Cases

JUSTICE BURKE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Fitzgerald and Justices Thomas, Kilbride, Garman, and Karmeier concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justice Freeman dissented, with opinion. OPINION Section 2 — 18(4)(c) of the Juvenile Cour

JUSTICE FREEMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Thomas and Justices Kilbride, Garman, Karmeier, and Burke concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justice Fitzgerald took no part in the decision. OPINION Plaintiff, J.S.A., filed an action in the circuit

Upon review of the competent evidence of record, and finding no good grounds to receive further evidence or rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission, upon reconsideration of the evidence affirms, with some modifications, the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner. The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing as: STIPULAT

Upon review of the competent evidence of record, and finding no good grounds to receive further evidence or rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission, upon reconsideration of the evidence affirms, with some modifications, the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner. The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing as: STIPULAT

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges O’Brien, Ortiz and Lorish PUBLISHED Argued at Fredericksburg, Virginia CORINNE WHITE LLEWELLYN OPINION BY v. Record No. 0404-24-4 JUDGE LISA M. LORISH JANUARY 21

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 13, 2016 Session LINDA DIANE COBB v. STATE OF TENNESSEE, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Maury County No. 13757 Robert Lee Holloway, Jr., Judge ___________________________________ No. M2014-01755-COA-R3-CV – Filed April 17, 2017 ______________________

GERBER, J. The defendant appeals his conviction for aggravated assault while possessing and discharging a firearm. He primarily argues that the trial court erred in: (1) overruling his Confrontation Clause objection to a deputy’s testimony recounting the statement of an alleged victim who did not testify at trial; and (2) sustaining the state’s objection to his attempted cross-examination of a detective who testified that the

JUSTICE KILBRIDE delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. ¶ 1 In this case, the trial court permitted the respondent to remain shackled during a hearing on the State's petition seeking to administer psychotropic medication involuntarily. The trial court granted the State's petition. The appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment, holding that the trial court erred in

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to the Illinois Official Reports accuracy and integrity of this

Affirmed in Part, Reversed and Rendered in Part, Remanded in Part, and Opinion Filed October 7, 2024 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00088-CV MICHAEL COMBS AND MICHAEL COMBS PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellants V. DIANE CREPEAU AND LARI RENINGER, Appellees On Appea

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan December 26, 2012 Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice 145654

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, with whom COWEN, Senior Circuit Judge, and MAYER, Circuit Judge, join, dissenting. The court today resolves certain disparities in the extensive body of precedent on the question of obviousness of new chemical compounds and compositions. However, these disparities are resolved in a way that is contrary to the weight and direction of this precedent, as embodied in over three decades of dec

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Re: ECF 313] BETH LABSON FREEMAN, United States District Judge Though now almost unbelievable, this case began with a partnership between the parties to build a groundbreaking payment card that would combat fraud. FiTeq and Venture entered into an Operating Agreement (“OA”), pursuant to which ea

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Illinois Official Reports Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan December 20, 2010 Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice 141682

857 A.2d 557 (2004) 158 Md. App. 402 Adele Florence FREEMAN v. STATE of Maryland. No. 3047, Sept. Term, 2002. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. September 8, 2004. *559 William E. Nolan (Stephen E. Harris, Public Defencer on the brief), Baltimore, for appellant. Diane E. Keller (J. Joseph Curran,

[Cite as Kenesky dba Superior Quality Machine v. M. Weingold & Co., 2014-Ohio-4987.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO JOSEPH KENESKY dba SUPERIOR : MEMORANDUM OPINION QUALITY MACHINE, : Plaintiff-Appellant, CASE NO. 2014-

KENNARD, J. I concur in the majority opinion and in the judgment. I write separately to state my understanding of one part of our decision in this case: the construction of the words “because of’ as they are used in Penal Code sections 422.6 and 422.7. Penal Code section 422.6 defines a criminal offense. At the time of the conduct at issue here, the offense was defined as using force or the threat of

917 N.E.2d 392 (2009) 234 Ill.2d 414 334 Ill.Dec. 566 In re MARRIAGE OF Suzanne GULLA, Appellee, and Stephen KANAVAL (Knobias, Inc., Appellant). No. 106612. Supreme Court of Illinois. June 4, 2009. Rehearing Denied September 28, 2009. *394 Michael S. Danian, Waukegan, f

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 25, 2012 Session DIANE S. HAND v. GOLDEN E. HAND, SR. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 01D2746 Phillip E. Smith, Judge No. M2010-02404-COA-R3-CV - Filed July 31, 2012 The parties married twice and divorced twice. Under the terms of their second divorce dec