Cases

399 B.R. 820 (2009) In re BIG BUCK BREWERY & STEAKHOUSE, INC., d/b/a Big Buck Brewery and Steakhouse and d/b/a Auburn Hill Winery, Debtor-in-Possession. Big Buck Brewery and Steakhouse, Inc., Counter-Defendant and Appellee, v. Michael G. Eyde, Counter-Plaintiff and Appellant. Bkrptcy No. 07-04213-SWR. No. 08-CV-12471. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.

MAX N. TOBIAS, JR., Judge. hThe plaintiff, Alvin Jones (“Jones”), appeals the trial court’s judgment that dismissed his lawsuit against the defendant, Buck Kreihs Marine Repair, L.L.C. (hereinafter, “BKM”) on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand this matter for further proceedings. I. We review the

130 F.3d 636 Frankie A. ARRANTS; Danette F. Arrants, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.Ellsworth Allen BUCK, JR.; George E. Hubbard, Defendants-Appellants,andF.N. Wolf & Company, Incorporated, Defendant.Ernest T. COLTRAIN; Betty P. Coltrain, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.Ellsworth Allen BUCK, Jr.; George E. Hubbard, Defendants-Appellants,andF.N. Wolf & Company, Incorporated, Defendant. Nos. 93

*552UPON REHEARING EN BANC Opinion BAKER, J. George Frederick Buck (appellant) appealed from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County (trial court) that approved his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. A majority of the panel that first considered

508 S.E.2d 880 (1998) 256 Va. 535 Mallory BUCK, Executor of the Estate of Calvin Hugh Buck v. Sandra B. JORDAN, et al. Record No. 972315. Supreme Court of Virginia. November 6, 1998. Edward L. Breeden, III (Breeden, MacMillan & Green, on briefs), Norfolk, for appellant. Richard F. Popp (Douglas W. Davis, Richmond; Davis & Brynt

Affirmed and remanded by published opinion. Judge MICHAEL wrote the opinion, in which Judge WILLIAMS and Senior Judge WARD joined. OPINION MICHAEL, Circuit Judge: This appeal involves the subject of arbitration. The matter began when the brokerage firm of F.N. Wolf & Co., Inc. (F.N. Wolf or Wolf) and two of its employees, Ellsworth A Buck, Jr. and George E. Hubbard, were sued in two ca

219 B.R. 996 (1998) In re Betty L. BUCK, Debtor. Bankruptcy No. 97-21871 WHB. United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee. April 21, 1998. *997 William A. Cohen, Cordova, TN, for Debtor. Glen D. Rubin, Julie J. Srochi, McCalla, Raymer, Padrick, Cobb, Nichols & Clark, Atlanta, GA, Agent for Federal National Mortgage Associat

JUSTICE LACY delivered the opinion of the Court. George Frederick Buck was found guilty by a jury in the Circuit Court of the County of Chesterfield of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. The circuit court sentenced him to forty years in prison and imposed a $15,000 fine in accordance with the verdict. Buck challenged his conviction, alleging that he

This appeal requires that we reconsider the standard to be used by an appellate court in reviewing the evidence before the trial court *Page 622 at the time of its ruling on a motion for a new trial under Rule 59(a)(7) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure for insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict of a jury. N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 59(a)(7) (1990). Specifically, we must determine whether the

503 S.E.2d 126 (1998) In the Matter of the Will of Calvin H. BUCK. No. COA97-1013. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. August 4, 1998. *128 Baker, Jenkins, Jones & Daly, P.A. by Bruce L. Daughtry, Rocky Mount, and Ronald G. Baker, Ahoskie, and Roger A. Askew, Rocky Mount, for propounders-appellees. Abbott, Mullen, Brumsey &

Opinion BENTON, J. George Frederick Buck appeals from his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. He contends that the trial judge erred in (1) allowing the Commonwealth to use two of its peremptory strikes to remove African-Americans from the jury panel because of their race, and (2) admitting hearsay testimony by a police officer to prove that an informant saw cocaine in an automobile i

Myers, Judge. {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Andre Buck appeals the judgment of the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court convicting him, after a jury trial, of the kidnapping of Tyrell George. {¶ 2} Buck was indicted for kidnapping, with firearm specifications, and for having a weapon while under a disability. Three codefendants, Anthony Barrow, Timothy Watson, and Lonnie

[Cite as State v. Buck, 2017-Ohio-273.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) STATE OF OHIO C.A. No. 27597 Appellee v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE ROXANNE BUCK

This is an original action filed by relator June Lunsford seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondent, Judge Robert E. Buck of the Meigs County Court of Common Pleas, to appoint counsel for relator in a child custody action commenced by relator in respondent's court. Relator filed a "complaint in mandamus and request for alternate writ" on April 6, 1992. Respondent filed an answer and "memorandum in opposition to request for alternative writ." Pursuant to Loc.R. 3, Section 6 of th

Sears, Justice, concurring specially. The majority holds that “a claimant is entitled to benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act for mental disability and psychic treatment which, while not necessarily precipitated by a physical injury, arose out of an accident in which a compensable physical injury was sustained, and that injury contributes to the continuation of the psychic trauma,” and remands the c

[Cite as Buck v. Milano, 2014-Ohio-5640.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) JEFFREY BUCK C.A. No. 26463 Appellant v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE STEVE MILANO, et al.

JAMES E. GRAVES, JR., Circuit Judge, dissenting: In my view, CAFA’s non-retroactivity language prohibits counting the Lester plaintiffs toward the 100-person threshold that Defendants must satisfy in order to justify removal under CAFA’s “mass action” provision. I would therefore reverse the district court’s order and remand both Lester and Bottley to Louisiana state

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 21-1784 ___________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GEORGE STONEY, a/k/a/ Butchy, Appellant On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Dist

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROBERT BUCK, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 17-632 (RDM) WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION This case presents the following question of first impression: Does the Civil Rights Remedies

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Jan 23 2017, 9:15 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK Indiana Supreme Court the defense of res judicata, collateral Court of Appeals