Cases

Supreme Court of Texas ══════════ No. 21-0496 ══════════ Houston Area Safety Council, Inc. and Psychemedics Corporation, Petitioners, v. Guillermo M. Mendez, Respondent ═══════════════════════════════════════ On Petition

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DOE I; DOE II; IVY HE; DOE III; No. 15-16909 DOE IV; DOE V; DOE VI; CHARLES LEE; ROE VII; ROE VIII; D.C. No. 5:11-cv- LIU GUIFU; DOE IX; WEIYU 02449-EJD WANG, and those individuals similarly situated, ORDER Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.; JOHN CHAMBERS; FREDY CHEUNG, AKA Zhang Sihua; DOES, 1-100,

710 S.W.2d 811 (1986) Norma and Thomas LOBDELL, individually and on Behalf of Their Deceased Son, Harry Edwin LOBDELL, III, Appellants, v. TARRANT COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT d/b/a John Peter Smith Hospital, Dr. L. Ray Ryan, Dr. Pelham Staples, III, Dr. Greg Elam, and Dr. Thomas White, Appellees. No. 2-85-159-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth. June 5, 1986.

557 P.2d 899 (1976) MUNSINGWEAR, INC., and the Travelers Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Maxine C. TULLIS and Oklahoma State Industrial Court, Respondents. No. 48686. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. December 14, 1976. Sanders, McElroy & Carpenter by Jerry H. Holland, Tulsa, for petitioners. Richard A. Bell, Norman, for respondent, Maxine C. Tullis. <

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA YASMEEN WINSTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 23 - 2123 (LLA) GREGORY T. MONAHAN, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Yasmeen Winston and India Johnson bring this action against the U.S. Park Police, the U.S. Secret

LARSON, Justice (concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in Division I and in the result of Division II. I dissent from Division III. The issue under Division III of the majority opinion is not whether we overrule McKillip because, as the majority points out, that case, involving a nonviable fetus, is distinguishable. Rather, the issue is

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2025 ND 199 Access Independent Health Services, Inc., d/b/a Red River Women’s Clinic, on behalf of itself and its patients; Kathryn L. Eggleston M.D., on behalf of herself and her patients; Ana Tobiasz, M.D. on behalf of herself and her patients; Erica Hofland, M.D. on behalf of herself and her patients; Collette Lessard, M.D. on behalf of herself and her patients,

DISSENT: Hale, C.J., and Bliss, J. The defendant was charged by a County Attorney's information with the crime of rape. This information, which was filed on May 7, 1940, states in part: "The said Ernest Howard on or about the 26th day of April A.D., 1940, in the County of Montgomery and the State of Iowa, did rape * * *, a girl 16 years of age." The court, upon showing by the defendant that he was without funds to employ counsel, appointed a member of the Montgomery County bar t

466 S.E.2d 522 (1995) 195 W.Va. 671 Kenneth FARLEY, as Administrator of the Estate of Baby Farley, an Unborn Child, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Billy R. SARTIN and Lee Sartin Trucking Company, Inc., Defendants Below, Appellees. No. 22797. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted September 19, 1995. Decided December 13, 199

[1] The offense of rape, charged in the indictment, was committed on the evening of June 7, 1931. The assault in some of its aspects was extremely brutal, and we shall recite no more of the details than is essential to the discussion of the propositions relied upon by the defendant for reversal. The first and major complaint of the defendant is that the court did not submit to the jury the alleged included offense of assault with intent to commit great bodily injury. T

144 Ariz. 467 (1985) 698 P.2d 712 Jack SUMMERFIELD and Charlene Summerfield, husband and wife, individually, and as surviving parents of Baby Girl Summerfield, Petitioners, v. SUPERIOR COURT of the State of Arizona, In and For the COUNTY OF MARICOPA, Hon. Marilyn A. Riddel, a judge thereof, and James Colleen, M.D., and Jane Doe Colleen, husband and wife, and Richard Lott, M.D. and Jane Doe Lott, husband and wife, real part

USCA11 Case: 23-10385 Document: 112-1 Date Filed: 03/12/2025 Page: 1 of 169 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-10385 ____________________ JANUARY LITTLEJOHN, JEFFREY LITTL

619 P.2d 826 (1980) 95 N.M. 150 Janet SALAZAR, as Personal Representative of the Estate of her Fetus, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. VINCENT HOSPITAL, Eric C. Wolf, Kenneth Harrold, M.D., and Northern New Mexico Emergency Medical Services, P.C., Defendants-Appellees. No. 4111. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. April 3, 1980. Rehearing Denied

Chief Justice DURRANT, opinion of the Court: INTRODUCTION {1 Floyd Eugene Maestas was charged with aggravated murder, a violation of see*905tion 76-5-202 of the Utah Code, and aggravated burglary, a violation of section 76-6-208 of the Utah Code.1 After being tried and convicted on both charges, he was s

Oppenheimer, J. The petition in this case alleges that ‘‘ defendant secretly, stealthily and maliciously pursued plaintiff’s husband * * * and wickedly, purposely and maliciously sought 'to win his affections and love from plaintiff * * * and-appropriate the same to herself.” It further alleges that defendant ‘‘did * * *395* wickedly, maliciously and knowingly seduce

276 U.S. 358 (1928) CORONA CORD TIRE COMPANY v. DOVAN CHEMICAL CORPORATION. No. 182. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 16, 17, 1928. Decided April 9, 1928. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. *359 Mr. Dean S. Edmonds, with whom Messrs. Wm. H. Davis and F

By the Court.*—Monell, J. The only judgment which could be entered upon the decision of the justice who tried this cause was, that the deed to Rachel A. Addison was not fraudulent and void; -that the goods transferred to Hatfield & Marshall could not be reached in this action, and that the assignment of the securities in the Pacific Bank was void. This was the whole of the decision. The learned ju