Cases

579 N.W.2d 485 (1998) STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. James BYNUM, Appellant. No. C6-97-2022. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. June 2, 1998. Review Denied August 18, 1998. *486 Hubert H. Humphrey III, Attorney General, St. Paul, for respondent. Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, Beverly J. Bens

Stanley Ford and his wife, Beverly, sued Bynum Livestock and Commission Company, Inc., alleging liability for injuries sustained by Stanley while he was attending a horse auction on Bynum's premises. The trial court entered a summary judgment in favor of Bynum. The Fords appeal. This case is before this court pursuant to § 12-2-7(6), Ala. Code 1975. In reviewing a summary judgment, an appellate court must construe the evidence in a manner most

KING, C.J., for the Court: ¶ 1. A long-time employee who was injured at her place of employment as a nurse at a nursing home in Ripley, Mississippi, was denied workers’ compensation benefits by the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission in a split decision. However on appeal, the circuit court reversed the Commission’s decision and reinstated the decision of the administrative judge (AJ) awarding Irene H

KELSEY, J. Claimant’s foot injury was determined to be non-compensable because she failed to meet her burden of proving that the injury occurred in the course and scope of employment or arose out of her employment. She does not appeal that ruling. Rather, she argues that the Employer/Carrier (E/C) were obligated to pay for her hospitalization that occurred before the E/C denied

OPINION ON INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS The appellants, the City of San Antonio and its police officer, Kenneth Davis, appeal the denial of summary judgment based on *Page 652 official immunity. When this court ordered appellants to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, Davis filed a motion for extension of time in which to file his brief; the City filed a motion to adopt Davis's brief

Opinion issued August 20, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-14-00556-CV ——————————— MIKE BIRNBAUM AND BEVERLY BIRNBAUM, Appellants V. GENA J. ATWELL, PHYLLIS BROWNING,

I must respectfully dissent from that portion of the opinion which holds that Ex parte Bynum, 294 Ala. 78, 312 So.2d 52 (1975), changes the statute of limitations for the crime of rape. As to the remainder of the opinion, I concur in the result only.

PER CURIAM: Appellant, a 74 year-old itinerant salesman, challenges his convictions for taking and having in his possession mail belonging to others, 18 U.S.C. § 1708 (1964), on the ground that the evidence used to convict him was illegally obtained. We hold that the search which produced this challenged evidence resulted from an

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WOODROW WILSON JONES, District Judge. The Defendants, Volkswagen of America, Inc. and Volkswagenwerk, AG, move the Court for an order imposing appropriate sanctions upon B. Ervin Brown, II, Esquire, Beverly C. Moore, Jr., Esquire, and/or Carl Shoolman, Esquire, pursuant to Rule 11, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Title 28 U.S.C.A. Section 1927 and the inherent powers of the Court. T

276 S.E.2d 496 (1981) YATES MOTOR COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. Beverly Jane SIMMONS, Defendant, v. Rena Bynum NOELL, Michael W. Noell and Hubert Warren Noell, Third-Party Defendants. No. 8015DC824. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. April 7, 1981. *497 Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill & Hargrave by Ro

EN BANC OPINION JANE BLAND, Justice. In this suit arising from the sale of land, we examine the appropriate measure of damages for a sale obtained through fraudulent inducement. A jury concluded that the seller of the land had failed to disclose material information to the buyer about the financial state of a commercial tenant who leased the land. But the jury further concluded that the buyers suffered noth

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2021-CC-00459-COA RHONDA BOYD APPELLANT v. MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF APPELLEE CORRECTIONS DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/01/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ISADORE W. PATRICK JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COUR

748 F.Supp. 1146 (1990) Hugh DEADWYLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC., and Volkswagenwerk, AG, Defendants. No. ST-C-85-38. United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Statesville Division. August 30, 1990. *1147 *1148 Charles R. Watkins, Jack L. Block, Sachnoff &

MEMORANDUM ** Alfred William Kemfort appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. He argues for suppression on three grounds: (1) that the search warrants were issued without probable cause; (2) that the state court failed to make an explicit probable cause determination; and (3) that the warrants did not adequately specify the items to be seized. We reject these arguments and af

Thomas Ertel ("Mr. Ertel") and Candice Ertel ("Ms. Ertel") (collectively, "appellants") were awarded $680,000.00 plus interest for the taking by eminent domain of their 7.18 acre tract of property and improvements in Mecklenburg County. Following the jury's verdict, appellants filed a motion for a new trial. On 19 May 2004, the trial court entered judgment and denied appellants' motion. For the reasons discussed herein, we affirm the judgment and order of the trial court. The f

ERVIN, Chief Judge: Plaintiffs brought this breach of implied warranty action against Volkswagen of America, Inc., and Volkswagenwerk, AG (collectively “Volkswagen”). Having failed to convince the jury of their claim that certain engine components installed in their Volkswagen Rabbits were defective, plaintiffs now appeal from the district court’s refusal to grant them a new tri

This Court's opinion of September 25, 2009, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor. The issue before this Court is whether the Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it ordered the Montgomery Circuit Court to set aside an order setting bail for a defendant who was being held under indictment for a capital crime. The Court of Criminal Appeals issued a writ of mandamus directing the Montgomery Circuit Court to vacate its order setting bail for Albert Wilding, who i

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Malveaux, Raphael and Senior Judge Petty PUBLISHED Argued at Richmond, Virginia JAMAR PAXTON OPINION BY v. Record No. 0910-22-2 JUDGE WILLIAM G. PETTY MARCH 1

323 P.2d 982 (1957) Mary M. GRATTAN, Plaintiff in Error, v. Beverly E. TILLMAN, Ida S. Gassaway and Josephine H. Theimer, Defendants in Error. No. 37356. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. October 22, 1957. Rehearing Denied February 11, 1958. Application for Leave to File Second Petition for Rehearing Denied April 15, 1958. Charles I. Allen

586 N.W.2d 123 (1998) STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Adrian Dion WILLIAMS, Appellant. No. C7-97-1316. Supreme Court of Minnesota. October 22, 1998. *124 John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Leslie J. Rosenberg, Asst. State Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant. Hubert H. Humphrey III, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Mich