Cases

[Cite as State v. Dennison, 2018-Ohio-4502.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAWRENCE COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee, : Case No. 18CA6 v. : DECISION AND JUSTIN R. DE

CHIEF JUSTICE GRAY delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶ 1 Randall Alan Dennison appeals sentencing conditions imposed on him by the Eleventh Judicial District Court, Flathead County. We reverse the sentencing conditions in part and remand with

695 F.Supp.2d 779 (2010) John K. HICKS, Plaintiff, v. CONCORDE CAREER COLLEGE, Defendant. No. 08-2410-STA. United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division. February 26, 2010. *781 Linda Kendall Garner, Law Office of Linda K. Garner, Memphis, TN, for Plaintiff. *782 Teresa

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Hicks v. Clermont Cty. Bd. of Elections, Slip Opinion No. 2026-Ohio-993.] 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

Mrs. Earle Dennison was convicted of murder in the first degree for taking the life of her two and one-half year old niece, Shirley Dianne Weldon, by administering arsenic poison. The death sentence was imposed and she appeals from that judgment. Appellant was ably represented by court appointed counsel who, responsive to his duty in the premises, orally argued the case on submission here and has filed brief in support of the propositions advanced as error. A careful considerat

JONES, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which MARTIN, C.J., joined. RYAN J. (pp. 863-867), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge. In this retaliatory discrimination case, Plaintiffs filed motions for summary judgment, claiming inter alia that they had met their prima facie burden. Defendant, in its response, directly countered that assertion.

254 Pa. Superior Ct. 284 (1978) 385 A.2d 1021 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Derald E. DENNISON, Appellant. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted November 14, 1977. Decided April 28, 1978. *285 John W. Peck, II, Assistant Public Defender, Greensburg, for appellant.

92 F.2d 90 (1937) MONARCH MARKING SYSTEM CO. v. DENNISON MFG. CO. SAME v. MAY CO. Nos. 7146-7149. Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. June 3, 1937. Rehearing Denied October 12, 1937. Edmund P. Wood, of Cincinnati, Ohio (Truman A. Herron and Wood & Wood, all of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Fay, Oberlin & Fay, of Cleveland, Ohio, on

535 S.W.2d 308 (1976) STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William Nelson HICKS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 9929. Missouri Court of Appeals, Springfield District. March 25, 1976. *310 John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., Robert H. House, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles L. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent

DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: This appeal is from a dismissal of the action under Rule 41(b) F.R.Civ.P. The action, in which seven individuals and three corporations are named as defendants, was filed on January 18, 1962. It was dismissed on May 21, 1964. The ground for dismissal was “failure to prosecute.” When the

104 F.3d 858 72 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 1602,69 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,473EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellant (95-3060),Ronald W. Willis, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant (94-4320),v.AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION, d/b/a Avery Label Systems,Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 94-4320, 95-3060. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] W.L. Dennison was convicted of perjury, and appeals. Reversed and remanded. Omitting the formal charging part, the indictment is as follows: William L. Dennison, alias Babe Dennison, upon the trial of a cause pending in the chancery court of Elmore county, Ala., wherein J.M. Holley was complainant and N.B. Sewell was defendant, the said William L.

Mr. Justice Mulkey, dissenting: Ordinarily, when I am unable to agree with the majority of.the court in the decision of a case, I am content to simply place myself upon the record as dissenting, and sometimes I do not even do that. But inasmuch as the conclusion reached in the present case seems to me to be not only destitute of any authority even tending to support it, but in

Appellant is under conviction for deserting his infant child, with punishment assessed at a fine of $500 and imprisonment in the county jail for one year. The child was only three days old. The facts show an aggravated case of desertion and justify the extreme penalty inflicted and the judgment should be affirmed, if no errors were committed calling for a reversal. It is admitted that the child was born in July, and that the marriage between its mother and appellant occurred in

April 16, 1902. The opinion of the Court was delivered by This is an application to the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, for an injunction restraining the county auditor from assessing, and the county treasurer from collecting, a certain tax, which they were directed to assess and collect, by mandamus, issued by the United States Circuit Court for this district for the purpose of paying certain judgments recovered in that Court, on coupons of bonds issued by Dunkli

Mr. Justice Neil delivered the opinion of the Court. This was an action brought to recover upon a policy of insurance for $1,000, payable originally to Mrs. Nannie A. Hicks, but subsequently changed in accordance with its terms, so as to be made payable to the estate of the insured, Milton B. Hicks. There was a recovery in favor of the estate in the chancery court, but on appeal this judgment was reversed by th

ORDER HICKS, District Judge. This matter is before the court on the motions and responses filed by the parties in this case, to wit: Defendant Law Offices of Wanderer & Wanderer’s (“Wanderer”) motion to quash service of process (# 4); Plaintiffs Thomas and Barbara Kerr’s (“Plaintiffs”) motion to strike Wanderer’s motion to quash (# 11); Plaintiffs’ application for default judgment against W

MEMORANDUM * Venetian Casino Resort, LLC (Venetian) appeals the district court’s denial of its emergency motion for a stay of state court proceedings pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (1949).1 We affirm. *87Putting aside whether the district court’s order to arbitrate was a final judgment

ORDER LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge. This is a copyright and trademark dispute, for the most part. Before the court is Stevo Design, Inc., Steven Budin, and Alan Rolli’s (“Plaintiffs’ ”) motion to alter or amend judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) (# 49 ).1 Defendant *1116SBR Marketing L

[Cite as State v. Stanford, 2024-Ohio-1451.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT State of Ohio, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 21AP-351 (C.P.C. No. 18CR-5848) v. :