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 “Jessie Mae Parker”
Safeway Insurance v. Parkerpublic domain
105 Ill. App.2d 208 (1969) 245 N.E.2d 75 Safeway Insurance Company, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jessie Parker and Eddie Mae Gardner, Defendants-Appellees. Gen. No. 52,412. Illinois Appellate Court First District, Third Division. January 23, 1969. Rehearing denied February 17, 1969. John Narusis, Jr., of Lazzara, Narusis & S
Graham v. Statepublic domain
PER CURIAM. Upon her plea of guilty to second degree murder the trial court sentenced the appellant to twenty years’ incarceration followed by ten years’ probation, which sentence was within the terms of the plea bargain. The appellant’s counsel then filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We have reviewed the record in accordance with In re Anders Briefs,
Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Alvin Harrispublic domain
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 1, 2022. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00690-CV UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant V. ALVIN HARRIS; JD HARRISON; CASSAUNDRA HENRY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CARRIE GANT (DECEASED); ARCHIE MAE HEWITT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE JOE WILL
Anderson v. Andersonpublic domain
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Vandergriff v. Vandergriff, 456 So.2d 464 (Fla.1984); Zulywitz v. Zulywitz, 473 So.2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Rawls v. Rideoutpublic domain
328 S.E.2d 783 (1985) Lois RAWLS, Ella V. Joyner, George N. Vaughan, Fannie Lee Hassett, Blanche V. Whitehead, J.T. Vaughan and Charles N. Vaughan v. Alma Ruth V. RIDEOUT, J. Guy Revelle, Jr., Executor of the Estate of Jessie Mae V. Harrison, Robert A. Parker and Margaret Lee Parker. No. 846SC295. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. May 7, 1985.
Harris v. Boonepublic domain
JOANOS, Judge. Appellant Jessie Mae Harris appeals the final summary judgment entered in favor of Sheriff Eddie Boone, defendant in Harris’s suit for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The issues for our review are: (1) whether there exist genuine issues of material fact with respect to probable cause to arrest, (2) whether appellant was afforded an opportunity to be heard on the issue of probable cause, and (3)
Zimmerman v. Corleypublic domain
GRIFFIN, Justice, for the Court: This case, concerning the term “cash” within a will, comes to the Court from the Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Harrison County, which awarded four certificates of deposit under a cash bequest. We affirm. On February 9,1981, Thomas A. Mitchell executed a will, which read in part: Item III
Cole v. Chevron USA, Inc.public domain
(2007) ROBERT L. COLE; LILLIE R. ASH; JESSIE M. HAYNES; JOYCE M. LOFTIN; DORETHA S. HICKS; RENNETE McKNIGHT; RANDY BEESLEY; CHARLES WILLIAMS; SHELIA A. BOOTH; BERTIE W. DAVIS; MARGARETT COLEMAN; MARY REVETTE; JANET REVETTE; BRENDA JOHNSON; PATTY McDONALD; DEBORAH A. MADISON; LELA M. HALL; SHARRON BUCHANAN; EARNESTINE FORTENBERRY; DENISE MIKELL; JAMES ARRINGTON; DERITT P. LOPER; WILLIE WOULLARD; LATOYNA Y. RICHARDSON; GLORIA L. BUXTON; MILEHARMAR DODSON;
East Parker Properties, Inc. v. Pelican Realty Co.public domain
335 So.2d 466 (1976) EAST PARKER PROPERTIES, INC. v. PELICAN REALTY CO. et al. No. 10761. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit. May 24, 1976. Rehearing Denied July 21, 1976. Writ Refused October 27, 1976. *468 E. Drew McKinnis and Martin C. Schroeder, Jr., Baton Rouge, for appellants.
