Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Barbara D. Reid”
Reid v. Duzetpublic domain
94 P.3d 694 (2004) 140 Idaho 389 Sandra REID, as Conservator of the Person and Estate of Cory L. Snyder, a protected person, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Philip DUZET and Barbara Duzet, husband and wife, and the following described real property; a parcel of land on the South half of the Northeast quarter of Section 3, Township 49 North, Range 4 West, Boise Meridian, Kootenai County, State of Idaho, described as follows; commen
West Ex Rel. Reid v. Moorepublic domain
116 S.W.3d 101 (2002) Barbara WEST, as next Friend of James J. Reid, and James J. Reid, Individually, Appellants, v. Norman H. MOORE, M.D., Appellee. No. 14-00-01478-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). January 31, 2002. *103 James F. Martin, Greer & Martin, L.L.P., Houston, for appellants. Michael C. F
Berkley v. D.C. Transit, Inc.public domain
950 A.2d 749 (2008) Ruth E. BERKLEY, Petitioner, v. D.C. TRANSIT, INC., Respondent. No. 07-AA-297. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Submitted May 22, 2008. Decided June 19, 2008. *751 Barbara McDowell and Eric Angel, Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia, for petitioner.[1] Before
Trump v. Barbarapublic domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2025 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
Reid v. Spivackpublic domain
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme *860Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), entered February 2, 1989, as, upon reargument, granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff failed to prove that he had suffered a "serious injury” within the meaning of Insurance
In Re Reidpublic domain
107 B.R. 79 (1989) In re A. Ray REID, Jean B. Reid, Debtors. Bankruptcy No. 89-00361-A. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. November 8, 1989. *80 James E. Sharp, Barbara Straughn Harris, Washington, D.C., for debtors. Thomas E. Cabaniss, Ann R. Bergan, McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe, Norfolk, V
Matter of Reid v. Mosespublic domain
Matter of Reid v Moses (2018 NY Slip Op 06197) Matter of Reid v Moses 2018 NY Slip Op 06197 Decided on September 25, 2018 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to
Matter of Reid v. Wardpublic domain
Matter of Reid v Ward (2018 NY Slip Op 06806) Matter of Reid v Ward 2018 NY Slip Op 06806 Decided on October 11, 2018 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Jud
YOUNG, BONNIE v. LACY, BARBARApublic domain
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 882 CA 14-00013 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ. BONNIE YOUNG AND MICHAEL RONDINELLO, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, V ORDER BARBARA LACY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.) BARTH SULLIVAN BEHR, BUFFALO (J. WILLIAM SAVAGE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. GREENE & REID, PLLC, SYRACUSE (EUGEN
Trump v. Barbara Revisions: 7/01/26public domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2025 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
Reid v. Johirapublic domain
[Cite as Reid v. Johira, 2011-Ohio-5400.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96713 DR. TOBIAS R. REID, PH.D. PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT vs.
Cleveland v. Reidpublic domain
[Cite as Cleveland v. Reid, 2011-Ohio-6649.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96785 CITY OF CLEVELAND PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.
ED. FREEDOM PAC v. REID (BALLOT ISSUE)public domain
138 Nev., Advance Opinion L{") IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EDUCATION FREEDOM PAC, No. 84736 Appellant, vs. . RORY REID, AN INDIVIDUAL; i [ L - D BEVERLY ROGERS, AN INDIVIDUAL; 3 AND BARBARA K. CEGAVSKE, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS JUN 28 2022 NEVADA SECRETARY OF STATE, THA BR Respondents. heF DEPUTY EF DEPUTY CIERK Appeal from a district court order enjoining an initiative petition’s circulation and the initiative’s placement on the ballot. First Judicial District Court, Ca
Reid v. City of San Diegopublic domain
NARES, J. *349Yvonne Reid and Serena Wong (collectively Plaintiffs) sued the City of San Diego (City) and the San Diego Tourism Marketing District (TMD) (together, Defendants) in a putative class action complaint, challenging what they allege is "an illegal hotel tax." The trial court sustained Defendants' demurrer without leave to amend on sta
Reid v. State of NYpublic domain
570 F.Supp. 1003 (1983) Elaine REID, et al., Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. No. 83 Civ. 2437 (KTD). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 9, 1983. *1004 Teitelbaum & Hiller, P.C., New York City, for plaintiffs; William Hibsher, Herbert Teitelbaum, New York City, of counsel. Robert A
Terris v. Co. of Santa Barbarapublic domain
Filed 2/16/18; on rehearing CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION* IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX SHAWN TERRIS, 2d Civ. No. B268849 (Super. Ct. No. 1339241) Plaintiff and Appellant, (Santa Barbara County) v. OPINION FOLLOWING
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER BARBARA M.G. LYNN, District Judge. Before the Court are Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(7) [Docket # 14], Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket # 17], and Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket #42], For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(7) is DENIED; Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment
Liqui-Box Corp. v. Reid Valve Co., Inc.public domain
672 F.Supp. 198 (1987) LIQUI-BOX CORPORATION, an Ohio corporation, Plaintiff, v. REID VALVE COMPANY, INC., a California corporation, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 87-1549. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. October 1, 1987. William H. Webb and Barbara E. Johnson, Pittsburgh, Pa., Francis A. Even and Joseph E. Shipley, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff. J. D
State of Tennessee v. Barbara Mae Potterpublic domain
02/05/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 26, 2018 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BARBARA MAE POTTER Appeal from the Criminal Court for Washington County No. 39553A Jon Kerry Blackwood, Senior Judge ___________________________________
Reid v. City of San Diegopublic domain
Filed 5/25/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA YVONNE REID et al., D072493 Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2016-00041207- CU-MC-CTL) CITY OF SAN DIEGO et al