Cases

Per Curiam. Petitioner, Howmedica Osteonics Corporation (HOC), seeks certiorari review from a trial court’s order that denied its request to redact identifying information from reports and related documents of health care providers who reported “foreign adverse events” associated with a medical device. Certiorari lies to protect privileged or protected material to avoid the irreparable harm of wrongful disclosure. See, e

[Cite as State v. Trowbridge, 2022-Ohio-4208.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 111401 v. : CHARLES TROWBRIDGE, :

Filed 4/12/11 by Clerk of Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2011 ND 73 In the Matter of J.G. Brian D. Grosinger, Morton County Assistant State’s Attorney, Plaintiff and Appellee</

954 So.2d 935 (2007) TROWBRIDGE PARTNERS, L.P., A Mississippi Limited Partnership; Phil Moore; and Neal Clement v. MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. No. 2005-CA-02167-SCT. Supreme Court of Mississippi. March 22, 2007. Rehearing Denied May 10, 2007. *937 W. Whitaker Rayner, Stephen W. Rimmer, Jackson, attorne

CLAY, Commissioner. Appellant was convicted of violating KRS 436.240 and fined $250.00. On appeal he contends he could not be charged with a crime under this section of the statutes. Appellant owned a tavern in which he maintained three pinball machines. While these machines registered winnings only in free games, the evidence was that appellant paid the player, in cash, a nickel for each free game won. KRS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2005-CA-02167-SCT TROWBRIDGE PARTNERS, L.P., A MISSISSIPPI LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; PHIL MOORE; AND NEAL CLEMENT v. MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/07/2005 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WILLIAM STRATTON AGIN COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: MADISON COUNTY SPECIAL COURT OF EMINENT DOMAIN

435 S.W.2d 268 (1968) BROADWAY DRUG STORE OF GALVESTON, INC., Appellant, v. Marilyn A. TROWBRIDGE and John B. Trowbridge, Appellees. No. 173. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). November 27, 1968. Henry G. Dalehite, Jr., Markwell, Stubbs, Decker, Dalehite & Youngblood, Galveston, for appellant. E. A. Apffel, Jr., McLeod, Alexander, Powe

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 89-1-00974-3, Daniel T. Kershner, J., entered June 4, 1990. Reversed by unpublished opinion per Scholfield, J., concurred in by Pekelis and Baker, JJ.

Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion. Concur: HISCOCK, Ch. J., CHASE, HOGAN, CARDOZO, POUND, McLAUGHLIN and ANDREWS, JJ.

ADAMS, District Judge. This action was brought by the Tweedie Trading Company, the chartered owner of the steamship Myrtledene, to recover- from the Strong & Trowbridge Company, a balance of certain demurrage on the steamer, claimed to amount to $6,225.96, said to be due by reason of the detention of the steamer at Takao and Keelung, Formosa, in October and November, 1904. On the 11th of March, 1904, the following contract w

390 F.Supp. 45 (1975) Ned G. SAALFRANK, Plaintiff, v. Melva M. O'DANIEL, Defendant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY et al., Third-Party Defendants. No. C 71-60. United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, W. D. September 27, 1974. On Motion to Reconsider January 27, 1975. *46 *47

Carroll, J. George Baird, in his will dated May 13, 1889, after providing for the payment of his debts and mating specific legacies to his wife and daughter, gave the residue of his estate to trustees who, after paying certain annuities, were to pay one half the income to his widow and one half to his daughter during their lives. If his daughter survived his wife, the whole income was to be paid to her; if she died before the wif

The opinion of the court was delivered by White, J. The amended complaint in this action, omitting the formal parts, is as follows: “That- at all the times herein mentioned the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, in the state of Missouri, was> and ever since has been, and now is, a court of general jurisdiction over matters in equity and law, duly organized and ex

Davis, P. J.: This case is brought to a hearing upon the return of the respondents, and the facts therein stated are to be taken as true. (People ex rel. Westbrook v. Ogdensburgh, 48 N. Y., 390.) The return states that the relators, as administrator, etc., of the estate of George Harden, deceased, were assessed by the deputy tax commissioner in the sum of $1,000,000 for personal property, and the same was ent

932 F.2d 1572 60 USLW 2120, 20 Fed.R.Serv.3d 754, RICOBus.Disp.Guide 7789 Tony AVIRGAN and Martha Honey, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.John HULL, Adolfo Calero, Robert Owen, John K. Singlaub,Ronald Joseph Martin, Sr., James McCoy, Rafael "Chi Chi"Quintero, Mario Delamico, Thomas Clines, Theodore Shackley,Albert Hakim and Richard Secord, Defendants-Appellees,Bruce Jones, et al., Defendants.Tony

*412 WIENER, Circuit Judge: Defendant-Appellant Fidelity Factors, L.L.C. (“Fidelity”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Reaves Brokerage, Inc. (“Reaves”) on its claims'for reimbursement under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 499a~

515 S.E.2d 291 (1999) 258 Va. 75 PROSPECT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., et al. v. Steven M. BERSHADER, et al. Record No. 981673 Supreme Court of Virginia. June 11, 1999. *293 George F. Trowbridge, Jr. (Michael A. Mays, on briefs), for appellants. R. Peyton Mahaffey (Daniel P. Lyon; McCandlish & Lil

499 S.E.2d 580 (1998) 27 Va. App. 453 William Cage STEVENSON v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 0920-97-2. Court of Appeals of Virginia, Richmond. June 2, 1998. *581 Thomas C. Hill (Max M. Reynolds; Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, on briefs), McLean, for appellant. Daniel J. Munroe, Assi

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. In this appeal pursuant to Rule 23(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure from an order certifying a class in a securities fraud case, we must decide an issue of first impression in this Circuit: the standard for determining whether a market was “efficient” when applying the fraud-on-the-market presumption of investor reliance. We also address the level o

UPON A REHEARING EN BANC A divided panel of this Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. See Stevenson v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 453, 499 S.E.2d 580 (1998). We stayed the mandate of that decision and granted a rehearing en banc. Upon rehearing en banc, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed without opinion by an equally divided Court. Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Benton