Cases

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 11, 2018. In the Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00126-CV CINDY MICHELLE JOHNSON, NICOLE MICHELLE LEE, AND VICKIE JOHNSON ROBINSON A/K/A VICKIE MARIE JOHNSON, Appellants v. FALLON CARLIN, Appellee On Appeal from the 61st District Court

Abatement Order filed June 2, 2016 In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________ NO. 14-16-00126-CV ____________ CINDY MICHELLE JOHNSON, NICOLE MICHELLE LEE AND VICKIE JOHNSON ROBINSON AKA VICKIE MARIE JOHNSON, Appellants V. FALLON CARLIN, Appellee

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT FALLON JOHNSON, Appellant, v. JACOREY JOHNSON, Appellee. No. 4D20-504 [March 24, 2021] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Karen M.

MEMORANDUM** Marie Snyder, as guardian ad litem of her son, Dylan Ridenour, appeals from a *654district court order dismissing her complaint for insufficiency of process because co-defendant-appellee the United States was improperly served under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. In the absence of a “persuasive justification for [

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-22-00335-CV IN RE FALLON BROWN Original Proceeding From the 378th District Court Ellis County, Texas Trial Court No. 108128D MEMORANDUM OPINION Fallon Brown has filed a peti

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 19-2775 ______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DONNA FALLON, Appellant ______________ No. 19-2788 ______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DEAN VOLKES, Appellant ______________ No. 19-2792 __

427 N.W.2d 809 (1988) Kevin O'FALLON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Joan POLLARD, City of Burlington, Inc., and Dave Wallace, Defendants and Appellees. Civ. No. 870300. Supreme Court of North Dakota. August 16, 1988. *810 Kent L. Johnson, Minot, for plaintiff and appellant. Richard H. McGee of McGee, Hankla, Backes & Whe

POSNER, Circuit Judge. This- class-action suit, before us for the second time, had been filed in an Illinois state court and accused Pushpin Holdings, ■a debt collector (along with owners and. affiliates of Pushpin-unnecessary to discuss separately — for simplicity we’ll pretend that Pushpin is' the only defendant), of having violated the- Illinois Consumer Ffaud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, and committed related to

614 F.3d 785 (2010) Susan JOHNSON; Robert Johnson; Cozy Kittens Cattery LLC, Appellants, v. Elizabeth ARDEN, dba Complaints-Board.com; Michelle Reitenger; ComplaintsBoard.com, InMotion Hosting Inc.; Melanie Lowry; Kathleen Heineman, Appellees. No. 09-2601. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: February 10, 2010. Filed: August 4, 2010.

POSNER, Circuit Judge. This class-action suit, which had been filed in an Illinois state court, accuses Pushpin Holdings (we can ignore the other defendants — owners and affiliates of Pushpin and entities alleged to have been acting in concert with it) of having violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, 815 ILCS 505/2, by operating as a debt collector in Illinois without an Illinois license, as required by 225 ILCS 425/4, an

436 B.R. 116 (2010) In re Steven B. JOHNSON, Debtor. American General Financial Services, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Steven B. Johnson, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 10-40670-659. Adversary No. 10-4173-659. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division. September 27, 2010. *117 Gerard A. Nieters, O'Fallon, MO, for Plai

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Frederick G. Reed, A.J.), entered December 4, 2014. The order granted the motion of defendant for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs appeal from an order granting defendant’s motion

ORDER & REASONS FALLON, District Judge. Before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Opinions of Dwain L. Eck-berg, M.D. and William E. Shell, M.D. in the case of Ernestine Brock (“Brock”), a plaintiff in Civil Action No. 00-2497. The defendants challenge these experts’ opinions as unreliable under the standards set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which in essence codified the Supreme

MR. JUSTICE WEBER delivered the Opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court of the Sixteenth Judicial District of Fallon County, awarding $500 per month rental from November 17, 1979 until the County’s scraper is returned. We vacate the judgment and remand the cause for further proceedings. The issues

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Armstrong, J. ¶1 William and Karyl Martin sued H.E. Sherry Johnson’s Estate for damages resulting from a leaking underground oil tank at a house the Martins bought from Johnson. The Martins and Johnson’s Estate agreed to settle the lawsuit. Johnson’s homeowners’ insurer, Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company, intervened and now appeals the trial court’s ruling that the settlement was reasonable. We affirm.

RILEY, Chief Judge. Demien Construction Co. (Demien) appeals from the dismissal of its complaint against the O’Fallon Fire Protection District (District). See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Challenging the District’s decision not to hire Demien for a construction project, Demien alleges the District violated Demien’s constitutional rights in the bidding process. With j

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed as to National Union Insurance Company and Federal Insurance Company on the authority of Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-Ohio-5849, 797 N.E.2d 1256. {¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the judgment of the trial court in favor of Consolidated Insurance Company and Indiana Insurance Company is reinstated on the authority of

244 B.R. 589 (2000) In re George E. FALLON, Debtor. In re Joye Hamer, Debtor. Bankruptcy Nos. 99-14973DAS, 99-16601DAS. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Division. February 14, 2000. *590 Christopher Bokas, Upper Darby, PA, for Fallon. Alan Liss, Philadelphia, PA, for Hamer. William J. Leva

By Judge Thomas D. Horne This matter' came before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and Plaintiff’s Motion To Rule on Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s Discovery Requests. The Court ruled from the bench on the issue of attorneys’ fees, as well as on Plaintiff’s Motion To Rule on Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s Disc