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 “Kelly Paige McKenzie”
Southpointe Golf Club, Pet v. Southpointe Propertypublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT SOUTHPOINTE GOLF CLUB, INC., : No. 217 WAL 2021 : Petitioner : : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the v. : Commonwealth Court :
Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church v. City of New Yorkpublic domain
SUMMARY ORDER Defendants-appellants-cross-appellees (“the City”) appeal from the memorandum and order entered October 29, 2004, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Lawrence M. McKenna, J.), granting plaintiffs-appellees-cross-appellants’ (“the Church”) motion for summary judgment in part and denying the City’s motion in part. Fifth Ave. Presbyterian Church v. City of New York, No. 01 Civ
Stanbury v. Statepublic domain
Melton, Justice. Following a jury trial, Thaddius Stanbury appeals his convictions for the murder of Allen Blash, Jr., and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. 1 Stanbury contends that: (1) the *126 trial court committ
Lyman v. Statepublic domain
HINES, Chief Justice. Inee Lyman appeals his convictions and sentences for malice murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, and conspiracy to commit armed robbery, all in connection with the shooting death of Christopher Lynn. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.1 *313Construed to support the
Crofton, Edward v. Amoco Chemical Companypublic domain
Opinion issued May 30, 2003 In The Court of Appeals For
Springs v. Statepublic domain
244 S.W.3d 683 (2006) Thomas Leo SPRINGS, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. No. CR 06-221. Supreme Court of Arkansas. December 7, 2006. *685 W.H. Taylor and Stevan E. Vowell; Tonya L. Patrick, Fayetteville, AR, for appellant. Mike Beebe, Att'y Gen., by: David R. Raupp, Sr. Ass't Att'y Gen., Little Rock, AR, for ap
Young v. McKenziepublic domain
By the Court. Warner J. delivering the opinion. It appears from the record in this case, that the complainant, who is the assignee of the Irwinton Bridge Company, made appli'cation to the Court below, for an injunction to restrain the 'defendants from prosecuting an' action of ejectment, for the recovery of the land on which the eastern abutment of the Irwinton Bridge is located. Afte
Kelly v. Turnerpublic domain
BBICKELL, C. J. — Notwithstanding the able argument of the counsel for Mrs. Kelly, we are constrained to adhere to the conclusion expressed when this cause was before the court at a former term. The pleadings and the evidence do not authorize a reformation of the conveyance under which she holds the premises sought to be charged with debts contracted by her, as it must be presumed, on the faith and credit of her equitable
In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigationpublic domain
ORDER GRANTING CLASS CERTIFICATION JAMES LAWRENCE KING, District Judge. THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (DE # 2256) (the “Motion”). The Court has carefully considered the Motion, response, reply, and the documents attached to them, as well as Plaintiffs’ voluminous evidentiary submission and the oral argument of c
People v Madisonpublic domain
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Syllabus Chief Justice: Justices: Megan K. Cavanagh Brian K. Zahra
490 S.E.2d 823 (1997) 200 W.Va. 735 WEST VIRGINIA DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Plaintiff Below, Appellant v. KINGWOOD COAL COMPANY, Defendant Below, Appellee. No. 23876. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted April 29, 1997. Decided July 16, 1997. *825 Christopher D.
State Of Washington, V. Bernard Bellerouchepublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 84887-9-I Respondent, DIVISION ONE v. PUBLISHED OPINION BERNARD BELLEROUCHE, Appellant. DÍAZ, J. — A jury convicted Bernard Bellerouche of assault in the first degree and unlawful possession of a firea
State Of Washington, V. Bernard Bellerouchepublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 84887-9-I Respondent, DIVISION ONE v. ORDER WITHDRAWING AND SUBSTITUTING OPINION BERNARD BELLEROUCHE, Appellant. The court has determined that it should withdraw the published opinion filed on March
07/01/2002 Case Announcementspublic domain
[Cite as 07/01/2002 Case Announcements, 2002-Ohio-3343.] The Supreme Court of Ohio CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS July 1, 2002 DISCIPLINARY CASES 2001-0412. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Cleary. Patricia A. Cleary is reinstated to the practice of law. MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS 2002-0902. Butcher v. Lewis. Stark App. No. 2001CA00219, 2002-Ohi
Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr
Ashurst v. Ashurstpublic domain
MAYFIELD, J. The bill in this case is filed by an executrix to remove the settlement and administration of the estate of her testator from the probate to the chancery court. The special ground alleged for the removal is to obtain the aid and assistance of the chancery court in the construction of the will, and in the administration of the trusts necessary to a proper settlement of the estate. The respondents, some of whom are co
ACCEPTED 15-25-00013-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 12:26 PM No. 15-25-00013-CV
Fifield v. Mayerpublic domain
The defendant sureties claim they are entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee, Kelly, whose mortgage and liens were paid by the bank's money for which they were sureties, and which they have paid to the bank, while the plaintiff claims that his lien is superior to the defendants' mortgage, which ought not to be treated as a prior incumbrance or to occupy the position of the former mortgage which was discharged. Upon these evidentiary facts, which were reported by a referee, t
ACCEPTED 15-25-00012-cv FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/8/2025 3:13 PM No. 15-25-00012-CV