Cases

Marci B. McIvor, United States Bankruptcy Judge This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Dismiss filed by the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS"). Plaintiff/Trustee's adversary complaint alleges that debtor, Laurestine Hatchett, used her assets to pay federal tax liabilities owed by her husband, Elbert Hatchett, and/or his law firm. The Trustee claims that the payments constitute fraudulent transfers under

Opinion Denying Motion To Dismiss Phillip J. Shefferly, United States Bankruptcy Judge Introduction The Chapter 7 trustee filed a complaint against the Wayne County Treasurer (‘Wayne County”) to avoid and recover $307,602.83 of alleged fraudulent transfers under § 544(b)(1) and § 550 of the Bankruptcy Code. Wayne County has moved to dismiss the complaint. For the

711 S.E.2d 492 (2011) STATE of North Carolina v. George Junior HAYDEN, Defendant. No. COA10-1306. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. June 7, 2011. *493 Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Amy Kunstling Irene, for the State. Marilyn G. Ozer, Chapel Hill, for defendant. ELMORE, Judge. Ge

Justice KENNEDY delivered the opinion of the Court. *704 This Court has held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution forbid the execution of persons with intellectual disability. Atkins v. Virginia,

679 S.E.2d 865 (2009) STATE of North Carolina v. Donald Carlton LOWRY, Defendant. No. COA08-845. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. August 4, 2009. *866 Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Diane A. Reeves, for the State. D. Tucker Charns, Durham, for defendant-appellant. GEER, Judge.

TRIAL ORDER Paul G. Hyman, Jr., Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge THIS MATTER came before the Court for trial (the “Trial”) on May 16 and 17, 2016, and June 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, 2016, upon (1) the Second Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) (EOF No. 61) and the *396Motion to Enforce Sale Order and to Hold The Best One, Inc. in Con

139 S.W.3d 895 (2004) Keith YOUNG, Individually and as Superintendent of Board of Education, Adair County, Appellants, v. Scott HAMMOND, Michael Akin, Janet Hutcheson, John Peck, Candace Stockton, and Debra Wimmer, Individually and as Members of Adair County High School Council, Appellees, and Ronald Back, in His Official Capacity as Superintendent of Russell Independent Schools, and Board of Education of Russell Independent School District,

762 F.Supp.2d 543 (2011) COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY, Plaintiff, v. ROPES & GRAY LLP and Matthew P. Vincent, Defendants. No. 10-CV-661 (ADS)(AKT). United States District Court, E.D. New York. January 22, 2011. *545 Scully, Scott, Murphy & Presser, P.C. by Peter I. Bernstein, Esq., Chad E. Ziegler, Esq., of Counsel, Gard

383 B.R. 782 (2008) In re Ricky Donovan VAN VLEET d/b/a First Financial Centre, Inc. SSN: XXX-XX-9158, Debtor. No. 06-17238 SBB. United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado. March 12, 2008. *783 *784 Douglas W. Jessop, Esq., K. Lane Cutler, Esq., Jessop & Company, P.C., Denver, CO, for Tom H. Conn

JOHNSON, Judge. Defendant Phillip Manning Cannada was tried and found guilty of the second-degree murder of Teresa Gilmore. Defendant was Ms. Gilmore’s live-in boyfriend; Ms. Gilmore’s body was found on the floor of the kitchen of her two-story home at 3510 Manford Drive in Durham, North Carolina. The facts of this appeal are as follows: Sergeant Jodie W. Piatt of the Durham City Police Department received a

WELLS, Judge. In one assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for insufficiency of the evidence. *172The evidentiary principles governing motions to dismiss are set out at length in State v. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. 62, 296 S.E. 2d 649 (1982). Briefly summarized, they are that the eviden

268 F.Supp.2d 1 (2003) DIAMOND CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. ATOFINA CHEMICALS, INC., et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A.02-1018 CKK. United States District Court, District of Columbia. June 5, 2003. *3 Mary Nicole Strimel, Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., Washington, DC, for Diamond Chemical CO. Inc.

PARKER, Judge. Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to take the case to the jury. We find the evidence insufficient and hold that defendant’s motion for nonsuit should have been granted. While it is the duty of the jury to determine the weight and credibility of the evidence, it is the court’s duty, in the first instance, to determine whether sufficient evidence has been presented to permit t

WELLS, Judge. In his first assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion to dismiss the murder charge. We agree. “Upon the defendant’s motion for judgment of nonsuit in a criminal action, the question for the court is whether there is substantial evidence of each essential element of the offense charged, or of a lesser offense included therein, and of the

160 S.E.2d 49 (1968) 273 N.C. 377 STATE v. Linda E. COOK, Joyce A. Furr and Frances Ann Owens. No. 258. Supreme Court of North Carolina. March 27, 1968. *50 T. O. Stennett, Charlotte, for defendant appellants. T. W. Bruton, Atty. Gen., and James F. Bullock, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State. H

338 S.E.2d 898 (1986) STATE of North Carolina v. Joe Lynn CAIN. No. 8519SC191. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. February 4, 1986. *899 Atty. Gen. Lacy H. Thornburg by Asst. Atty. Gen. Daniel F. McLawhorn, Raleigh, for the State. Koontz, Hawkins & Nixon by Timothy M. Hawkins, Concord, for defendant-appellant.

185 B.R. 637 (1995) In re Roy W. TALMO, Debtor. Bankruptcy No. 93-32745-BKC-RAM. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. August 17, 1995. *638 Amber Donner, U.S. Trustee, Miami, FL. Arthur Halsey Rice, Arthur Halsey Rice & Associates, Miami, FL, Scott Callahan, Frith & Stump, P.A., Orlando, FL, for The Reliant Group.

237 F.Supp.2d 1204 (2002) Harriet CONRAD, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF JOHNSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A.00-2277-DJW. United States District Court, D. Kansas. October 15, 2002. *1205 *1206 *1207 *1208

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 177 Ohio St.3d 281.] IN RE APPLICATION FOR CORRECTION OF BIRTH RECORD OF ADELAIDE. [Cite as In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide, 2024-Ohio-5393.] Court of appeals’ judgment left undisturbed in the absence of a majority to render a judgment. (No. 2022-0934—Submitted April 4, 2023—Decided November 19, 2024.) APPEAL from the Court of Appe

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide, Slip Opinion No. 2024-Ohio-5393.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Colum