Cases

November 17 2009 DA 08-0573 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2009 MT 390 PATRICIA ELLEN CLARK, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. KARA TAYLOR BELL, Defendant and Appellee. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District,

957 N.E.2d 592 (2008) 379 Ill. App.3d 1084 354 Ill. Dec. 276 CLARK v. BELL. No. 3-06-0805. Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District. February 27, 2008. Affirmed.

C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

538 U.S. 1016 CLARKv.BELL, WARDEN. No. 02-9385. Supreme Court of United States. May 5, 2003. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. 2 C. A. 6th C

636 F.2d 1207 Clarkv.Bell 79-1656 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Third Circuit 12/22/80 1 M.D.Pa. AFFIRMED

MO1NFIE13, and AFFIRM; Opinion issued September 19 2012. in The QLlnrt uf Apprals Fift1! Oitrirt uf at tIaIla!.i No. 05-11-01649-CR ERIC BELL CLARK, Appellant V. THE Si ATE OF 1EXAS, Appellec

JUSTICE RICE delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶ 1 Patricia Clark brought a negligence action to recover damages for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. A jury in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Cascade County, rendered a verdict in favor of Defendant Kara Bell. Clark appeals. We affirm in part, re

Garry, J.P. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Burns, J.), entered January 26, 2016 in Otsego County, which denied plaintiffs motion to, among other things, enforce certain provisions of the parties’ judgment of divorce. In December 2010, plaintiff (hereinafter the wife) and defendant (hereinafter the husband) entered into a separation agreement, wh

670 N.E.2d 1290 (1996) Richard BELL, Appellant (Counter-defendant below), v. Gordon CLARK, Appellee (Counter-claimant below). No. 49S02-9608-CV-530. Supreme Court of Indiana. August 6, 1996. *1292 Jon D. Krahulik, Yosha Ladendorf Krahulik & Weddle, Indianapolis, for Appellant (Counter-defendant below). Jon R. Pactor, I

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE LARRY W. CLARK v. RICKY BELL, WARDEN Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 3598 J. Randall Wyatt, Jr., Judge No. M2005-00285-CCA-R3-HC - Filed May 26, 2005 The Petitioner, Larry W. Clark, appeals from the dismissal of his petition for the writ of habeas corpus. The State has filed a mot

*901 OPINION Per curiam. Appellant, age 16, was charged in juvenile court with delinquent conduct based on his participation in an aggravated robbery. In July 2013, the juvenile court waived jurisdiction and transferred the case to the criminal district court. There, appellant pled

653 N.E.2d 483 (1995) Richard BELL, Appellant-Defendant, v. Gordon CLARK, Appellee-Claimant. No. 49A02-9311-CV-609. Court of Appeals of Indiana. July 11, 1995. Rehearing Denied September 21, 1995. *486 James K. Wheeler, James D. Crum, Coots, Henke & Wheeler, Carmel, for appellant. Jon R. Pactor, Indian

R. Brooke Jackson, United States District Judge Defendants Tyco Fire Products, Chemguard and 3M move to dismiss plaintiffs' medical monitoring claims, arguing that Colorado's appellate courts have not recognized such a cause of action. Tyco and Chemguard alternatively request that the issue be certified to the Colorado Supreme Court. Several other defendants ask to join one or both of the motions to dismiss. I decline to certify the

SHARON G. LEE, C.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur with the majority’s holdings as to the trial court’s denial of Mr. Bell’s motion to strike the death notice based on intellectual disability; the constitutionality of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-203 that prohibits the execution of any intellectually disabled person; and the trial court’s denial

*651 ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: Whether, under the Court’s recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, In

ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: Whether, under the Court’s recent decision in Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc. [628 Pa. 2967, 104 A.3d 328 (Pa.2014), a defendant in

POSNER, Chief Judge. After we denied his certificate of appeal-ability, Fed. R.App. P. 22(b), Mr. Bell asked for his $105 in filing and docketing fees back, on the ground that since a certificate of appealability is a jurisdictional prerequisite to an appeal from a denial of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A); Fed. R.App. P. 22(b)(1), there was n

Motions to direct the Clerk to file petitions for writs of certiorari out of time denied.

In re State of Louisiana;—Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial *712Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 498-078; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2011-K-0641. Denied. GUIDRY and CLARK, JJ., would grant.