Cases

Carlton W. Reeves, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *725Federal courts "have an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party." Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. , 546 U.

MEMORANDUM * Notwithstanding petitioner Brett Sorenson’s ineligibility for parole under his original sentence and 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (1987), he was properly released under 18 U.S.C. § 4163 upon the expiration of his term less good time credits and accordingly “deemed as if released on parole” under 18 U.S.C. § 4164. He therefore remained while on release under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Parole Commissio

2022 IL App (4th) 200260 FILED November 21, 2022 NO. 4-20-0260 Carla Bender 4th District Appellate IN THE APPELLATE COURT

Colorado Supreme Court Opinions || June 1, 2015 Colorado Supreme Court -- June 1, 2015 2015 CO 43. No. 14SC495. People v. Vigil, Jr. The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 2 East 14th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203 2015 CO 43 Supreme Court Case No. 14SC495

362 S.C. 421 (2005) 608 S.E.2d 855 James NELSON, Jr., as guardian ad litem for Ty'Quain S. Nelson, a minor child, Respondent/Petitioner, v. QHG OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC., d/b/a Carolina Hospital System, Quorum Health Group, Inc., Drs. Coker, Phillips, and Haswell, P. A., and Thomas W. Phillips, M.D., Defendants, of whom Drs. Coker, Phillips, and Haswell, P.A. and Thomas W. Phillips, M.D. are, Petitioners/Respondents.

354 S.C. 290 (2003) 580 S.E.2d 171 James NELSON, Jr., as guardian ad litem for Ty'Quain S. Nelson, a minor child, Appellant, v. QHG OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC., d/b/a Carolina Hospital System, Quorum Health Group, Inc., Drs. Coker, Phillips, and Haswell, P.A., and Thomas W. Phillips, M.D., Defendants, of whom Drs. Coker, Phillips, and Haswell, P.A. and Thomas W. Phillips, M.D., Respondents. No. 3626.

WIGGINS, Justice. The State seeks further review of a court of appeals decision reversing a defendant’s first-degree murder conviction. A jury found the defendant guilty of first-degree murder. On appeal, the court of appeals reversed the conviction because it concluded the district court should not have admitted evidence of the defendant’s drug dealing. On further review, we fi

Appeal No. 4671 from Judgment dated July 2, 1992, James E. Thomas, Ruling Judge, Stone County Circuit Court. Bobby G. O’Barr, Sr., Biloxi, Stanton J. Fountain, Jr., Fountain & Walker, Biloxi, for Appellants. Mark A. Nelson, Jon Mark Weathers, Rick D. Norton, Thomas C. Anderson, Bryan Nelson Randolph & Weathers, Hattiesburg, for Appellee. Before FRAISER, C.J., and

CAMPBELL, Judge. The husband assigns as error evidence introduced by the wife pertaining to settlement negotiations which had been conducted between the parties without a final agreement being consummated. While the rules of evidence are not as strictly enforced where the judge hears a case without the intervention of a jury, nevertheless, evidence which is obviously incompetent should not be permitted even in such a hearing.

This appeal involves a boundary line dispute between coterminous landowners. Appellants, plaintiffs below, raise two points on this appeal: (1) that the jury verdict in favor of the defendants, and the court's judgment entered thereon, were contrary to the great preponderance of the evidence, and (2) that the trial court erred in submitting the factual issues to a jury. Appellants Oval Snyder and Eugie Pearl Hood, along with W.J. Buckner, filed a complaint to establish t

701 S.E.2d 421 (2010) Larry HOOD v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 092402. Supreme Court of Virginia. November 4, 2010. *423 James C. Martin (Martin & Martin, on brief), for appellant. Sean J. Murphy, Assistant Attorney General (Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, Attorney General; Wesley G. Russell, Jr., Deputy Attorney G

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0073p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Appellee, │

686 F.Supp.2d 1240 (2010) David HANCOCK, Plaintiff, v. James HOOD, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:09-00026-KD-N. United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Northern Division. February 18, 2010. *1242 Bruce Boynton, Selma, AL, for Plaintiff. Joseph Lister Hubbard, Jr., Montgomery, AL, Abigail Lounsbury Morrow, Tayl

4 F.Supp.2d 683 (1998) Geneva NELSON, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN TOWER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. CIV. A. 97-45. United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky. March 23, 1998. *684 Lawrence R. Webster, Pikeville, KY, Eldred E. Adams, Jr, Adams & Adams, Louisa, KY, for Geneva Nelson. Henry E. Kinser, Samuel G.

Justice GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. When a criminal conviction is invalidated by a reviewing court and no retrial will occur, is the State obliged to refund fees, court costs, and restitution exacted from the defendant upon, and as a consequence of, the conviction? Our answer is yes. Absent conviction of a crime, one is presumed innocent. Under the Colorado law before us in these cases, however, the State retains co

On Application for Rehearing The opinion released on October 15, 1993, is hereby withdrawn and the following opinion is substituted. This lawsuit arose out of the repossession of a tractor-trailer truck owned by the plaintiff Temple Willett, Jr. Price-Williams Associates, Inc., and Tom Price-Williams, defendants, appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict awarding Willett $196,000 in damages in connection with the repossession of the tractor-trai

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-16-00406-CR BILLY JOE ARMSTRONG, JR. APPELLANT A/K/A BILLY JOE ARMSTRONG A/K/A BILLY ARMSTRONG A/K/A BRADLEY NELSON V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ----------

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-16-00406-CR Billy Joe Armstrong, Jr. a/k/a Billy § From the 355th District Court Joe Armstrong a/k/a Billy Armstrong a/k/a Bradley Nelson § of Hood County (CR13583) v. § March 1, 2018 §

OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM H. BARBOUR, JR., District Judge. This cause is before the Court on the Motions of Plaintiff to Remand. Having considered the pleadings, the attachments thereto, as well as supporting and opposing authorities, the Court finds the Motions are not well taken and should be denied. I. Factual Background and Procedural History In June of

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-3100 JOSE ANTONIO COSSIO, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District