Cases

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-1353 ROBERT BEVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS and JASON ARRES, Defendants-Appellees, and THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-1353 ROBERT BEVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS and JASON ARRES, Defendants-Appellees, and THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-1353 ROBERT BEVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS and JASON ARRES, Defendants-Appellees, and THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-1353 ROBERT BEVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CITY OF NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS and JASON ARRES, Defendants-Appellees, and THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 24-3060, 24-3061, 24-3062 & 24-3063 CALEB BARNETT, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. KWAME RAOUL, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, et al., Defendants-Appellants. _________________

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 24-3060, 24-3061, 24-3062 & 24-3063 CALEB BARNETT, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. KWAME RAOUL, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, et al., Defendants-Appellants. _________________

By Judge Thomas D. Horne This matter came before the Court on November 5, 2014, for trial on Plaintiff Alexander John Peter’s Motion for Detinue. This case was taken under advisement to determine whether detinue should be ordered. For reasons set for in this opinion, the Motion for Detinue is granted. This action arises out of a broken engagement. Plaintiff and Defendant, Kelly Rhea Langley, were engaged o

MEMORANDUM ** Virgil Langley appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of his former attorney, Raymond Brown, Carioca Company (Carioca), and Carioca’s attorney, Albert Van Wagner, in Langley’s diversity action. Langley also appeals the district court’s award of attorneys’ fees to Carioca and Van Wagner. We have juris*598diction u

990 S.W.2d 575 (1999) 66 Ark.App. 311 Brady Andrew LANGLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. No. CA CR 98-914. Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division I. May 19, 1999. *576 Mark F. Hampton and Patrick J. Benca, Law Student No. 359, Little Rock, AR, for Appellant. J. Winston Bryant, Attorney

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 337 SYLLABUS 1. The initiation of a criminal investigation alone is not sufficient to constitute the basis for a malicious prosecution action. 2. The district court did not err in denying plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint where there was no evidence presented by plainti

Robert H. Dudley, Justice. Appellant was convicted on three counts of rape for having sexual intercourse with three girls, whose ages were nine, eight, and six. The judgment of conviction fixes appellant’s punishment at three consecutive life sentences. We affirm. Appellant’s first point of appeal is that the trial court erred on all three counts by refusing to give one of

NAKAMOTO, J. **484Defendant was convicted on 16 counts of aggravated murder in 1989. This court affirmed 15 of those convictions in State v. Langley , 314 Or. 247,

OPINION The State brings this appeal following the trial court's suppression of a juvenile's written statement. By one point of error, the State contends that sixteen-year-old Royal Langley's confession was properly obtained pursuant to a legal detention. We affirm the trial court's order. On August 20, 1991, after receiving a tip about a burglar with a description similar to Langley, Officer Bennetsen along with two other Victoria police officers, arrived at L

187 Mich. App. 147 (1991) 466 N.W.2d 724 PEOPLE v. LANGLEY Docket No. 116647. Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided January 22, 1991, at 9:50 A.M. Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Gay Secor Hardy, Solicitor General, and Norman W. Donker, Prosecuting Attorney, for the people. State Appellate Defender (by Richard B

376 S.E.2d 519 (1989) T.B. LANGLEY, et al. v. Virginia MEREDITH, et al. Record No. 860450. Supreme Court of Virginia. January 13, 1989. Carl A. Eason (Wolcott, Rivers, Wheary, Basnight & Kelly, P.C., Virginia Beach, on briefs), for appellants. H. Thomas Padrick, Jr., Edward T. Caton (Anderson & Padrick, Caton & Koch, P.C., Virginia Beach, on brief

284 S.C. 162 (1984) 325 S.E.2d 550 Robin LANGLEY, Appellant, v. James Lee BOYTER and Concrete Specialties of America, Respondents. 0325 Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard January 26, 1984. Decided November 29, 1984. *163 Kenneth M. Suggs, of Suggs & Kelly, Columbia

61 So.3d 747 (2011) STATE of Louisiana v. Ricky Joseph LANGLEY. No. 10-969. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. April 6, 2011. Rehearing Denied May 11, 2011. *751 John Foster DeRosier, Assistant District Attorney, Lake Charles, LA, for State of Louisiana. Anna Van Cleave, Richard Bourke, Louisiana

DECISION This case is before the Court for decision in the continued proceedings on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Withheld Under Claim of Privilege. At issue are two witness statements, in the form of written memoranda; six purported transcriptions of recorded witness interviews; and the content of three micro-cassette audio recordings of the witness interviews — all of which have been revi

407 F.Supp.2d 897 (2005) Brenda LANGLEY, Plaintiff, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORP., Defendant. No. 3:04 CV 7676. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division. December 28, 2005. *898 *899 *900 Michael D. Portnoy, Rossford, OH, for Plaintiff. H

09/11/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs September 4, 2019 RICHARD KELLY SMITH v. GRADY PERRY, WARDEN Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hardeman County No. 18-CV-45 Joe H. Walker, III, Judge _________________________________