⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Hazel Marie Ward”

District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2004-02-11 · Published · cited 1× · 303 F. Supp. 2d 753; 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2085; 2004 WL 291481
303 F.Supp.2d 753 (2004) Bobby E. HAZEL Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, Respondent. Nos. CIV.A.97-633-AM, CRIM.A.93-62-A. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. February 11, 2004. *755 United States, Pro se. MEMORANDUM OPINION ELLIS, District Judge. This pro se
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · 2018-01-02 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 03-17-00543-CV 21523412 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1955-04-28 · Published · cited 5× · 221 F.2d 703
PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court rendered upon a jury verdict in favor of the beneficiary under a life insurance policy issued by defendant, 1 a fraternal beneficiary society incorporated under the laws of Ohio. The life insurance certifica
Michigan Court of Appeals · 1993-12-06 · Published · cited 67× · 509 N.W.2d 874; 202 Mich. App. 685
202 Mich. App. 685 (1993) 509 N.W.2d 874 MANNING v. CITY OF HAZEL PARK Docket No. 134556. Michigan Court of Appeals. Submitted March 2, 1993, at Detroit. Decided December 6, 1993, at 10:05 A.M. Stark & Gordon (by Deborah L. Gordon), for the plaintiff. Brady Hathaway, P.C. (by Thomas M.J. Hat
Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2006-11-17 · Published · cited 1× · 360 N.C. 640; 637 S.E.2d 516; 2006 N.C. LEXIS 1190
PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. REVERSED.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006-02-21 · Published · cited 3× · 625 S.E.2d 805; 176 N.C. App. 19; 2006 N.C. App. LEXIS 413
625 S.E.2d 805 (2006) Jo Ann Outlaw KORNEGAY, Plaintiff, v. Bonnie R. ROBINSON, Administratrix of the Estate of Byard G. Kornegay, Jimmy B. Kornegay, Byard G. Kornegay, Jr., Gerald Clay Kornegay, Ricky Thomas Kornegay, Linda Kay K. Lane, and Mary Hazel K. Manuel, Defendants. No. COA05-131. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. February 21, 2006. Warren, Kerr, Walston,
Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2006-11-17 · Published · cited 1× · 637 S.E.2d 516
PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. REVERSED.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2002-12-05 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 9, 2002 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ANN MARIE THORNTON KELLY Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Giles County No. 8644-7 Robert L. Jones, Judge Jim T. Hamilton, Judge
Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002-09-17 · Published · cited 6× · 568 S.E.2d 923; 153 N.C. App. 81; 2002 N.C. App. LEXIS 1084
568 S.E.2d 923 (2002) HARVEY FERTILIZER AND GAS CO., Plaintiff, v. PITT COUNTY and The Pitt County Board of Commissioners, Defendants, v. Roger McIntyre, Judith Hunt, Joseph Kelly, Barbara Kelly, Wayne Clift, Hazel Clift, James A. Manning, Clemon A. Thomas, Brenda Thomas, George M. Worsley, Patricia A. Worsley, Floyd Sneed, Emma Sneed, Frances Whitfield, A.J. Thomas, Annie Thomas, Mary Hines and Mary Bunns, Intervenor-Defendants.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989-11-24 · Published · cited 23× · 888 F.2d 1071; 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 17593; 1989 WL 133431
E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge: This case is before us a second time on appeal. In this appeal we address whether the district court erred in concluding that the prior opinion of this court established the law of the case regarding the consideration supporting a 1968 land transaction and thus required it to enter summary judgment for the plaintiffs, thereby recognizing their mi
District Court, S.D. New York · 1993-10-05 · Published · cited 28× · 833 F. Supp. 1054; 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14001; 1993 WL 394647
833 F.Supp. 1054 (1993) Benjamin and Anna GREENSTEIN, by their next friend, Rose HOROWITZ, Barbara Bogsted, Sheldon and Hazel Greenberg, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Mary Jo BANE, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services and Barbara Sabol, Administrator of the New York City Human Resources Administration, Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendants.
