⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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 “Lisa A. Greenawalt”

Tennessee Supreme Court · 2020-08-05 · Published · cited 0×
08/05/2020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE July 30, 2020 Session EARLE J. FISHER, ET AL. v. TRE HARGETT, ET AL. Appeal by Permission from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 20-043
Tennessee Supreme Court · 2020-08-05 · Published · cited 0×
08/05/2020 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE July 30, 2020 Session EARLE J. FISHER, ET AL. v. TRE HARGETT, ET AL. Appeal by Permission from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 20-043
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2015-11-16 · Published · cited 0×
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be Nov 16 2015, 8:33 am regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Antony Garza Gregory F. Zoeller Warsaw, Indiana
Court of Appeals of Iowa · 2023-04-26 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 22-0273 Filed April 26, 2023 MARK J. DEN HARTOG, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. IOWA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Celene Gogerty, Judge. A chiropractor appeals from an Iowa Code chapter 17A (2019) proceedin
District Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2018-02-16 · Published · cited 5× · 294 F. Supp. 3d 659
H. Brent Brennenstuhl, United States Magistrate Judge Before the Court are the following related motions: Defendants motion to enforce the scheduling order and for a protective order regarding untimely additional privilege challenges1 (DN 235 SEALED); Plaintiffs' motion to update and amend the Court's December 17, 2013 class certification order2 (DN 239, 240); and Plaintiffs'
Hawaii Supreme Court · 2015-09-23 · Published · cited 4× · 136 Haw. 95; 358 P.3d 664; 2015 Haw. LEXIS 235
***FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER*** Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAP-13-0005781 23-SEP-2015 09:22 AM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TH
District Court, D. New Jersey · 1995-03-01 · Published · cited 25× · 876 F. Supp. 666; 1995 WL 91540
876 F.Supp. 666 (1995) Alexander A. ARTWAY v. The ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, The Superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, and The Chief of Police of Woodbridge Township, New Jersey. Civ. A. No. 94-6287 (NHP). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. February 28, 1995. Order March 1, 1995. *667 Alex
District Court, S.D. New York · 1990-01-24 · Published · cited 7× · 728 F. Supp. 958; 1989 WL 156099
728 F.Supp. 958 (1989) The RECTOR, WARDENS, AND MEMBERS OF THE VESTRY OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S CHURCH, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, and Landmarks Preservation Commission of the City of New York, Defendants. No. 86 Civ. 2848 (JES). United States District Court, S.D. New York. December 13, 1989. As Amended January 24, 1990.
Levin v. Madiganpublic domain
District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2010-03-10 · Published · cited 21× · 697 F. Supp. 2d 958; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22724; 2010 WL 934032
697 F.Supp.2d 958 (2010) Harvey N. LEVIN, Plaintiff, v. Lisa MADIGAN, individually, and as Illinois Attorney General, Office of the Illinois Attorney General, the State of Illinois, Ann Spillane, individually, Alan Rosen, individually, Roger P. Flahaven, individually, and Deborah Hagan, individually, Defendants. No. 07 C 4765. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division.
