Cases

This case requires us to determine whether a promissory note, executed by Defendants/Appellants, to Plaintiff/Appellee, is enforceable under Code 1975, § 7-3-408. Hall, as promissee, sued Elsie and Andrew Chaffin, along with Highland Development, Inc. (Highland), a corporation owned by the Chaffins, on two promissory notes signed by the Chaffins in their personal capacity, and by Mrs. Chaffin on behalf of Highland in her capacity as secretary-treasur

Howk, C. J. — The only error assigned by appellant, the plaintiff below, upon the record of this cause, is this: “The •court erred in sustaining the appellees’ motion to strike out the appellant’s pleadings in this cause, and rendering judgment against the appellant for costs.” On the 10th day of December, 1881, the appellant filed his' complaint against the appellees, in the St. Joseph Circuit Court. Afterwa

GARRECHT, Circuit Judge. The appellant was born in Pubhana, Ludhiana District, in Punjab, British East India. He is a Hindu of the Sikh caste, and belongs to the Pubhana Tribe. He asserts *674that he last entered the United States in June, 1923, from Mexico, at a point two or three miles west of Mexicali, Lower California, Mexico, and Calexico, California, and that fr

PER CURIAM: This appeal consolidates forty-eight individual appeals arising out of multidistrict litigation in In re Denture Cream Products Liability Litigation, 1:09-md-02051-CMA. In their complaints, Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants produced a denture cream that caused Plaintiffs to develop a condition known as copper deficiency myelopathy. In 2015, the district court issued an order granting De

LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Arbitration sometimes fails to fulfill its promise of efficient, inexpensive dispute resolution. Charles J. Hutson, believing his employer, Bull HN Information Systems, owed him commissions and had underpaid certain benefits, sought to arbitrate the dispute as required under the terms of his contract. After winning two rounds of arbitration but twice losing

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON BULL HN’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND OR FOR RECONSIDERATION (# 17) COLLINGS, Chief United States Magistrate Judge. I. Introduction On July 24, 1998, I allowed defendant Charles J. Hutson’s (herein “Hutson”) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after determining that the minimum amount in controversy to support diversity juri

OPINION AND ORDER ON AMENDED APPLICATION AND MOTION TO VACATE MODIFIED ARBITRATION AWARD (# 31) AND MOTION OF CHARLES J. HUTSON TO CONFIRM MODIFIED ARBITRATION AWARD (#35) COLLINGS, Chief United States Magistrate Judge. I. Introduction Following an arbitrator’s modification of an arbitration award on remand from a judgment vacating the previous award,1

This is an unemployment compensation benefits case. The State Department of Industrial Relations (Department) appeals from the trial court's determination that Marilyn J. Wilson (employee) was entitled to unemployment compensation benefits in the amount of $988. *Page 231 On appeal the Department contends that the trial court committed reversible error when it determined that the employee was entitled to unemployment compensation ben

200 F.Supp.2d 1305 (2002) HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY and Wolf Point Industrial Warehouse, Inc., Plaintiff, v. HONEYWELL, INC., and Circle International, Inc., Defendants. T.L.C. International, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Circle International, Inc., a/k/a and/or d/b/a Circle International Group, Inc., EGL, Inc., Wolf Point Industrial Warehouse, Inc., a/k/a and/or d/b/a Wolf Creek Industrial Warehouse, Inc., Tulsa Properties, Inc., Fleming Build

McCullough, Judge. Defendants Tar Heel Capital Corporation, the employer, and Companion Property & Casualty Co., the insurance carrier, appeal from the opinion and award of the Industrial Commission (the “Commission”) in favor of employee Sonya Chaffins (“plaintiff’). For the following reasons, we reverse. I. Background This workers’ compensation action stems from an admittedly com

[Cite as State v. McCormick, 2020-Ohio-3140.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 19CA011502 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE JACOB MCCORMICK

[Cite as Fayette Drywall, Inc. v. Oettinger, 2020-Ohio-6641.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY : FAYETTE DRYWALL, INC., et al. : : Appellate Case No. 28636 Plaintiffs-Appellees

[Cite as State v. Oliver, 2021-Ohio-2543.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLERMONT COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2020-07-041 : OPINION - vs -

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Oct 29 2015, 8:20 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Jeremy Tidmore Gregory F. Zoeller

RINGLAND, J. {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Barry Fridley, appeals his conviction and sentence in the Clermont County Court of Common Pleas. For the reasons outlined below, we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand this matter to the trial court for the limited purpose of issuing a nunc pro tunc sentencing entry. {¶ 2} On November 19, 2014, appellant was driving nor

[Cite as State v. Conley, 2016-Ohio-5310.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 27869 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE PATRICK CONLEY

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; No. 23-3445 RASIER, LLC; RASIER-CA, LLC, MDL. No. 3084 Petitioners, United States v. Judicial Panel on

[Cite as State v. Sewell, 2016-Ohio-7175.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT MARION COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE NO. 9-16-02 v. EUGENE SEWELL, JR., OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Marion Municipal Court

DONOVAN, J. {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Bradley A. T. Harmon appeals his conviction and sentence for one count of aggravated burglary, in violation of R.C. 2911.11(A)(2), a *1241 felony of the first degree; one count of felonious assault, in violation of R.C. 2903.11(A)(1), a felony of

[Cite as State v. McCallister, 2014-Ohio-2041.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT SCIOTO COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 13CA3558 v. :