Cases

O'DONNELL, J., not participating.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER KANE, Senior District Judge. This action, on remand from the appellate court, arises out of pro se Plaintiff Terry W. Mobley’s termination from Defendant U.S. West Communications Inc. Mobley alleges U.S. West terminated him because of his race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Two motions are pending: (1) Defe

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Mobley v. Toledo, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-3889.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any

PER CURIAM. Zulema O’Connor appeals from the final judgment dissolving her marriage to Thomas O’Connor. She challenges various aspects of the final judgment that pertain to the marital home, equitable distribution, time-sharing, child support, and alimony. There- is no transcript of the final hearing in the record, but the record contains “FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Per Curiam. Two questions are presented for our review: (1) Did the commission comply with State ex rel. Stephenson v. Indus. Comm. (1987), 31 Ohio St.3d 167, 31 OBR 369, 509 N.E.2d 946, and State ex rel. Noll v. Indus. Comm. (1991), 57 Ohio St 3d 203, 567 N.E.2d 245, in denying Mobley PTD? and (2) Does the record demonstrate that Mobley is permanently and totally disabled and, therefore, entitled to

Mobley v Foster Phillips Funeral Home, Inc. (2019 NY Slip Op 08997) Mobley v Foster Phillips Funeral Home, Inc. 2019 NY Slip Op 08997 Decided on December 18, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New Y

59 Ill. App.3d 1031 (1978) 376 N.E.2d 247 CHARLES MOBLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JAMES CONLISK, JR., et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 76-104. Illinois Appellate Court — First District (1st Division). Opinion filed May 1, 1978. *1032 John C. Ambrose and Philip J. Schmidt, both of Chicago, for appellant.</

PER CURIAM: William Mobley, a Florida inmate proceeding pro se, appeals the grant of summary judgment on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim of excessive force during an arrest. He also appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint.

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Mobley v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-1765.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbu

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC20-1225 ____________ MINTZ TRUPPMAN, P.A., etc., Petitioner, vs. COZEN O’CONNOR, PLC, et al., Respondents. August 25, 2022 COURIEL, J. The question in this case is whether the Third District Court of

BARFIELD, Chief Judge. The order of the judge of compensation claims is supported by competent substantial evidence and is therefore AFFIRMED. See Frederick v. United Airlines, 688 So.2d 412 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Wilson v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 660 So.2d 407 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Johnson v. Martin Paving, 659 So.2d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Pruett-Sharpe Const. v. Hayden, 654 So.2d 241

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 78 Ohio St.3d 579.] THE STATE EX REL. MOBLEY, APPELLEE AND CROSS-APPELLANT, V. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF OHIO ET AL., APPELLANTS AND CROSS- APPELLEES; OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, CROSS-APPELLEE. [Cite as State ex rel. Mobley v. Indus. Comm., 1997-Ohio-181.] Workers’ compensation—Denial of application for permanent total disability compensation—Industrial Commission ordered to reconsider and issue

447 So.2d 328 (1984) George W. MOBLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 83-722. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. February 24, 1984. Rehearing Denied March 22, 1984. Jerry Hill, Public Defender, Bartow, and Douglas S. Connor, Asst. Public Defender, Tampa, for appellant. Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and

630 So.2d 207 (1993) BAXAS HOWELL MOBLEY, INC., Appellant, v. BP OIL COMPANY, Appellee. No. 93-524. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. December 21, 1993. Rehearing Denied February 15, 1994. *208 Robert C. Eber, Miami, for appellant. Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash & Block, and Anthony J.

The defendant was convicted on a charge of larceny for stealing a hog and sentenced to the State Penitentiary at hard labor for a period of one year, subject to commutation for good behavior as provided by law. The defendant appealed from the verdict and sentence herein. During the course of the trial, there were three bills of exception reserved to the court's rulings. Defendant's bill of exception No. 1 was reserved to the overruling of defendant's motion to quash the indictme

Duckworth, Chief Justice, dissenting. I dissent upon the ground that the proof of the statements of the conduct of the wife may constitute cruel treatment, and that whether or not it would be offset by the testimony of the expert witness was a matter for the jury to decide, and this court is without lawful power to reverse it. I am authorized to say that Justices Candler and Mobley Concur in this dissent.

The general rule is that the burden is on the plaintiff, in the trial of actions for the possession of land, as in the old action of ejectment, to either prove a title good against the whole world or good against the defendant by estoppel. Taylor v. Gooch, 48 N.C. 467; Kitchen v. Wilson,80 N.C. 191. The plaintiff may safely rest his case upon showing such facts (115) and such evidences of title as w

BIRCH, Circuit Judge: In this case, we must decide whether the current Georgia parole system, as embodied in the Georgia Constitution, the Georgia statutes, and the rules and guidelines promulgated pursuant to the statutes, creates a liberty interest in parole protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court found no protected liberty interest, and we affirm. I. BACKG

WISDOM, Circuit Judge: This case requires us to decide for the first time the far-reaching question whether the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees a right to treatment to persons involuntarily civilly committed to state mental hospitals. The plaintiff-ap-pellee, Kenneth Donaldson, was civilly committed to the Florida State Hospital at

[Cite as Beverly v. Cuyahoga Cty. Mun. Court, 2025-Ohio-2457.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA WILLIAM CREAD BEVERLY, : Relator, : No. 115044 v. : CUYAHOGA COUNTY MUNICIPAL : COURT,