Ford v. Hubbardpublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002-09-06 · Published · cited 15× · 305 F.3d 875; 2002 WL 31001146
*878OPINION REINHARDT, Circuit Judge. Richard Herman Ford, a California prisoner, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his two habeas corpus petitions as time-barred under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). Both federal habeas petitions were initially timely filed in the district court by Ford proce
Ford v. Hubbardpublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003-05-15 · Published · cited 27× · 330 F.3d 1086
Opinion by Judge REINHARDT. Dissent by Judge SILVERMAN. ORDER The majority opinion filed September 6, 2002, and appearing at 305 F.3d 875 (9th Cir.2002), is hereby amended as follows: 1. slip op. at 13347, line 18 [305 F.3d at 878]: after “See” and before the citation to James v. Pliler, insert “Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063, 1070-71 (9th Cir.2003);”
Kentucky Supreme Court · 1998-03-19 · Published · cited 93× · 968 S.W.2d 76; 1998 Ky. LEXIS 41; 1998 WL 124517
968 S.W.2d 76 (1998) Debra TALBOTT, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, Appellee. No. 96-SC-643-MR. Supreme Court of Kentucky. March 19, 1998. *78 Kimberly A. Brooks, Covington, for Appellant. A.B. Chandler, III, Attorney General, Ian G. Sonego, Criminal Appellate Division, Office of Attorney General, Frankfort, for Ap
Eckardt v. D'Esopopublic domain
California Supreme Court · 1989-11-27 · Published · cited 1× · 49 Cal. 3d 868; 264 Cal. Rptr. 93; 782 P.2d 232; 1989 Cal. LEXIS 2086
*871Opinion KAUFMAN, J. Probate Code section 910 provides that attorneys for executors and administrators of a decedent’s estate shall be allowed fees from the estate for conducting the ordinary probate proceedings and “such further amount as the court may deem just and reasonable for extraordinary services.” (See also, Prob. Code, § 469 [attorney fees
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002-09-06 · Published · cited 9× · 305 F.3d 875; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 10287; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8162; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 18345
305 F.3d 875 Richard Herman FORD, Petitioner-Appellant,v.S. HUBBARD, Warden; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.Richard Herman Ford, Petitioner-Appellant,v.S. Hubbard, Warden; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees.Richard Herman Ford, Petitioner,v.United States District Court for the Central District of California, Respondent,S. Hubbard, Warden, Real Party in I
Estate of Tryninpublic domain
California Supreme Court · 1989-11-27 · Published · cited 45× · 782 P.2d 232; 49 Cal. 3d 868; 264 Cal. Rptr. 93
49 Cal.3d 868 (1989) 782 P.2d 232 264 Cal. Rptr. 93 Estate of ESTHER ROYCE TRYNIN, Deceased. RICHARD W. ECKARDT et al., Petitioners and Appellants, v. MARCIA D'ESOPO et al., as Co-administrators, etc., Objectors and Respondents. Docket No. S008320. Supreme Court of California. November 27, 1989.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003-05-15 · Published · cited 29× · 330 F.3d 1086; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 28118; 2003 Daily Journal DAR 5201; 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4056
330 F.3d 1086 Richard Herman FORD, Petitioner-Appellant,v.S. HUBBARD, Warden; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.Richard Herman Ford, Petitioner-Appellant,v.S. Hubbard, Warden; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees.Richard Herman Ford, Petitioner,v.United States District Court for the Central District of California, Respondent,S. Hubbard, Warden, Real Party in
California Court of Appeal · 1991-07-30 · Published · cited 51× · 232 Cal. App. 3d 1239; 284 Cal. Rptr. 18; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6027; 91 Daily Journal DAR 9342; 1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 871
232 Cal.App.3d 1239 (1991) 284 Cal. Rptr. 18 Adoption of MATTHEW B., a Minor. NANCY B., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CHARLOTTE M., Defendant and Respondent. TIMOTHY M., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. NANCY B., Defendant and Appellant. Docket Nos. A044280, A045711. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Three. July 30, 1991.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995-12-08 · Published · cited 957× · 71 F.3d 1086
71 F.3d 1086 64 USLW 2396, 33 Fed.R.Serv.3d 687 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATIONv.TELECONCEPTS, INCORPORATED, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant,v.BELL OF PENNSYLVANIA, Third-Party Defendant-Appellee,Teleconcepts, Incorporated, Appellant. No. 94-5426. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued March 1, 1
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · 2015-12-07 · Published · cited 0×
FILED IN st 1 COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TX 12/07/2015 NO. CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, CLERK IN THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS FOR TH
State v. Biblepublic domain
Arizona Supreme Court · 1993-08-12 · Published · cited 662× · 858 P.2d 1152; 175 Ariz. 549; 145 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 3; 1993 Ariz. LEXIS 73
175 Ariz. 549 (1993) 858 P.2d 1152 STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Richard Lynn BIBLE, Appellant. No. CR-90-0167-AP. Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc. August 12, 1993. *560 Grant Woods, Atty. Gen. by Paul J. McMurdie, Barbara A. Jarrett, Phoenix, for appellee. Law Offices of Wendy F. White by Wendy