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008-04-25 · Published · cited 0× · 983 So. 2d 30; 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 5918; 2008 WL 1827520
COHEN, J. Rhea Killinger seeks certiorari review of an order compelling production of documents in a guardianship proceeding commenced by her sister, respondent Sandra Marie Craft, who disputes whether Killing-er’s appointment as plenary guardian is in the best interests of their incapacitated mother, Hazel lone Grable. We deny relief. Craft, alleging that their mother suffers from dementia and related sever
District Court, D. New Jersey · 2013-11-06 · Published · cited 1× · 42 F. Supp. 3d 596; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189117; 2013 WL 9903925
ORDER GRANTING MOTION IN LIMINE (Dkt. No. 22) IRENAS, Senior District Judge: This matter having come before the Court upon Defendant’s Motion in Limine (dkt. no. 22), the Court having considered the Defendant’s submission, and it appearing that: (1) This suit arises out of the sinking of the F/V LADY MARY, a scallop boat that sank approximately sixty-five miles off the coast of
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988-10-27 · Published · cited 0× · 860 F.2d 602; 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 14545
BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge: Accountant’s Society of Virginia, Inc., and several accountants appeal from a decision of the district court denying declaratory and injunctive relief, and holding that certain provisions of the Code of Virginia regulating the accounting profession are constitutional. Accountant’s Society of Virginia, Inc. v. Bowman, No. 84-0376-R (E.D.Va. Feb. 1, 1988). We affirm. I</
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996-09-27 · Published · cited 0× · 96 F.3d 114
PER CURIAM: In United States v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 976 F.2d 890 (4th Cir.1992), we held that single-gender education is pedagogically justifiable for both males and females, and therefore that “the homogeneity of gender in the process, regardless of which sex is considered” warrants a state’s offering single-gender education. Id. at
Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2001-07-11 · Published · cited 2× · 27 P.3d 1081; 175 Or. App. 319; 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 1038
27 P.3d 1081 (2001) 175 Or. App. 319 Heidi SMITH, D.V.M., Petitioner, v. VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINING BOARD, Respondent. G60143; A109656. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted February 9, 2001. Decided July 11, 2001. *1082 Lawrence W. Erwin, Bend, argued the cause and filed the
White v. Patepublic domain
Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1983-07-07 · Published · cited 80× · 304 S.E.2d 199; 308 N.C. 759; 1983 N.C. LEXIS 1294
304 S.E.2d 199 (1983) Hazel WHITE, Beatrice McCoy, Artis Chadwick, Linwood Chadwick, and Mary H. White v. Dorothy PATE, Clerk of Superior Court of Craven County; S.W. McCoy, Fletcher McCoy, and Carlton Ward, Commissioners of the Core Creek Drainage District. No. 511PA82. Supreme Court of North Carolina. July 7, 1983. *200 Smith,
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2016-05-05 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 12, 2015 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHARLES WAYNE DALTON Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lincoln County No. S0800040 Forest A. Durard, Judge No. M2014-02156-CCA-R3-ECN – Filed May 5, 2016 CAMILLE R. MCMULLEN, J., concurring. Although I am compelled t
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995-01-26 · Published · cited 0× · 44 F.3d 1229
Affirmed and remanded by published opinion. Judge NIEMEYER wrote the opinion, in which Senior Judge WARD joined. Senior Judge PHILLIPS wrote a separate dissenting opinion. OPINION NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge: At issue is the important question of whether a state may sponsor single-gender education without violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Ohio Supreme Court · 2012-09-20 · Published · cited 4× · 2012 Ohio 4310; 133 Ohio St. 3d 184; 977 N.E.2d 590
Per Curiam. {¶ 1} This is an expedited election case for writs of mandamus and prohibition to- find Akron Ordinance No. 271-2012 to be invalid and to order two of the respondents, the Summit County Board of Elections and the secretary of state of Ohio, to reconvene forthwith and adopt ballot language that properly describes the propos