Cases

Suzy Strickland Harbison appeals from a summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Bonnie Sue Strickland. We reverse and remand. I. Bonnie Sue Strickland is the manager and a 17% equity owner of the Strickland Family Limited Liability Company ("the LLC"). The LLC was formed by Bonnie Sue Strickland and her now deceased husband, Jake Strickland, on August 4, 2000, as part of their estate plan.1 The LLC was for

Justice WEBB dissenting. I dissent. The defendant contended she was unable to form an intent to kill. She offered the testimony of Dr. Alexander Bory on this issue. It is worth noting that Dr. Bory did not have to be an expert to give his opinion as to the defendant’s mental condition at the time of the killing. The majority says that this testimony would not have assisted the jury to determine a fact in issue b

514 N.W.2d 442 (1994) Maurice VACHON and Kathie Vachon, Appellants, v. STATE of Iowa, Appellee. No. 93-583. Supreme Court of Iowa. March 23, 1994. As Amended April 14, 1994. *443 Randall J. Shanks, Gallner & Gallner, P.C., Council Bluffs, and David D. Nisley, Modesto, CA, for appellants. Richard M. Tuc

17-2208, 18-359 Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2018 (Argued: February 13, 2019 Decided: April 1, 2020) Nos. 17-2208-cv, 18-359-cv MAXCIMO SCOTT, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, JAY FRANCIS ENSOR, CHRISTIN

ORDER G. MURRAY SNOW, District Judge. Pending before the Court are Defendants’ Joint Motion for Summary Judgment Dismissing the Claims of Non-Party Bondholders (Doc. 644) and the Underwriters’ Motion to Exclude the Report and Testimony of Robert M. Smith (Doc. 774). For the reasons discussed below, the Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part and denied in part, and the Motion to Exclude is denied with

7 N.Y.3d 338 (2006) 855 N.E.2d 1 821 N.Y.S.2d 770 DANIEL HERNANDEZ et al., Appellants, v. VICTOR L. ROBLES, as City Clerk of the City of New York, Respondent. SYLVIA SAMUELS et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH et al., Respondents. In the Matter of ELISSA KANE et al., Appellants, v. JOHN MARSOLAIS, as Albany City Clerk, et al., Respondents. JASON SEY

Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court

BAKES, Justice. Respondent F. Clair Rindlisbaker brought this action for damages against the manufacturer and distributor of a fertilizer applicator and against the fertilizer dealer who furnished the applicator to respondent for use in respondent’s field. In 1967 respondent’s father, with whom respondent was a partner in a family farming partnership, called Wilson’s Farm Service (hereinafter Wil

Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr

WHICHARD, Justice. Defendant was convicted of common law conspiracy to commit murder and first-degree murder at the 18 May 1987 Criminal Session of Superior Court, Onslow County. Following a capital sentencing proceeding pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-2000, the jury recommended that defendant be sentenced to death. The trial court sentenced accordingly, and further, imposed a sentence of three years for the conspiracy. Defendant

Opinion of the Court by Justice VENTERS. This case arose in the aftermath of the settlement of Darla S. Guard, et' ál. v. American Home Products, Inc. (Guard).1 The Guard case, which is also known as “Jonetta Moore, et al. v. American Home Products, Inc.,” or the “Moore ” case, was brought by Kentucky residents who had taken th

215 F.Supp.2d 795 (2002) In re NORPLANT CONTRACEPTIVE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. MDL No. 1038. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division. August 14, 2002. *796 *797 Christopher Matthew Parks, Parker & Parks, Port Arthur, TX, for Plaintiffs. F. Lane Heard III, Williams

EBEL, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs, a group of former employees of Defendant Lucent Technologies, Inc. (“Defendant”), sued Defendant in state court for fraud arising out of alleged misrepresentations made in encouraging Plaintiffs to take an early retirement benefits package. Defendant removed the case to federal court on the basis of complete preemption under the Employee Retire

ACCEPTED 05-15-01292-CV 05-15-01292-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS