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 “Howard v. Mackie”
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS ══════════ No. 19-0365 ══════════ ANDY BRUMLEY AND SHERI BRUMLEY, PETITIONERS, v. RICHARD HOWARD MCDUFF AND SARA SULLIVAN MCDUFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE MCDUFF TRUST, THE ERIN ELIZABETH MCDUFF TRUST, AND THE MACKIE ANN
MacKie v. Chizmarpublic domain
965 P.2d 1202 (1998) Scott P. MACKIE, M.D., Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. Savitri CHIZMAR, Appellee and Cross-Appellant. Nos. S-7782, S-7802. Supreme Court of Alaska. October 2, 1998. Rehearing Denied October 30, 1998. *1203 Donna M. Meyers and Howard A. Lazar, Delaney, Wiles, Hayes, Gerety & Ellis, Inc.,
Chizmar v. MacKiepublic domain
896 P.2d 196 (1995) Savitri CHIZMAR, individually, and Savitri Chizmar, as the natural parent of minors Cynthia Marie Chizmar and Desiree Michelle Chizmar, Appellants, v. Scott P. MACKIE, M.D., Appellee. Nos. S-5232, S-5278. Supreme Court of Alaska. May 19, 1995. *198 C.R. Kennelly, Stepovich Kennelly & Stepovich P.C., An
David L. Banks v. Mackie H. Bankspublic domain
GLASSCOCK, Vice Chancellor At common law, real property transferred equally to two or more persons jointly was presumed to be held thereafter by those persons as joint tenants with right of survivorship, unless the documents of transfer provided explicitly that the property would be held as tenants in common. 1 The prim
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-20-00294-CV ___________________________ REGINA NACHAEL HOWELL FOSTER, Appellant V. MACKIE WOLF ZIENTZ & MANN, P.C., Appellee On Appeal from the 48th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 048-317495-20 Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ.
MacKie v. Mayor of Elktonpublic domain
265 Md. 410 (1972) 290 A.2d 500 MACKIE ET AL. v. MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF ELKTON [No. 306, September Term, 1971.] Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided May 10, 1972. The cause was argued before HAMMOND, C.J., and BARNES, McWILLIAMS, FINAN,[*] SINGLEY, SMITH and DIGGES, JJ. *411
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________ No. 07-17-00248-CV ________________________ RICHARD HOWARD MCDUFF AND SARA SULLIVAN MCDUFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE MCDUFF TRUST, THE ERIN ELIZABETH MCDUFF TRUST, AND THE MACKIE ANN MCDUFF TRUST, ERIN ELIZABETH MC
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________ No. 07-17-00248-CV ________________________ RICHARD HOWARD MCDUFF AND SARA SULLIVAN MCDUFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE MCDUFF TRUST, THE ERIN ELIZABETH MCDUFF TRUST, AND THE MACKIE ANN MCDUFF TRUST, ERIN ELIZABETH MCD
Commonwealth v. Howardpublic domain
749 A.2d 941 (2000) COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Ford HOWARD, Appellant. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted February 22, 1999. Filed March 23, 2000. *944 Paul J. Hetznecker, Philadelphia, for appellant. Catherine Marshall, Asst. Dist. Atty., Philadelphia, for Com., appellee. Before McEWEN, Presi
in the Estate of Howard Anthony Frenzelpublic domain
NUMBER 13-07-00341-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG <
in the Estate of Howard Anthony Frenzelpublic domain
NUMBER 13-07-00341-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG IN THE ESTATE OF HOWARD ANTHONY FRENZEL, DECEASED On appeal from the County Court at Law of Kleberg County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Benavides Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides On February
Mackie v. County of Islandpublic domain
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Island County, No. 10032, Howard A. Patrick, J., entered October 12, 1979. Affirmed by unpublished opinion per James, C.J., concurred in by Callow and Durham, JJ.
MacKie v. Statepublic domain
* Headnotes 1. Courts, 15 C.J., Section 245; 2. Juries, 35 C.J., Section 264; 3. Criminal Law, 16 C.J., Section 2138 (1926 Anno); 4. Criminal Law, 16 C.J., Sections 306, 307; 5. Witnesses, 40 Cyc., p. 2200; The question of competency of children as witnesses as dependent upon age is discussed in a note in 19 L.R.A. 605, et seq., 28 R.C.L., pp. 461, 463; 3 R.C.L. Supp., p. 1575; 5. R.C.L. Supp., 1540; 6. Criminal Law, 16 C.J., Section 1
John Eldre Howard v. Statepublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-97-00053-CR John Eldre Howard, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee</
Howard v. State of Texaspublic domain
972 S.W.2d 121 (1998) John Eldre HOWARD, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 03-97-00053-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. June 18, 1998. *123 Stan Schwieger, Waco, for Appellant. Hollis C. Lewis, Jr., County and Dist. Atty., Charles H. Van Orden, Special Pros., Cameron, for State. Before POWERS, AB
Commonwealth v. Howardpublic domain
KELLY, Judge, concurring: I join in the majority opinion. I write separately to explain my reasons for concluding that the prosecution’s improper statements made during its closing argument do not require a new trial. During the course of the trial, the attorneys for the four co-defendants made liberal use of prior grand jury and trial testimony in the Craig Murphy case to develop their
Howard v. Schildberg Const. Co., Inc.public domain
528 N.W.2d 550 (1995) Carlton V. HOWARD, Sr., Trustee under a Declaration of Trust of Which Carlton V. Howard, Sr. is Trustor, Appellant, v. SCHILDBERG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., An Iowa Corporation, Appellee. No. 93-1638. Supreme Court of Iowa. March 29, 1995. *551 Roger T. Stetson and Robert D. Sharp of Belin Harris Lamson McC
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 17, 2019. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00999-CV NFTD, LLC F/K/A BERNARDO GROUP, LLC; BERNARDO HOLDINGS, LLC; PETER J. COOPER; AND JACQUELINE MILLER, Appellants V. HAYNES & BOONE, LLP AND ARTHUR L. HOWARD, Appellees On Appeal from the 269th District Court
MacKie-clemens Fuel Co. v. Bradypublic domain
Plaintiff, respondent here, brought suit against Brady and Mitchell on Account for coal seeking to recover a balance of $425.10. The cause was tried below before the court without a jury and judgment went for the plaintiff and defendant Mitchell has appealed. The only question for determination here is whether or not there was a partnership existing between Brady and Mitchell during the time the coal was bought and *Page 553 used. Brady, on Decembe
Harris v. McCrorypublic domain
COGBURN, District Judge, concurring: I fully concur with Judge Gregory’s majority opinion. Since the issue before the court was created by gerrymandering, and based on the evidence received at trial, I write only to express my concerns about how unfettered gerrymandering is negatively impacting our republican form of government. Voters should choose their representatives. Mitchell N. Berma