⚖ 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 “Janice Parker”

Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · 2016-06-01 · Published · cited 0× · 2016 TN WC 133
FILED JUNE 1,2016 TN C OU1IT OF W ORKERS
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas) · 2024-11-01 · Published · cited 0×
Affirmed and Opinion Filed November 1, 2024 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00890-CV JANICE C. STAUB AND PARKER D. YOUNG, Appellants V. BBVA USA, Appellee On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Texas Supreme Court · 2026-05-29 · Published · cited 0×
Supreme Court of Texas ══════════ No. 24-1057 ══════════ Janice C. Staub and Parker D. Young, Petitioners, v. BBVA USA, Respondent ═══════════════════════════════════════ On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeal
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2007-12-05 · Published · cited 26× · 269 S.W.3d 391; 100 Ark. App. 400; 2007 Ark. App. LEXIS 847
269 S.W.3d 391 (2007) Janice PARKER, Appellant, v. COMCAST CABLE CORPORATION, Appellee. No. CA 07-158. Court of Appeals of Arkansas. December 5, 2007. *393 Rieves, Rubens & Mayton, by David C. Jones, Little Rock, for appellees. SARAH HEFFLEY, Judge. Appellant Janice Parker appeals the decision of the Arkansas Wo
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013-01-24 · Published · cited 67× · 706 F.3d 345; 84 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1077; 2013 WL 265083; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1883
Affirmed by published opinion. Judge WILKINSON wrote the opinion, in which Chief Judge TRAXLER and Judge DUNCAN joined. OPINION WILKINSON, Circuit Judge: In late 2011, plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of the North Carolina “Woman’s Right to Know Act,” (“the Act”), a statute that requires certain informed consent proced
Parker v. Wal-Martpublic domain
District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2001-08-28 · Published · cited 0× · 241 F. Supp. 2d 663; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24986; 2001 WL 34062386
241 F.Supp.2d 663 (2001) Janice and Hollie B. PARKER, Jr. Plaintiffs v. WAL-MART Defendant No. CIV.A.3:00-CV-502WS. United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Jackson Division. August 28, 2001. *664 Keith R. Raulston, Vikki J. Taylor, Watkins Ludlam Winter & Stennis, P.A., Jackson, MS, for Janice Parker, Hollie B. Parker
District Court, C.D. California · 2009-09-29 · Published · cited 0× · 670 F. Supp. 2d 983; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112874; 2009 WL 4030535
670 F.Supp.2d 983 (2009) Janice PARKER, Plaintiff, v. VULCAN MATERIAL COMPANY LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, et al., Defendants. Case No. EDCV 07-01512 SGL(OPx). United States District Court, C.D. California. September 29, 2009. *985 Charles J. Fleishman, Fleishman Law Firm, Northridge, CA, for Plaintiff. Edith S. Shea, Meliss
Missouri Court of Appeals · 2005-06-28 · Published · cited 6× · 167 S.W.3d 219; 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 974; 2005 WL 1510683
167 S.W.3d 219 (2005) Forest G. PARKER, Appellant, v. CITY OF SAINT JOSEPH, Missouri, Respondent. No. WD 64000. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. June 28, 2005. *220 Jeffrey W. Bruce, Belton, MO, for Appellant. Janice E. Farr, Matthew J. Gist, Kansas City, MO, for Respondent. Before HARDWICK, P.J., ULRICH
Mississippi Supreme Court · 2002-03-07 · Published · cited 1× · 817 So. 2d 554; 2002 Miss. LEXIS 94; 2002 WL 358775
GRAVES, J., for the Court. ¶ 1. This matter is an appeal from the judgment of the Chancery Court of Jefferson Davis County in which the chancellor set aside various transfers of mineral deeds as fraudulent. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW ¶ 2. On June 6, 1990 Dan Livingston, Robert L. Burklow and Melvin Burklow each obtained a summary final judgment in the chambers of the Circuit
Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · 2018-01-18 · Published · cited 0× · 560 S.W.3d 332
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-16-00386-CR JANICE BATES, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 181st District Court
Bailey v. Parkerpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Utah · 1989-08-08 · Published · cited 0× · 778 P.2d 1005; 114 Utah Adv. Rep. 34; 1989 Utah App. LEXIS 133; 1989 WL 89890
