Cases

Opinion issued September 17, 2015. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-15-00159-CV ——————————— BARRY CHRISTOPHER CONNOR, Appellant V. LYNETTE MARIE CONNOR, Appellee

Opinion issued December 22, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-15-00916-CV ——————————— BARRY C. CONNOR, Appellant V. LYNETTE MARIE CONNOR, Appellee

ACCEPTED 01-15-00159-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS

MANDATE Court of Appeals First District of Texas NO. 01-15-00159-CV BARRY CHRISTOPHER CONNER, Appellant V. LYNETTE MARIE CONNOR, Appellee Appeal from the 311th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 2013-68896). TO THE 311TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, GRE

O’Donnell, J. {¶ 1} Chelsey Barry appeals from a judgment of the Fourth District Court of Appeals affirming her conviction for tampering with evidence arising from an incident involving the concealment of 56 grams of heroin within a body cavity. The appellate court certified that its decision conflicted with State v. Cavali

The opinion of the court was delivered by Johnson, J.: This is a consolidated appeal of two cases in which Gregory A. O’Connor pled nolo contendere to certain charges. He seeks review of the Court of Appeals decision to affirm the district court’s classification of a prior Florida juvenile adjudication for third-degree burglary as a person felony for purposes of calculating his Kansas criminal

Lahtinen, J. (concurring). While I agree with the concurrence, I write separately to stress the need that this matter proceed without delay to a hearing. In light of the protracted delays and meandering procedures that have marked this proceeding, principles of equity and fundamental fairness—as well as maintaining integrity of the administrative process—require that a hearing be held expeditiously (see Matter of Louis H

Lahtinen, J. (concurring). While I agree with the concurrence, I write separately to stress the need that this matter proceed without delay to a hearing. In light of the protracted delays and meandering procedures that have marked this proceeding, principles of equity and fundamental fairness—as well as maintaining integrity of the administrative process—require that a hearing be held expeditiously (see Matter of Louis H

*163OPINION OF THE COURT George B. Ceresia, Jr., J. Since March 2000 the petitioner has served as president of the State University of New York Research Foundation (hereinafter Research Foundation).1 By letter dated January 29, 2009 (referred to as a 15-day letter, see Executive Law § 94 [12] [a]) the respondent New York S

666 F.Supp.2d 154 (2009) GLENWOOD FARMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. Cozen O'CONNOR, et al., Defendants. No. 09-cv-205-P-S. United States District Court, D. Maine. October 14, 2009. *157 Andrew D. Berman, Simonds Winslow Willis & Abbott Boston, MA, Glenn D. Goodman, Law Offices of Glenn D. Goodman, Springfield, MA, William P. Logan,

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Prods. Co., 125 Ohio St.3d 250, 2010-Ohio-1027, 927 N.E.2d 1066, and Stetter v. R.J. Corman Derailment Servs., L.L.C., 125 Ohio St.3d 280, 2010-Ohio-1029, 927 N.E.2d 1092, and the judgment of the trial court is reinstated. Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

Judge ERDMANN delivered the opinion of the Court. Appellant, Senior Airman Barry O’Connor, United States Air Force, was tried by general court-martial at Hurlburt Field, Florida. Pursuant to his pleas, he was convicted of two specifications of forcible sodomy of a female under 16 years of age and four specifications of indecent acts or indecent liberties with the same victim, in violation of Articles 125 and 13

Busher v Barry (2024 NY Slip Op 00292) Busher v Barry 2024 NY Slip Op 00292 Decided on January 24, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Matter of Connor v Connor (2019 NY Slip Op 02520) Matter of Connor v Connor 2019 NY Slip Op 02520 Decided on April 3, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant

OPINION Justice BAER. We granted allocatur in this case to determine whether Appellant, Cozen O’Connor (the Firm), a law firm that is owed monies for legal work performed for a political campaign committee, “the Friends of Bob Brady Campaign Committee” (Committee), has standing to bring a declaratory judgment action against the City of Philadelphia (City) and the Philadelphia Board of Ethics (Et

PROST, Circuit Judge. Donald O’Connor, et al., (collectively “appellants”) appeal from the decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing their complaint for lack of jurisdiction. O’Connor v. United States, 50 Fed.Cl. 285 (2001). Because the court erred in concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, we reverse the court’s dismissal. Because the court correctly granted, in the alternati

Busher v Barry (2021 NY Slip Op 03141) Busher v Barry 2021 NY Slip Op 03141 Decided on May 18, 2021 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.<

DAUKSCH, Judge. This is an appeal from a non-final order determining liability against appellants, and a judgment thereon. Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(e)(iv). We have no transcript of the testimony which appellee relies upon to refute the affidavit of appellant in opposition to the summary judgment. That is, although appel-lee says appellant’s testimony at a hearing, or hearings, refutes his affidavit, we

Merrigan, J. The threshold question presented by this appeal pursuant to Dist./ Mun. Cts. R. A. D. A, Rule 8C is whether this appeal is properly before us. Teresa Hodel-Malinofsky, the Appellant, appeals from the allowance of Appellee Barry O’Connor’s motion to remove the default. “[T]he allowance of such a motion is interlocutory in character.” Wainwright v. Galeno, 1998 Mass. App. Div. 89. Hodel-Ma

712 A.2d 375 (1998) Colleen E. MELLOR v. Carleen M. O'CONNO et all. No. 97-172-Appeal. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. May 28, 1998. Barry J. Kusinitz, Providence, for Plaintiff. F. Monroe Allen, Pawtucket, for Defendant. Before WEISBERGER, C.J., and LEDERBERG, BOURCIER, FLANDERS and GOLDBERG, JJ. OPINION LEDERBERG, Justice.