Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION JOHN H. SQUIRES, Bankruptcy Judge. This matter comes before the Court on the motion of David R. Brown, the Chapter 7 trustee (“Trustee”) of the estate of James Christopher Szabo, to enforce the judgment and imposition of a resulting trust on the assets in the hands of Carol Szabo, Metrikis Properties, LLC, and other punitive relief. For the reasons set forth herein, the Court

PER CURIAM. Having considered the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of January 11, 2002, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The appellees’ motion to dismiss filed on February 7, 2002, is denied as moot. The appellees’ request for attorneys’ fees is denied for failure to state a sufficient basis for such an award. See Shuler v. Darby, 786 So.2d 627, 630 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The appelle

Per Curiam. {¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment denying the claim of a terminated public employee for a writ of mandamus to compel her reinstatement to her former job with back pay and an award of attorney fees. Because the employee has been reinstated to her former job and because she failed to establish her entitlement to back p

*283 ORDER WILLIAM C. LEE, Chief Judge. This matter is before the court on a motion for class certification filed by the plaintiff, John D. Szabo, d/b/a Zatron (“Szabo”), on August 16, 2000. The defendant, Bridgeport Machines, Inc. (“Bridgeport”), filed its response on September 22, 2000, to which Szabo replied on October 20, 2000. Also bef

[Cite as Koerper v. Szabo, 2019-Ohio-3159.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Jamie Koerper et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 18AP-734 (C.P.C. No. 17CV-6295) v. :

Branch, Judge. Raymond J. Brown was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. He moved to suppress the State’s alcohol breath test results. The trial court denied the motion but certified the order for immediate review. We granted Brown’s application for interlocutory appeal. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. On review of a ruling on a m

55 Ill. App.3d 866 (1977) 371 N.E.2d 117 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FEIRUZ SZABO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 77-146. Illinois Appellate Court — First District (2nd Division). Opinion filed December 13, 1977. *867 Elliott Samuels, of Chicago, for appellant. Bernard Care

81 F.Supp.2d 447 (2000) Kareem ALI, Plaintiff, v. Officer SZABO, et al., Defendants. No. 98 Civ. 0424(WHP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. January 13, 2000. *448 *449 I.M.S., Washington, DC, for plaintiff. Daniel A. Seymour, Bank, Sheer, Servino & Seymour, White Plains

283 B.R. 242 (2002) In re SZABO CONTRACTING, INC., Debtor. No. 99 B 39097. United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. September 26, 2002. *243 *244 *245 *246 William S. Piper, Thomas H. Cafcas, Jr., McKenna

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 02-1800 JOHN SZABO, Petitioner-Appellee, v. JONATHAN R. WALLS, Warden, Menard Correctional Center,† Respondent-Appellant. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for

[Cite as State v. Brown, 2021-Ohio-2161.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. Nos. 20CA011646 20CA011649 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ASHLE

PER CURIAM. We affirm the convictions and sentences with the exception that follows. Istavan Sza-bo was convicted and sentenced for a number of crimes arising out of seventeen separate informations filed against him. Three of those crimes were separate armed robberies, as to each of which his sentence was enhanced pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of section 812.13, Florida Statutes (Supp.1992), because of his use of a firearm in

[Cite as Homestead Am., Ltd. v. Brown, 2024-Ohio-3253.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Homestead America, Ltd. et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellees, : No. 23AP-377 No. 23AP-382 v. : (C.P.C. No. 19CV-9720) Matthew R. Brown et al.,

Per Curiam. Section 2506.01, Bevised Code, in the chapter titled “Appeals from Orders of Administrative Officers and Agencies, ’ ’ provides: “Every final order, adjudication, or decision of any officer, tribunal, authority, board, bureau, commission, department or other division of any political subdivision of the state may be reviewed by the Common Pleas Court of the county in which the pri

TIMBERS, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Szabo Food Services, Inc. (the employer) has petitioned to review and to have set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board (the Board), 222 N.L.R.B. No. 193 (1976), ordering it to bargain with Local 217 of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees and Bartenders Union, AFL-CIO (the union) and t

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Frederick G. Reed, A.J.), entered August 11, 2015. The order denied the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damage

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Frederick G. Reed, A.J.), entered August 11, 2015. The order denied the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damage

[Cite as Deere & Co. v. Brown, 2022-Ohio-1898.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLERMONT COUNTY DEERE & COMPANY, : Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2021-12-069 : OPINION - vs -

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge, dissenting. The State of Illinois proposes to put Mr. Szabo to death despite the fact that, in its own state courts, he did not receive the quality of legal representation required by state law. Nor was his claim of ineffective assistance of resentencing counsel addressed with precision or care by the Illinois courts., Despite this stark reality, we are required to limit our inquiry to th

Matter of Brown v Simon (2021 NY Slip Op 03831) Matter of Brown v Simon 2021 NY Slip Op 03831 Decided on June 16, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to J