Cases

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED SEPTEMBER 19, 2025 NO. 03-25-00142-CV Andrew Toscano, Appellant v. Kimberly D. Brown and Douglas Welch, Appellees APPEAL FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES TRIANA, KELLY, AND THEOFANIS AFFI

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-25-00142-CV Andrew Toscano, Appellant v. Kimberly D. Brown and Douglas Welch, Appellees FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. C2016-1830D, THE HONORABLE DIB WALDRIP, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-06-473 CV

LESLIE H. SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: Several female alien detainees filed lawsuits alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Federal Tort Claims Act, among others. The district court ruled in the defendants’ favor on various grounds. We AFFIRM in part, and REVERSE and REMAND in part. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL ' BACKGROUND The plaintif

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 13-2214 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EBON P.D. BROWN, a/k/a E-MURDER Ebon P.D. Brown, Appellant _____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania District Court

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, United States District Judge Defendants’ motion pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) for an order dismissing the first amended complaint came on for hearing on November 12, 2014. Plaintiff appeared by her counsel Adam Gutride, and defendants appeared by then- counsel Amy Lally. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully

Brown, J. (dissenting) ¶ 109 — Trial judges in third party custody cases, like this one concerning A.L.D., resolve agonizing competing facts after trial and apply the relevant law to the facts found. Trial judges exclusively decide close, difficult questions of evidence weight and witness credibility because they see the evidence presented and see the witnesses testify. Trial judges should not be lectured on moral

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2018 Term FILED _______________ May 30, 2018 released at 3:00 p.m. No. 17-0096 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 282 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CV-22-679 CHRISTINA MARZIALE, Opinion Delivered May 1, 2024 INDIVIDUALLY AND AS MOTHER OF BABY BOY MARZIALE; AND DANA APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON MCLAIN, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ESTATE OF ELAINE MARZIALE [NO. 35CV-18-660] APPELLANTS

PYLE, Judge. Statement of the Case [1] Following a jury trial; Guffey was convicted of: (1)' Class A felony conspiracy to. commit child molesting; 1 (2) Class A felony aiding, inducing, or causing attempted child molesting; 2 (3) Class

OPINION AND ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER, District Judge. Plaintiff Kimberly Brown brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §. 1983 and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act, Ark.Code Ann. § 16-123-101 et seq. (“ACRA”). She filed suit against defendants Sheriff Charles “Doc” Holladay, Randy Morgan, and Shawn Smith in their individual and official capacities. Ms. Brown alleges that she was discrimin

PER CURIAM. *502Affirmed. See People's Trust Ins. Co. v. Acosta, 259 So. 3d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

PER CURIAM. *502Affirmed. See People's Trust Ins. Co. v. Acosta, 259 So. 3d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 30, 2022. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-20-00447-CV RONALD D. SMITH AND KIMBERLY SMITH, Appellants V. KINGDOM INVESTMENTS, LIMITED; CARL/WHITE TRUST; ANITA COLLINS; PAUL O’FARRELL; GLADYS A. STONE; EDNA A. AVITTS; PRISCILLA WELLS; JOHNNY M. GLOSSON; ELLEN AVITTS MANAGEMENT TRUST; CONNIE B. BROWN

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WILLIAM E. SMITH, Chief Judge. Before the Court is a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10) filed by Defendant Brown University (“Brown”). Plaintiff John Doe (“John” or “Doe”) filed an Opposition (ECF No. 15) and Brown filed a Reply (ECF No. 17). The parties also filed subsequent letters to the Court concerning supplemental authority (ECF Nos. 18-21). After careful consideration, the Court hereby

957 N.E.2d 666 (2011) Amanda D. BROWN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. No. 62A01-1105-CR-224. Court of Appeals of Indiana. November 22, 2011. *667 Kimberly A. Jackson, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant. Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Richard C. Webster, Deputy Attorney

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Steuben County (Joseph W. Latham, A.J.), entered August 21, 2013 in a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The judgment, among other things, denied petitioners’ application for an award of costs and attorney’s fees. *1500It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Steuben County (Joseph W. Latham, A.J.), entered August 21, 2013 in a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The judgment, among other things, denied petitioners’ application for an award of costs and attorney’s fees. *1500It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Robert L. Hinkle, United States District Judge The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act ("USERRA") requires an employer to take back an employee after an absence necessary for service in the United States military, subject to specified conditions. The obligation extends to an employer's "successor in interest." This case presents an issue about the meaning of that term. I The pl

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 19 2019, 9:48 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals esto