Cases

Per Curiam. {¶ 1} This is an expedited election case in which relators seek a writ of mandamus requiring respondents, Secretary of State Jon Husted and the boards of elections of Athens, Meigs, and Portage Counties (“the boards of elections”),1 *333to place proposed charters for those counties on the ballot at the November 8, 2016 general

[Cite as State v. Wallace, 2023-Ohio-3014.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HENRY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 7-23-04 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. CHRISTOPHER G. WALLACE, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Henry County Common Pleas Court

[Cite as State v. Kalvitz, 2024-Ohio-392.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HENRY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 7-23-11 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. GREGORY R. KALVITZ, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. STATE OF OHIO, C

[Cite as State v. Addiego, 2024-Ohio-1849.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HENRY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 7-23-09 PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. TYLER ADDIEGO, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLEE. Appeal from Henry County Common Pleas Court

[Cite as State v. Gunther, 2024-Ohio-1848.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HENRY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 7-23-08 PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. MICAH GUNTHER, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLEE. Appeal from Henry County Common Pleas Court

DECISION RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT WARDLAW, District Judge. The Court has reviewed and considered all the papers and other materials, including the supplemental briefings by both parties in support of and in opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Petitioner Lavell Frierson on June 18, 1996, and the Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Respondent on October 7, 199

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1960 In re: KBR, INC., Burn Pit Litigation. ------------------------------ ALAN METZGAR, RWT 09-744; PAUL PARKER, and all others similarly situated: RWT 09-744; JOSHUA ELLER, RWT 09-2748; JOANNE OCHS, RWT 09-2747; MELISSA OCHS, RWT 09-2747; JAMES MORGAN, RWT 09-2747; DAVID NEWTON, RWT

703 So.2d 1055 (1997) Toney Deron DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 86363. Supreme Court of Florida. November 6, 1997. Rehearing Denied January 9, 1998. *1056 Nancy Daniels, Public Defender; and Bill Salmon, Special Assistant Public Defender, Gainesville, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterw

987 So.2d 1 (2008) Ronald Lee WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Ronald Lee Williams, Petitioner, v. James R. McDonough, etc., et al., Respondents. Nos. SC05-226, SC05-1579. Supreme Court of Florida. January 10, 2008. Rehearing Denied July 11, 2008. *4 Joseph F. McDermott of McDermott

[Cite as State v. Maynard, 2026-Ohio-2558.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HENRY COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 7-25-10 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. OPINION AND ROBBY W. MAYNARD, JUDGMENT ENTRY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Hen

OPINION WHITHAM, Justice. In this declaratory judgment action, the homeowner-appellants, David H. and Alice Faye Scoville, Billy G. and Ruth W. Hannah, Jim E. and Carla S. Brown, Arthur Ray, Jr. and Sherry Rhodes, Gary and Linda L. Pinkham, Gary L. and Nancy Meiner-shagen, James E. and Barbara R. Brogan, Alan P. and Jordanna P. Whitheiler, Jack and Kathryn Vincent, Robert A. and Kyoko O. Mallon, Richard F

FLOYD, Circuit Judge: *253The Constitution entrusts the President and Congress, not the courts, with the power to resolve political questions. See Japan Whaling Ass'n v. Am. Cetacean Soc'y , 478 U.S. 221, 230, <

CONSENT JUDGMENT GADOLA, District Judge. This matter having come before the Court upon the stipulation of the parties to the entry of a Consent Judgment finally and fully resolving all of the remaining claims in this action; and It appearing to the Court that this action, initially commenced some twenty-two years ago, involves claims of discrimination based upon gender in hi

ORDER YOCK, Judge. This civilian overtime and premium pay dispute is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction filed on June 4, 1990. For the reasons stated herein, defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part. Facts All the plaintiffs in this case are guards employed by the United States Department of

940 F.2d 143 20 Fed.R.Serv.3d 576 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.STATE OF MICHIGAN, James J. Blanchard, Governor of the Stateof Michigan, the Michigan Corrections Commission, GwenAndrew, Chairman, Michigan Corrections Commission, ThomasEardley, Dwayne Waters, Don P. Leduc, Members, MichiganCorrections Commission, Michigan Department of Corrections,Perry Johnson, Director, Mich

KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judge. The five orders of the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan dated November 3, 1989, November 6, 1989, two on January 24, 1990, and April 4, 1990, presently under appellate review, had their common genesis in the ongoing implementation of a consent decree approved by the court on July 16,1984 resolving a case initiated by the plaintiff-appellee United States of America (U

604 F.Supp.2d 1003 (2009) Bobby T. SHEPPARD, Petitioner, v. Margaret BAGLEY, Warden, Respondent. Case No. 1:00-cv-493. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. March 4, 2009. *1007 Carol Ann Wright, Melissa J. Callais, Steven Scott Nolder, Federal Public Defenders Office, Columbus, OH, for Petitioner. Cha

Opinion of the Court by Justice VENTERS. This case arose in the aftermath of the settlement of Darla S. Guard, et' ál. v. American Home Products, Inc. (Guard).1 The Guard case, which is also known as “Jonetta Moore, et al. v. American Home Products, Inc.,” or the “Moore ” case, was brought by Kentucky residents who had taken th