Cases

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 18, 2001 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. FELICIA L. BRITTON Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 40806, 40000400 John H. Gasaway, III, Judge No. M2001-00176-CCA-R3-CD - Filed September 7, 2001 After pleading guilty to felony theft of identity, a Class D

AMENDED SUMMARY ORDER J.D. Smith, Jr., Charles W. Piquet, Alfonso Davis, and Cheri Martin-Weatherly appeal the order of the district court (Mor-due, /.), entered on January 22, 2008, 2008 WL 200015, granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, New Venture Gear, Inc., Daimler Chrysler Corporation (collectively, with New Venture Gear, Inc., “NVG”), Mike Allen, in his capacity as President of the United Automobile, Aerospace

AMENDED SUMMARY ORDER J.D. Smith, Jr., Charles W. Piquet, Alfonso Davis, and Cheri Martin-Weatherly appeal the order of the district court (Mor-due, /.), entered on January 22, 2008, 2008 WL 200015, granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, New Venture Gear, Inc., Daimler Chrysler Corporation (collectively, with New Venture Gear, Inc., “NVG”), Mike Allen, in his capacity as President of the United Automobile, Aerospace

AMENDED SUMMARY ORDER J.D. Smith, Jr., and Charles W. Piquet appeal the order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.) on September 30, 2007, granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees. Smith and Pi-quet filed suit against New Venture Gear, Inc. and Daimler Chrysler Corporation (collectively, “NVG”), as well as Mike Allen, in his capacity as President of United Automob

AMENDED SUMMARY ORDER J.D. Smith, Jr., and Charles W. Piquet appeal the order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.) on September 30, 2007, granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees. Smith and Pi-quet filed suit against New Venture Gear, Inc. and Daimler Chrysler Corporation (collectively, “NVG”), as well as Mike Allen, in his capacity as President of United Automob

SUMMARY ORDER Reba Carter appeals the order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.) granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees. Carter had brought suit in the district court under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (collectively “Title VII”); id. §§ 1981, 1981A (collectively

SUMMARY ORDER Reba Carter appeals the order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Mordue, J.) granting summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees. Carter had brought suit in the district court under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e to 2000e-17 (collectively “Title VII”); id. §§ 1981, 1981A (collectively

OPINION OF THE COURT Wesley, J. The issue we must address today is whether public policy bars arbitration of this dispute over whether the employee rights provisions of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) can be invoked to limit or restrict the procedures of criminal investigations commenced by the New York City Department of Investigation (DOI). We conclude that it does. In February 1

04/09/2018 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 6, 2018 IN RE SHARDA R. ET AL. Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Bedford County No. 17JV271 Charles L. Rich, Judge ___________________________________

A. Marvin Quattlebaum, Jr., United States District Judge This is an action for declaratory relief brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 concerning claims for insurance coverage arising out of an accident. Before this Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company (h

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM C. BRYSON, UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE Before the Court is the motion of defendant Eli Lilly & Co. (“Lilly”) for a protective order. Dkt. No. 88. The motion is DENIED. A. Background In the course of discovery in this case, the plaintiff, Erfindergemeinschaft UroPep GbR (“UroPep”) served Lilly with a set of 18 interrogatories. Purs

In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00846-CV ——————————— DAVID GORDON SCHMIDT D/B/A ABC BONDING COMPANY AND GREENBRIAR EQUITIES, LLC, Appellants V. BRENDA CRAWFORD, CARLOS PEREZ, ANTHONY WILLIAMS, ANNIE J. BUTLER, ANTHO

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 20-1787 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. SHELLEY M. RICHMOND JOSEPH, Defendant, Appellant. No. 20-1794 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. WESLEY MACGREGO

MELTON, Chief Justice. **740Following a jury trial, Dantevoise J. Doleman appeals his convictions for murder and related crimes, contending, among other things, that the trial court made certain evidentiary errors and that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict.1 For the reasons set forth below, we aff

TAYLOR, J. In this prosecution against multiple defendants for conspiracy to traffic in oxyco-done and trafficking in oxycodone, the state appeals from the trial court’s order granting the defendants’ joint motion to suppress evidence obtained after a traffic stop for littering. We reverse. Deputy Frank Castor of the Broward Sheriffs Office testified at the hearing on the motion to suppress. He said that whi

304 Ga. 740 FINAL COPY S18A1155. DOLEMAN v. THE STATE. MELTON, Chief Justice. Following a jury trial, Dantevoise J. Doleman appeals his convictions for murder and related crimes, contending, among other things, that the trial court made certain evidentiary errors and that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict.1 For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. 1 On January 20, 2015, a Muscogee County grand jury returned a 21-count i

539 F.3d 741 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Walter THORNTON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 07-2839. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued May 13, 2008. Decided August 26, 2008. *742 Felicia M. Alesia (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-A

995 A.2d 1 (2010) 296 Conn. 80 Laura E. MATURO v. Frank A. MATURO. No. 17776. Supreme Court of Connecticut. Argued September 19, 2008. Decided May 4, 2010. *3 Robert M. Shields, Jr., with whom were Kenneth J. Bartschi and, on the brief, Wesley W. Horton, Hartford, for the appellant (defend

03/23/2021 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs September 15, 2020 KEVIN L. FRENCH v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2010-C-2466 Steve R. Dozier, Judge ___________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM C. BRYSON, UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE Before the Court are the following motions: (1) Defendant Eli Lilly & Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment That the Claims of the T24 Patent Are Anticipated (“Lilly’s Anticipation Motion”), Dkt. No. 172; (2) Defendant Eli Lilly & Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness (“Lilly’s Indefiniteness Motion”), Dk