Cases

112 F.Supp.2d 253 (1999) Joseph FRAZIER, Petitioner, v. Walter KELLY, Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility, Respondent. No. 98-CV-6049FE. United States District Court, W.D. New York. November 18, 1999. *254 *255 Joseph Frazier, Attica, NY, pro se. Howard Broder, Rochester, NY, f

NO. 07-05-0125-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL D APRIL 20, 2006 ______________________________ KELLY JEROME FRAZIER, APPELLANT V. TH

NO. 07-05-0125-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL D APRIL 20, 2006 ______________________________ KELLY JEROME FRA

NO. 07-05-0125-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL D APRIL 20, 2006 ______________________________ KELLY JEROME FRAZIER, APPELLANT

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * CAROLYN B. McHUGH, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Plaintiff

Biles, J., concurring in part: I would hold that the Kansas Parentage Act (KPA), K.S.A. 38-1110 et seq., governs this case and provides sufficient statutory framework to resolve the legal issues advanced by Frazier in her favor as to whether she is a nonbiol-ogical parent under the law and entitled to enforce the coparenting agreement. Therefore, I believe it is unnecessary for this court to delve further into what a

PER CURIAM: Erma Frazier appeals the district court’s order entering judgment in favor of the remaining Appellees in accordance with the jury’s verdict on Frazier’s claim of retaliation and directing judgment in favor of the Appellees on Frazier’s claims of race and age discrimination. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and deny Frazier’s motion

CHEHARDY, C.J. _JjOn appeal in this workers’ compensation case, claimant seeks review of the judgment denying her supplemental earnings benefits. For the following reasons, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History On January 12, 2010, claimant, Bonnie Frazier, was injured during a training exercise while in the course and scope of her employment as a security guard-for Covenant Servi

693 S.E.2d 333 (2010) John David MOONEY, an Individual, Plaintiff Below, Respondent, v. Michael FRAZIER, an Individual, and Frazier & Oxley, L.C., West Virginia Legal Corporation, Defendants Below, Petitioners. No. 35224. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted March 2, 2010. Decided April 1, 2010. *334

772 N.W.2d 348 (2009) PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Willie Lonell FRAZIER, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 138979. COA No. 291149. Supreme Court of Michigan. September 28, 2009. Order On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 28, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED,

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Chief Justice: Justices: Opinion Robert P. Young, Jr. Michael F. Cavanagh Marilyn Kelly

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs December 2, 2014 FRAZIER PERRY v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dyer County No. 11-CR-462 Russell Lee Moore, Jr., Judge No. W2014-00690-CCA-R3-PC - Filed January 15, 2015 The Petitioner, Frazier Perry, appeals as of right from the Dyer County Circuit Court’

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 20, 2014 DAVID FRAZIER v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Polk County No. 04-097 Carroll L. Ross, Judge No. E2013-02563-CCA-R3-CD - Filed June 16, 2014 The Defendant, David Frazier, appeals as of right from the Polk County Criminal Court’s summary

CAVANAGH, J. (dissenting). I respectfully dissent from today’s decision. In this case, we are called to implement a federal district court’s order stemming from defendant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Rather than genuinely attempting to execute the federal court’s order in our courts, the majority disputes the basis of the order itself and, as a result, frustrates

767 F.Supp.2d 1354 (2011) Deborah FRAZIER, Plaintiff, v. ABSOLUTE COLLECTION SERVICE, INC. a North Carolina corporation, Defendant. Civil Action File No. 1:10-CV-2110-TWT. United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division. February 3, 2011. *1359 James Marvin Feagle, Kris Kelly Skaar, Skaar & Feagle, LLP, Decatur,

PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: Named plaintiffs of a putative class appeal denial of remand to Louisiana state court, arguing that the case was not removable under the Class Action Fairness Act. We AFFIRM. I Defendant Pioneer Americas, a Canadian company and citizen, operated hydrogen processing equipment in its St. Gabriel

LEE, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. On December 11, 1998, the Chancery Court of Warren County, Mississippi entered an order modifying the child custody payments of Jeffrey K Burnett. Pri- or to that date in a bifurcated proceeding, the Chancery Court granted Jeffrey’s motion and gave him physical custody of' his eldest daughter. Terri Cowart Frazier appeals asserting two issues 1. The Chan

PER CURIAM. The State of Florida appeals the downward departure sentence entered by the trial court after Joe Frazier was adjudicated guilty of violating his community control. We reverse. As the basis for imposing a departure sentence, the trial court determined that the state had agreed to the imposition of a downward departure sentence when Mr. Frazier was originally sentenced on the underlying crime o

In re Caston, Jesse James et al.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of East Carroll, 6th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. *99719,799; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 40337-CW. Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X, section 5.

27 S.W.3d 592 (2000) Ken FRAZIER, Individually and d/b/a Assured Risk Consultants, Appellants, v. PROGRESSIVE COMPANIES, Appellee. No. 05-99-01133-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. August 22, 2000. *593 E. Stratton Horres, Jr., Lee L. Cameron, Jr., Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP, Dallas, for appellant.</