Cases

441 F.Supp.2d 769 (2006) David KENNEY, Harold L. Summers, Jr., and Roscoe Tucker, Plaintiffs, v. William. J. CHARNOCK, individually and as the Kanawha County Prosecuting Attorney, and Kanawha County Commission, Defendants. Civ.A. No. 2:05-0390. United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division. July 26, 2006. Lonnie C. Simmons, Rudolph L. Ditrapa

GEER, Judge. Juvenile D.A.Q. appeals from the trial court’s order requiring him to pay $242.58 in restitution after he was adjudicated delinquent of two counts of feloniously breaking and entering a motor vehicle. We reverse and remand for further findings of fact because the trial court failed to make any findings regarding whether restitution is in the juvenile’s best interest and whether the restitution was fair to the ju

715 S.E.2d 509 (2011) In the Matter of D.A.Q. No. COA10-1325. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. August 16, 2011. *510 Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Tawanda N. Foster-Williams, for the State. Mary McCullers Reece, Smithfield, for defendant-appellant. GEER, Judge. Juvenile D.A.Q. appeals

848 F.Supp. 1228 (1994) Jason DOE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 2:92-1061. United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, Charleston Division. March 25, 1994. *1229 Susan Cannon-Ryan, Caldwell, Cannon-Ryan & Riffee, Charleston, WV, W. Harold Flowers, Jr., Maureen R

*333MARTIN, Justice. The sole issue for review on this appeal is whether the trial court properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. As a preliminary matter, however, this case poses a choice of law dilemma. We must determine which statute of repose applies to this products liability action: that of North Carolina, the forum state, or that of Florida, the

268 Md. 643 (1973) 304 A.2d 244 STRATAKIS ET AL. v. BEAUCHAMP ET AL. [No. 268, September Term, 1972.] Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided May 11, 1973. *645 The cause was argued before BARNES, SINGLEY, SMITH, DIGGES and LEVINE, JJ. William J. Blondell, Jr., for appellants. James D

NORVELL, Justice (dissenting). In the concluding sentence of the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals it is said that “appellants (respondents Lewis et al.) have vested property rights in the San Juan Dam, headgate and ditch.” 343 S.W.2d 481. This stated conclusion is the basis upon which the final holding of the Court of Civil Appeals is based. This Court has now affirmed the judgment of the Court o

Holmes, J. The only question raised by the report is whether the general words of Pub. Sts. c. 191, § 1, give a lien for labor upon a schoolhouse held by a town for public school purposes. Such a lien seems to have been enforced in Morse v. Newbury School District, 3 Allen, 307, but it does not appear whether the exceptions were broad enough to present this question, and the question is not adverted to in the d

LAND, J. By Act No. 16, p. 19, of 1904, the General Assembly submitted to the electors of the state a proposed constitutional amendment, reading, in part, as follows, viz.: “There shall be exempt from taxation for a period of ten years from the date of its completion, any railroad or part of railroad that shall have been constructed and completed subsequently to January 1, 1905, and prior to January

Williams, Judge: Joseph Friedman appeals from a decree of the circuit court of Nicholas county, made at the January term, 1914, dismissing his suit, brought to cancel a tax deed made to defendants, A. L. Craig and J. M. Wolverton, partners as Craig & Wolver-ton. The first error assigned is, that the tax deed is void because it was acknowledged by the clerk of the county court before his deputy. Webb

Haight, J.: This action was brought by James Van Burén to set aside a conveyance of certain real estate in tbe city of Buffalo. He having died tbe action was revived and continued in tbe name of tbe plaintiff. Hpon tbe trial tbe plaintiff’s attorney asked to have tbe case adjourned to tbe bouse of Mr. Van Burén to take bis testimony on account of bis sickness, and that tbe defendant be excluded from

BENEDICT, District Judge. This case comes before the court upon a motion for a new trial. The defendants were charged with having conspired with one Scott and others, to defraud the United States out of the dtities on silks and laces to be imported into New York from Great Britain, contrary to law. The indictment sets forth several acts done by several of the accused to effect the object of the conspiracy. Of the acts so charged,

Young, C. J. This is an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The complaint alleges that the defendant, “Company D, North Dakota National Guard,” is a corporation organized under the authority of section 1425a, Rev. Codes 1899; that said corporation contracted with the defendant O. T. White for the erection of an armory building upon certain lots in Devils Lake; that the plaintiff performed work, labor, and services as a subcont

Lord, J. This is a suit to foreclose a mechanic’s lien; alleged to exist against the property of the defendant. A demurrer to the complaint was interposed, upon the ground that the facts stated were not sufficient to constitute a cause of suit. The court below sustained the demurrer, dismissed the complaint, and a decree was entered in-accordance therewith, from which the plaintiff has; ap-

Shiras, J. In substance tlie bill in this cause sets forth that on the twelfth of April, 1882, the complainant made a contract in writing with the American Construction Company, of New York, and the Council Bluffs City Water-works Company, whereby complainant agreed with the construction company to furnish certain cast-iron pipes and castings to be used in the construction of the water-works at Council Bluffs, the construction c

STORY, Circuit Justice. The present is a joint indictment against the prisoners for murder. They have severally pleaded not guilty. And a motion has now been made in writing, in behalf of one John D. White, otherwise called Charles Marchant, that he’may be tried separately; and this he claims, as a matter of right. The motion is resisted on the part of the district attorney for the United States, who utterly denies that there e

On the Merits. The question for consideration in this court, is flm validity and legality of the ordinance of the City of Shreveport, under1 which the local assessment for street improvements is sought to be enforced against the defendants in this suit. • Having assumed jurisdiction of the matter in controversy, which *1909is below the lower limit of

In July, 1932, this court decided the case of Laramie Irrigation and Power Company v. Grant, 44 Wyo. 392,13 P.2d 235, wherein we held that the adjudications by the Board of Control of this state of the waters of the Big Laramie and Little Laramie Rivers respectively are prima facie correct, and that the water commissioner is authorized to regulate the waters of these rivers, and the diversion works of the several appropriat

Bland, Chancellor, Ordered, that the matter of this Petition be heard during the second week of the ensuing December term: And, that proofs be taken, as to the sufficiency of the sureties offered, before any Justice of the Peace, by either party, on giving reasonable notice of the time and place of taking the same to the opposite party, or their solicitor. And it is further Ordered, that the issuing of execution on the final