Fetty v. Pension Ben. Guar. Corp.public domain
104 F.3d 367 97 CJ C.A.R. 42 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or
Craig Lyons v. Conagra Foods Packaged Foods Lpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 17-3134 ___________________________ Craig Lyons, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated; Justin Anderson, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated; Tommy Applegate, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated; Brandon Etzkorn, I
Aaron v. Brown Group, Inc.public domain
80 F.3d 1220 64 USLW 2692, 131 Lab.Cas. P 11,567,11 IER Cases 910 Sherry AARON; Deborah D. Barber; Dolores V. Beauchamp;Patricia Beauchamp; Brenda Becker; Eva M. Becker; Alice M.Cox; Billi Jo Crews; Betty Doyle; Patty Dull; Jessie F.Dunlap; Lois I. Elseman; Augusta Emmons; Cathy M.Ethington; Carol J. Foster; Joseph E. Foster; Virginia M.Foster; Donald Fritchey; Melissa C. Galbraith;
Fetty v. Pension Benefitpublic domain
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 12/23/96 TENTH CIRCUIT CHARLES R. FETTY; ALFRED D. AGUERO; ARTHUR A. AGUERO; DAVID L. ALEXANDER; HILARIO ALFONSO, JR.; DAVID R. ALLEE; ROBERT JOHN APODACA; EDWARD J. ARAGON; VIRGIL R. ARAGON; LAWRENCE A. ARCHULETTA; ROBERT J. ARCHULETA; KENNETH R. ARKO; CRISTOBAL ARMIJO; JOHN EDWARD ARMIJO; RICHARD L. ARMSTRONG; EMANUEL AVILLA; SIMON A AYALA; JOE LOUIS BACA; RICHARD J. BACA; DALE W. BANDY; BASILIO A BARELA; DAMIAN
Angle v. Blackpublic domain
Morris, J. The appellant failed to file a brief within the time provided in Rule 28 and appellee moved to dismiss under Rule 28. Appellant answered the motion asserting that he was not aware of the time requirement of the rules for the filing of briefs and tendered his brief. Since we are not inadvertent to the possibility that all members of the bar may not have familiarized themselves with the rules, despite their opportunity to
Turner v. Lassiterpublic domain
Larry Lassiter filed a complaint in the nature of an action in ejectment against Vance Turner seeking to recover possession of an undivided one-half interest in and to all oil, gas, and minerals in, on, or under a twenty-acre tract in Escambia County, Alabama. The complaint was amended to add a second claim for declaratory relief in regard to the instruments in dispute in this cause. Turner denied the allegations of the complaint as amended, filed affirmative defenses (estoppel, waive
Woodruff v. Wrightpublic domain
51 S.W.3d 727 (2001) Ronny Dewey WOODRUFF, et al., Appellants, v. James O. WRIGHT, III, M.D., et al., Appellees. No. 06-00-00119-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Texarkana. Submitted June 12, 2001. June 22, 2001. *730 James F. Twombly, Rockne W. Onstad, The Onstad Law Firm, Austin, for appellants. Hunter T.
914 F.2d 525 54 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40,260, 17 Fed.R.Serv.3d 737 Sandra L. BLUE, Plaintiff-Appellant,andMattiebelle C. Harris, Samuel P. Sheppard, Edward R.Humphrey, Robert L. Evans, Beulah Mae Harris, LeonettaBibby, Annette Todd, William Kincy, James T. Love, ManuelEarly, Bernard Fields, Betty Reid, Lynn Siler, Lelia Walker,Thelma Curry, John Smith, James N. Fleming, GeraldineBallew, Robert B
Gillespie v. Southern Farm Bur. Cas. Ins. Co.public domain
The separate suits of Mrs. Doris Gillespie and Joe B. Whitten against Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company were consolidated by order of the Circuit Court of Lee County, Mississippi. Thereafter that court sustained a demurrer and plea in bar to each declaration and plaintiffs, Doris Gillespie and Joe B. Whitten, appeal. Jessie Mae Whitten, the appellants' 80-year-old mother, was a passenger in an automobile owned and driven by her adult
Baxter v. Jonespublic domain
188 S.E.2d 622 (1972) 14 N.C. App. 296 Jessie BAXTER et al. v. Effie Leah Murrell JONES et al. No. 7227SC38. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. May 24, 1972. Certiorari Denied July 31, 1972. *627 Basil L. Whitener and Anne M. Lamm, Gastonia, for plaintiff appellants. Whitesides &am;
Blue v. United States Department of the Armypublic domain
WILKINSON, Circuit Judge: In this case we must determine whether the district court erred in imposing sanctions on two Title VII plaintiffs, their counsel, and counsel’s law firm. The court invoked a number of different yet overlapping legal theories to justify its imposition of sanctions, including Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 11 and 16, the “bad faith” exception to the American Rule, and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. In imposing t