Cases

Gill, J. This is an action by the appellant against the respondent on an insurance policy made at Carroll-ton, Missouri, December 19, 1885. The policy was made to cover a barn, grain, farming implements, etc., belonging to the appellant, the respondent agreeing with the appellant Dircks to insure him thereon for the space of five years in the aggregate sum of twenty-two hundred dollars. On the face of the policy was written, “Loss,

989 F.2d 507 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. Ma

Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Chief Judge In 2016, Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. ("Rembrandt") entered into an agreement to sell cage-free eggs to Rexing Quality Eggs ("Rexing"), the doing-business-as designation for Leo and Joseph Rexing's egg selling partnership.1 The contract required Rembrandt to provide Rexing with approximately 3,240,000 eggs per week for one year,2

948 F.2d 1562 Marcus R. MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Stanley GLANZ, Sheriff, Bob Bates, Deputy Sheriff, DanCherry, Captain, Lance Ramsey, Deputy Sheriff, Jerry Bagby,Deputy Sheriff, George Rogers, Deputy Sheriff, DeWayneHarris, Deputy Sheriff, Don P. Holyfield, Director, ClentDedek, Commissioner, John Doe, Investigator, Dr. Barnes,John Doe, Deputy Sheriff, Jane Doe, Nurse # 1, Jane Doe,Nurse # 2, Johnny F. Dirck, Di

TACHA, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant Marcus R. Miller appeals from a district court order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for use of excessive force, deliberate indifference to medical needs, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, cruel and unusual punishment, biased investigation, discriminatory acts to prolong incarceration, negligent failure to train and certify deputies, and intentional infliction of emo

933 N.E.2d 572 (2010) Charles Adam TROTTER, Appellant-Defendant/Cross-Appellee, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff/Cross-Appellant. No. 29A02-0910-CR-974. Court of Appeals of Indiana. September 10, 2010. *576 Rodney T. Sarkovics, Campbell Kyle Proffit LLP, Carmel, IN, Attorney for Appellant. Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorn

MASSA, Justice. Mary Osborne filed this interlocutory appeal following the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress, on the grounds that the traffic stop giving rise to the charges was not permissible under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article 1, -Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. Although we believe the officer’s actions in this case were pr

FILED Oct 30 2018, 5:49 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals

SADLER, J. {¶ 1} Appellant-appellant, HDV Cleveland, LLC, d.b.a. Larry Flynt's Hustler Club, appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirming orders of appellee-appellee, Ohio State Liquor Control Commission ("commission"), issued on September 9 and October 19, 2016 and April 25, 2017. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

579 S.W.2d 198 (1978) Joe Riley DIRCK, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 54370. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, Panel No. 3. May 17, 1978. On Rehearing April 18, 1979. *199 Warren E. Hancock, Jr., Houston, for appellant. Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James C. Brough and Henry K. Oncke

299 S.E.2d 509 (1983) Wilma POWELL, et al. v. Shirley T. HOLLAND, et al. Record No. 801168. Supreme Court of Virginia. January 21, 1983. *510 Joshua Pretlow, Jr., Suffolk (Carl E. Eason, Jr., Pretlow, Pretlow & Moore, P.C., Suffolk, on brief), for appellants. J. Edward Moyler, Jr., James E. Rainey, Franklin (Moyler, Mo

868 F.Supp. 1422 (1994) Malcolm D. FLAVEL, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Group Representative Plaintiff and Robert F. Cnare, James R. Conradt, Major Coxhill, Robert K. Elbel, Malcolm D. Flavel (deceased), Russell H. Graff, Robert L. Isferding, Robert E. Jones, Chalasani C. Rayan (deceased), Richard Spoonamore and Ronald J. Weiss, Individual Plaintiffs, and The United States Equal Employment Opportunit

This is an action to recover on a policy of fire and tornado insurance. The record discloses that defendant is a corporation organized and operating under the laws of the State of Missouri, engaged in the business of writing fire and tornado insurance, and having its headquarters in the City of St. Louis in said State. Plaintiff is a farmer residing near Princeton in Mercer County, Missouri, and, at the time of the issuance of the policy in suit, he was the owner and in possession of t

Preston, J. Plaintiff was seriously injured. Two ribs were broken; his fingers were cut; 64 stitches were taken in his shoulder ; his leg was broken, and, at the time of the trial, a year and a half after the injury, there was no union of the bones of his leg, which hung limp. It appears that, after the infection disappears, another operation will be necessary, and, if this is successful, his leg will be three

Platt, J., delivered the opinion of the court. The plaintiff deduces a regular chain of title under the patent of Kayaderosseras, granted the 2d of November, 1708, to John Tatham and 12 others ; and the defendant also shows a regular deduction of title under the patent of Queensbury, granted the 20th of May, 1762,-to Jacob Haviland and others. Each of the patents (by reason of an inter

Williams, Judge: Plaintiff filed its bill at April rules, 1899, to enforce the lien of a judgment recovered against the defendant W. J. Read, and in the caption thereof named Nora S. Read, his ■wife, and a number of other lien creditors besides itself as defendants. The bill avers that some of the judgments, naming them, were recovered against W. J. Read and his wife jointly. No other averment shows why Nora S. Read was made

There are two appeals on this record that present a controversy arising among a former landlord, a mortgagee of goods and chattels, and certain creditors, over the proceeds of sale of this personalty which had been owned by one whose relation with each had been respectively that of tenant, mortgagor, or debtor. The landlord was the Calvert Building Construction Company, appellant, which, on August 31st, 1921, had leased unto Paul M. DeCrette a portion of its premises to be used for a lunchro

An opinion in this case, written by one of our commissioners, failed to receive a carrying vote. The case was reassigned to the writer who wrote an opinion which also failed to receive a vote of the majority of the judges in Division One. The case was then transferred to the court en [571] banc, re-argued, additional briefs filed and again assigned to the writer. This is an action for money had and received. The finding and judgment below were for defendant and plainti

Willard, J. “ The defendants, who derive their titles under the sheriff’s sale in 1831, to Whittick and Foster, cannot be prejudiced by the mortgage now sought to be foreclosed, unless they purchased with notice, actual or constructive, of the existence of that mortgage. There is no pre*516tence that either Foster or Whittick had actual notice of the pretended incumbrance,