Cases

OPINION SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs-Appellants Sharon Hall and James Cody appeal the district court’s dismissal of their § 1983 action which challenged, on several constitutional grounds, a state court judgment declaring them to be vexatious litigators under Ohio Rev.Code § 2323.52. The district court dismissed Plaintiffs’ due process,' equal protection, and as-applied constitutional challenge

691 S.E.2d 918 (2010) CALLAHAN et al. v. HALL. No. A09A2358. Court of Appeals of Georgia. March 17, 2010. *919 Crumbley & Crumbley, R. Alex Crumbley, Mcdonough, for appellants. Power, Cooper, Jaugstetter & Futch, Gregory A. Futch, McDonough, for appellee. PHIPPS, Judge. Clarence Hall d/b/a Sonny Hall

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 13a0181p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Plaintiffs-Appellants, - SHARON HALL; JAMES CODY,

[Cite as Hall v. Zimmerman, 2021-Ohio-270.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) JACK HALL C.A. No. 20CA011639 Appellant v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE LYNN ZIMMERMAN

949 A.2d 513 (2008) 108 Conn.App. 605 STATE of Connecticut v. Louise CALLAHAN. No. 28609. Appellate Court of Connecticut. Argued April 17, 2008. Decided June 24, 2008. *514 William B. Westcott, Norwalk, for the appellant (defendant). Richard K. Greenalch, Jr., special deputy assista

[Cite as Hall v. Silver, 2018-Ohio-1706.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) JAMES W. HALL C.A. No. 28798 Appellant v. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE JAMES R. SILVER

Ruffin, Chief Judge. Eugenia Cox, as executrix of the estate of Pauline White, filed suit against David and Ann Callahan, alleging that the defendants defaulted on a promissory note to White. The Callahans answered, asserting that their obligations under the note terminated upon White’s death. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the trial court found in favor of Cox. As we find the trial court erred in

352 F.Supp.2d 211 (2005) Edward VINES, Plaintiff v. Eugene V. CALLAHAN, et al. Defendants No. CIV.A. 3-99-CV-1746J. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. January 13, 2005. Edward Vines, Suffield, CT, pro se. James V. Minor, City of Stamford Office of Legal Affairs, Stamford, CT, for Defendants. RULING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

MEMORANDUM ** Gary Patrick Callahan appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his motion to alter or amend the judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and the district court’s denial of his motion for an evidentiary hearing. Callahan’s § 2255 motion challenges his jury conviction and 330-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and possession with intent to distribute coc

CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I agree with the majority that this case is “rare and extraordinary” but not for the reasons it cites. What is extraordinary is that this court repeats the error of Sherrors v. Woodford, 425 Fed.Appx. 617 (9th Cir. 2011), which granted the habeas petition of Hall’s co-defendant Ronnie Sher-rors based on the same supposed instructional error, even in the face of ad

[Cite as State v. Callahan, 2022-Ohio-4103.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT State of Ohio, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 22AP-221 v. : (C.P.C. No. 16CR-341) Wendell L. Callahan, : (ACCELERA

548 F.3d 729 (2008) Anthony WALDRIP, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James E. HALL, Respondent-Appellee. No. 07-55512. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted February 11, 2008. Filed November 18, 2008. *730 Gail Ivens, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, CA, for the petitioner-appel

MEMORANDUM ** Nevada state prisoner Terrence R. Hall • appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging sub-standard medical attention and inadequate meals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment. Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2001). We review for an a

*742MEMORANDUM ** More than a year after his conviction in state court became final, Saul Pelayo filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction for second-degree murder. He argued that his inability to understand English and lack of access to the provisions of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act in a language he could unders

550 So.2d 79 (1989) Michael T. CALLAHAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 88-03176. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. September 13, 1989. *80 James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Andrea Steffen, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahass

Henry, J. — That a conveyance in fraud of creditors cannot be impeached by the grantor, or his administrator, is well settled in the State by the cases of McLaughlin v. McLaughlin, 16 Mo. 242 , Brown’s Admr. v. Finley, 18 Mo. 375, and George v. Williamson, 26 Mo. 190. The probate court of Lafayette county therefore, had no jurisdiction *324over t

[Cite as Nelson v. Callahan, 2015-Ohio-3464.] COURT OF APPEALS GUERNSEY COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JUDGES: SAM NELSON : Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. : Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. Plaintiff-Appellant :

12/06/2024 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs November 12, 2024 at Jackson STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JOEY DEWAYNE CALLAHAN Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marshall County No. 2022-CR-55 M. Wyatt Burk, Judge ___________________________________

OPINION BY OLSON, J.: Appellant, Varían C. Callahan, appeals from the order entered on January 14, 2014 denying his petition filed under the Posi^Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We affirm. This Court has previously summarized the factual background of this case as follows:

88 Cal.Rptr.2d 417 (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 733 Sinisna SAVNIK et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Opal HALL, Defendant and Appellant. No. C030006. Court of Appeal, Third District. August 30, 1999. *418 Adams & Mason, Inc., Douglas P. Adams and John A. Mason, for Defendant and Appellant. Fritz C