Cases

289 S.W.3d 1 (2008) James Richard MAYS and William Coke Viser, Appellants, v. Rhonda COLE, County Clerk of Clark County, Arkansas, and Morgan A. Berry, Appellees. No. 08-1231. Supreme Court of Arkansas. November 3, 2008. *2 Andi Davis and Cliff Jackson, for appellants. Ralph Charles Ohm, for appellee Rhonda Cole. Mo

*194 Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge WYNN wrote the opinion, in which Judge WILKINSON and Judge KING joined. WYNN, Circuit Judge: Defendant Brian Keith Berry was convicted of a sex offense in state court and obligated to register under the federal Sex Offender Regi

Biles, J., dissenting: In my view, reinstating Berry’s negligence action is an injustice to these defendants and the voluntary rehabilitation programs with which they contract. If plaintiff truly felt aggrieved by the rehabilitation program procedures offered by the Kansas State Board of Nursing, she had significant due process rights available administratively to protect her nursing license from erroneous testing results. Her de

Defendant Kyle Berry was indicted for the first-degree murder of Margaret Theresa Fetter. He was convicted on the basis of premeditation and deliberation and sentenced to death. The State presented evidence that Timothy Ratliff was eating at a McDonald's restaurant in Wilmington on 5 November 1998. He was approached by Bobby Autry, who asked for a cigarette. Autry, accompanied by Theresa Fetter, the victim, later returned to Ratliff and asked Ratliff to rent a motel room for hi

766 N.E.2d 805 (2002) Melvin BERRY, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. No. 49A04-0108-CR-332. Court of Appeals of Indiana. April 30, 2002. *806 Bryan L. Cook, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant. Steve Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Cynthia L. Ploughe, Deputy Attorney General, Indianap

*623Buser, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part: I concur in my colleague’s affirmance of the district court’s dismissal of Berry’s consumer protection claim. I dissent, however, from the reversal of the district court’s dismissal of Berry’s negligence claim. It is the public policy of this state, as decided by t

TYSON, Judge. *409 John Berry ("Plaintiff" or "Mr. Berry") appeals from an order assigning primary physical custody of his two children to their mother, Ashleigh Berry ("Defendant" or "Ms. Berry"). Plaintiff has failed to show the trial court abused its discretion in assigning Defendant prim

632 F.Supp.2d 300 (2009) Wayne BERRY, Plaintiff, v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO. AMERICAS et al., Defendants. No. 07 Civ. 7634 (WHP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. April 6, 2009. *302 Timothy J. Hogan, Esq., Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff. Andrew P. DeNatale, Esq., Jonathan E. Moskin, White & Case LLP, New York,

Per Curiam. Affirmed. To the extent that appellant petitions for a writ of prohibition, this Court takes judicial notice of Case No. 4D17-2669 and sua sponte dismisses the petition. May, Conner and Forst, JJ., concur.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE KEVIN BERRY, § § No. 357, 2024 Defendant-Below, § Appellant, § Court Below: Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § Cr. ID No. N2307003037 STATE OF DELAWARE,

[Cite as Berry v. Mullet, 2025-Ohio-2346.] COURT OF APPEALS HOLMES COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PATRICIA J. BERRY, ET AL. : JUDGES: : Hon. Andrew J. King, P.J. Plaintiffs-Appellants : Hon. Robert G. Montgomery, J. : H

[Cite as Berry v. Mullet, 2025-Ohio-2345.] COURT OF APPEALS HOLMES COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PATRICIA J. BERRY, ET AL. : JUDGES: : Hon. Andrew J. King, P.J. Plaintiffs-Appellees : Hon. Robert G. Montgomery, J. : H

Jensen, Justice. [¶ 1] Phyllis Berry appealed from a corrected judgment revising the parties’ original divorce judgment. Because Phyllis Berry requested the. district court retain jurisdiction over the allocation of Ronald Berry’s military retirement benefits, and the court effectively denied her request for attorney fees, we affirm.

*********** The Full Commission reviewed the prior Opinion and Award, based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Taylor and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award. Accordingly, the Full Commission affirms the Opinion and Award of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANDREA N. BERRY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 23-3587 (TSC) PETE BUTTIGIEG, Secretary of Transportation, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 21, 2023, pro se Plaintiff Andrea Berry filed a Complaint against Pete Buttigieg, in his

[Cite as State v. Berry, 2025-Ohio-716.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT State of Ohio, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 23AP-149 v. : (C.P.C. No. 04CR-5651) Chanz Berry, :

People v Berry (2025 NY Slip Op 01523) People v Berry 2025 NY Slip Op 01523 Decided on March 14, 2025 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Fain v Berry (2024 NY Slip Op 03032) Fain v Berry 2024 NY Slip Op 03032 Decided on June 5, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

[Cite as State v. Berry, 2024-Ohio-5970.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. L-23-1209 Appellee Trial Court No. CR0202202536 v. Chris Berry DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SHAHEED BERRY, § § Defendant Below, § No. 274, 2023 Appellant, § § Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID Nos. 2110002587,