Chester Edwin Bailey III, dba Artistic Impressions Interior Designs (Artistic Impressions), seeks reversal of the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Edward and Janice Parker. Artistic *Page 1006 Impressions claims the trial court erred in ruling that it was not a materialman for purposes of Utah Code Ann. § 14-2-1 (1986) and, therefore, could not hold the Parkers personally liable for payment for
Stangel v. Parkerpublic domain
Texas Supreme Court · 1997-03-21 · Published · cited 1× · 945 S.W.2d 114; 40 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 445; 1997 Tex. LEXIS 35; 1997 WL 126856
PER CURIAM. Frank Stangel, appellant before the Second Court of Appeals, moved that court to extend the time for filing his motion for rehearing. Appellees did not oppose Stan-gel’s motion. The court of appeals denied Stangel’s motion. Stangel now seeks relief from this Court under Tex.R.App. P. 100(g). Because Stangel’s timely motion reasonably explains his need for additional time, we grant Stangel relief from the court of
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · 1997-02-10 · Published · cited 0× · 36 Pa. D. & C.4th 70; 1997 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 81
DiNUBILE, J., Defendant Philadelphia Housing Authority has filed a post-trial motion seeking judgment n.o.v. following the jury trial and verdict in favor of two minor plaintiffs in this lead paint poisoning action. This opinion arises from the trial court’s denial of these motions and the entry of judgment on the jury verdict in favor of minor-plaintiff Ibn Tyrone Leanier, age 14, in the amount of $105,000, and minor-plaintiff Me
Tennessee Supreme Court · 1999-09-07 · Published · cited 41× · 2 S.W.3d 170; 1999 Tenn. LEXIS 419; 1999 WL 767885
2 S.W.3d 170 (1999) Demetra Lyree PARKER, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. WARREN COUNTY UTILITY DISTRICT, Defendant/Appellant. Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville. September 7, 1999. Lisa M. Carson, Franklin, for Appellant. Robert S. Peters, Winchester, for Appellee. *171 OPINION HOLDER, Justice. We granted revi
Alaska Supreme Court · 2022-05-20 · Published · cited 9× · 509 P.3d 1014
Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, phone (907) 264-0608, fax (907) 264-0878, email corrections@akcourts.gov. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA JANICE L. PARK, ) ) Supreme Co
Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2024-05-29 · Published · cited 0×
05/29/2024 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs April 1, 2024 JANICE FARMER v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lauderdale County No. 7102 A. Blake Neill, Judge ___________________________________
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2025-08-06 · Published · cited 0× · 2025 NY Slip Op 04580
Parker Waichman, LLP v Chaikin (2025 NY Slip Op 04580) Parker Waichman, LLP v Chaikin 2025 NY Slip Op 04580 Decided on August 6, 2025 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018-12-07 · Published · cited 57× · 910 F.3d 399
GRASZ, Circuit Judge. Janice Hustvet sued her former employer, Allina Health System ("Allina"), alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the Minnesota Human Rights Act ("MHRA"), after Allina terminated Hustvet's employment for refusing to fulfill a job requirement that she take necessary steps to develop immunity to rubella. Hustvet appeals the district cou
Parker v. Wiserpublic domain
District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1996-03-29 · Published · cited 0× · 947 F. Supp. 245; 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17321; 1996 WL 673523
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WINGATE, District Judge. Before the court are the defendants’ motions asking this court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ lawsuit. Filed pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6),1 defendants’ motions respectively assert that plaintiffs’ complaint lacks subject matter jurisdiction and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. At issue he
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022-11-30 · Published · cited 7× · 210 A.D.3d 1128; 180 N.Y.S.3d 191; 2022 NY Slip Op 06831
Wells Fargo, N.A. v Parker (2022 NY Slip Op 06831) Wells Fargo, N.A. v Parker 2022 NY Slip Op 06831 Decided on November 30, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary La