Cases

45 F.Supp.2d 230 (1999) AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL ADVISORS, INC., Plaintiff, v. Richard ZITO, Defendant. No. CV 98-4542. United States District Court, E.D. New York. April 26, 1999. *231 Chorpenning Good Carlet & Garrison, by Michael J. Zaretsky, New York City, for plaintiff. Schupbach, Williams & Pavone, by Paul

FILED Jun 13, 2018 09:58 AM(CT) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

REDMANN, Judge. A corporate trucking company and its president appeal from a judgment holding them liable for plaintiff employee’s crushed finger, fractured leg and other injuries resulting from a crate’s falling over upon him. Plaintiff also appeals from the judgment’s dismissal of his demand against the night dispatcher-supervisor who was in charge of the freight terminal at the time of the accident. Th

319 Ga. 711 FINAL COPY S24G0007. GARRISON v. THE STATE. PETERSON, Presiding Justice. Georgia case law makes clear that the State generally must allege and prove that a prosecution is brought within the applicable statute of limitations. Although this requirement is most often satisfied by alleging and proving the date that the crime was committed, sometimes more is required. One line of precedent holds that in prosecutions where the State seeks to toll the applic

Carleton Harris, Chief Justice. By application filed with the Arkansas Transportation Commission, Mistletoe Express Service of Oklahoma City, appellee herein, sought a certificate of public convenience and necessity as a motor carrier, intrastate in “express service” limited to shipments not exceeding 350 pounds. The application embraced 14 separate and distinct routes of a wide area of this state. Originally,

ORDER ROY B. DALTON JR., United States District Judge This cause is before the Court on the following: 1. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Counts II-VII of Plaintiffs Complaint with Prejudice (Doc. 19), filed August 1, 2016; and 2. Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant Caliber Home Loans, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint and Supporting Me

THOMPSON, Presiding Judge. R.E. Garrison Trucking, Inc. ("Garrison"), petitions this court for a writ of mandamus directing the Washington Circuit Court ("the trial court") to vacate its order denying Garrison's motion for a change of venue and to enter an order transferring this workers' compensation action to the Cullman Circuit Court. The materials submitted to this court in support of and in opposition to the pe

CALABRIA, Judge. Seraph Garrison, LLC ("plaintiff") appeals from an order and judgment denying its claims, which were brought derivatively and on behalf of Garrison Enterprises, Inc. ("GEI" or "the corporation"), against Cameron Garrison ("defendant"). For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. I. Background GEI, a North Carol

LYNNE, District Judge: The genesis of this litigation, including the two consolidated petitions under submission, was the publication by the Interstate Commerce Commission (Commission) of a notice in the Federal Register.1 In response to such notice some thirty-nine comments were received from carriers,2 shippers, labor, and government parties

297 S.W.2d 22 (1956) Lee Roy GARRISON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CAMPBELL "66" EXPRESS, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. No. 7584. Springfield Court of Appeals, Missouri. December 11, 1956. *23 Stanley P. Clay, Joplin, for defendant-appellant. *24 Sylvan Bruner, Morris Matuska, Pittsburg, Kan.

Seraph Garrison, LLC v. Garrison, 2014 NCBC 28. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE MECKLENBURG COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION 11 CVS 14182 SERAPH GARRISON, LLC, derivatively on behalf of GARRISON ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff, v. CAMERON GARRISON,

179 P.3d 867 (2008) 2008 WY 34 Wayne GARRISON and Pamela Garrison, Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. CC BUILDERS, INC., a Wyoming corporation and Clint Cook, Individually, Appellees (Defendants). CC Builders, Inc., a Wyoming corporation, Appellant (Defendant), v. Wayne Garrison and Pamela Garrison, Appellees (Plaintiffs). Nos. S-07-0132, S-07-0133, S-07-0162. Supreme Court

75 F.Supp.2d 807 (1999) FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, FCB/Leber Katz Partners Inc., True North Communications, Inc., and Young & Rubicam, Inc., Defendants. No. 96-3151 D/A. United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division. November 22, 1999. *808

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON July 21, 2011 Session DAVID WHITE v. EMPIRE EXPRESS, INC. AND EMPIRE TRANSPORTATION, INC. An Appeal from the Chancery Court for Shelby County No. CH-08-0107-2 Arnold Goldin, Chancellor No. W2010-02380-COA-R3-CV - Filed December 13, 2011 The case involv

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Carla Denise Garrison and Clint Garrison, Appellants/Respondents, v. Target Corporation, Respondent/Appellant. Appellate Case No. 2017-000267 Appeal From Anderson County R. Keith Kelly, Circuit Court Judge Opinion No. 5711 Heard May 15, 2019 – Filed January 15, 2020 AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED Joshua Thomas Hawkins and Helena LeeAnn Jedz

ACCEPTED 12-15-00189-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 11/30/2015 8:54:48 PM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WEXLER, District Judge: This is an action commenced by Plaintiff Earl Garrison (“Plaintiff’ or “Garrison”) against his former employer, Defendant Toshiba Business Solutions (USA), Inc. (“TBS”), and its corporate parent, Toshiba America Business Solutions, Inc. (“TABS”). Plaintiff alleges only state law causes of action, and therefore jurisdiction is based solely on diversity o

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court Carla Denise Garrison and Clint Garrison, Petitioners- Respondents, v. Target Corporation, Respondent-Petitioner. Appellate Case No. 2020-000523 ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS Appeal From Anderson County R. Keith Kelly, Circuit Court Judge Opinion No. 28080 Heard May 26, 2021 – Filed January 26, 2022 AFFIRMED AS MODIFIE

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE Re: Dkt. Nos. 110, 137, 138 LUCY H. KOH, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Greg Garrison (“Garrison”), Deborah Van Vorst (“Van Vorst”), and Sastry Hari (“Hari”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this putative class action against Defendant Oracle Corporation (“Oracle”) for alleged violations of federal and Californi

ACCEPTED 12-15-00189-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 9/16/2015 5:22:49 PM