the Curtis Act, 30 Stat. 495 (1898), grants Tulsa jurisdiction over municipal violations committed by all Tulsa’s inhabitants, including Indians, in Indian country. Tulsa issued a traffic citation to Mr. Hooper, an Indian and member of the Choctaw Nation, and he paid a $150 fine for the ticket in Tulsa’s Municipal Criminal Court (“municipal

¶1 Appellant, Marvin Keith Stitt, was convicted of Aggravated Speeding (Tulsa, Okla., Rev. Ordinances Title 37, § 617(C) (2021)) following a non-jury trial before the Honorable Mitchell McCune, Municipal Judge, and fined $250.00 in City of Tulsa Municipal Court Citation/Case No. 7569655.

¶2 Mr. Stitt was issued City of Tulsa (Tulsa) Municipal Citation/Case No. 7569655 on February 3, 20

¶1 Appellee, Nicholas Ryan O'Brien, was charged by Information in the Municipal Criminal Court of the City of Tulsa with the following misdemeanor traffic crimes:

Case No. 720766, Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol, in violation of City of Tulsa Revised Ordinances Title 37, § 649;

Case No. 720766A, Transporting an Open Container, in violation of City of Tuls

¶1 The State of Oklahoma appeals the order of the reviewing judge affirming an adverse ruling of the magistrate dismissing the criminal charges in Ottawa County District Court Case No. CF-2022-215 for lack of jurisdiction. See 22 O.S.2011, §§ 1089.1--1089.7; Rule 6.1, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2024).

¶2 On November 1, 2022, the State charg

¶1 Appellant Michael Gary Parker, Jr. appeals his Judgment and Sentence from the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. CF-2018-3184, for First Degree Manslaughter, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 711.1 Parker's jury unanimously found him guilty, but deadlocked on the issue of punishment. The Honorable William J. Musseman, Jr., District Judge, who presided over Parker's jury trial, sentenced Pa

¶1 The State of Oklahoma, Appellant, appeals from an order sustaining Appellee's motion to dismiss a charge of assault and battery on a police officer filed in the District Court of Mayes County, Case No. CF-2019-295. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on Appellee's motion to dismiss, and, relying on McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), and Hogner v. State, 2021 OK CR 4, 500 P.3d

Tulsa, Oklahoma criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged wih:

Count # 1.
Count as Filed: BH, THREATENING AN ACT OF VIOLENCE, in violation of 21 O.S. 1378 A
Date of Offense: 07/29/2025
DIXON, BRENDAN WADE
Disposed: DISMISSED, 11/06/2025. Dismissed- Prosecution Witness Failed to Appear
Count as Disposed: THREATENING AN ACT OF VIOLENCE(BH)
Violatio