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 “Luz Kyles”
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 28, 2020 No. 04-20-00234-CV Kyle Bratton, Appellant v. HOLT TEXAS, LTD D/B/A Holt CAT and D/B/A Sitech-Tejas,
in Re John Kylepublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00022-CR IN RE John KYLE Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Beth Watkins,
Neville v. Vingellipublic domain
170 Ariz. 570 (1991) 826 P.2d 1196 William NEVILLE and Luz Neville, husband and wife, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Michael J. VINGELLI and Jane Doe Vingelli, husband and wife, Defendants/Appellees. No. 2 CA-CV 91-0023. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2, Department B. September 24, 1991. Review Denied April 7, 1992.[*]
in Re John Kylepublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas January 29, 2020 No. 04-20-00022-CR IN RE John KYLE Original Mandamus Proceeding 1 ORDER On January 14, 2020, relator filed a petition for writ of man
Kyle Hinojosa v. Statepublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas JUDGMENT No. 04-16-00742-CR Kyle HINOJOSA, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 144th Judicial Distr
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00234-CV Kyle BRATTON, Appellant v. HOLT TEXAS, LTD d/b/a Holt CAT and d/b/a Sitech-Tejas, Appellee
COURT OF APPEALS SANDEE BRYAN MARION FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT MICHAEL A. CRUZ, CHIEF JUSTICE CADENA-REEVES JUSTICE CENTER CLERK OF COURT REBECA C. MARTINEZ 300 DOLOROSA, SUITE 3200 PATRICIA O. ALVAREZ SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78205-3037 LUZ ELENA D. CHAPA WWW.TXCOURTS.GOV/4THCOA.ASPX TELEPHONE IRENE RIOS
Stearns v. Islamic Republic of Iranpublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SHIRLEY STEARNS, et al., Plaintiffs, Vv. Case No. 1:17-cv-131-RCL THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN Defendant. FINDING OF LIABILITY For the reasons stated in the Court’s Memorandum Opinion, the Court hereby GRANTS the plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment. Specifically, the Court holds as follows: 1. As to Count I, defendant the Islamic Republic of Iran (“Iran”) is LIABLE to the following plaintiffs: (1) Steven Vernier, Jr.; (2
Rocker v. KPMG LLPpublic domain
OPINION By the Court, Rose, C. J.: In this case, we adopt the relaxed pleading requirements that the federal courts utilize under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) for cases when facts necessary for the plaintiff to plead a cause of action for fraud with particularity under NRCP 9(b) are peculiarly within the defendant’s knowledge or possession. When a complaint includes a claim of fraud,
Kyle Hinojosa v. Statepublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-16-00742-CR Kyle HINOJOSA, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
United States v. Vasquez-Hernandezpublic domain
Judge Kathleen Cardone This consolidated appeal acutely illustrates the difficult and controversial nature of our country's immigration laws and their enforcement. Appellants are five asylum seekers who were apprehended shortly after entering into the United States with their minor children. Ultimately, they were separated from the children, prosecuted by the government for the misdemeanor offense of improper entry under
Pueblo v. Velázquez Colónpublic domain
Opinión disidente emitida por el Juez Presidente Señor Hernández Denton. Si bien coincidimos con la opinión del Tribunal en cuanto al estándar aplicable para determinar si procede una moción de nuevo juicio en circunstancias como las del caso de autos, nos vemos en la necesidad de disentir con su resultado, por entender que el caso debió ser devuelto al foro de instancia para que sea éste quien evalúe la moción
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions by email at: JUD.Reporter@vtcourts.gov or by mail at: Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801, of any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press. 2024 VT 26
State v. Spencer Kyle Shaferpublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00162-CR The STATE of Texas, Appellant v. Spencer Kyle
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER MARCIA A. CRONE, District Judge Pending before the court is Defendant Associates First Capital Corporation’s (“Associates”) Motion for Summary Judgment (#36). Associates seeks summary judgment as to all claims asserted by Plaintiff The Note Investment Group, Inc. (“TNIG”). Having considered the pending motion, the submissions of the parties, the pleadings, and the applicable law, the
Alice Labra v. Carlos Labrapublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00285-CV Alice LABRA, Appellant v. Carlos
State of Iowa v. Stephen Deloi Lucorepublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 21-1803 Filed January 25, 2023 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. STEPHEN DELOI LUCORE, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Jason D. Besler, Judge. Stephen LuCore appeals various criminal convictions and sentences following a bench tria
NOTICE: The attorneys on the attached list have the opportunity to comply with outstanding requirements prior to the effective date of the Supreme Court Order and not be administratively suspended. DATE: 07/16/2024 PENNSYLVANIA CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PAGE: 1 TIME: 15:10:52 NON-COMPLIANT LAWYERS USER ID: jilgenfr ACTIVE
Canales-Yanez v. Statepublic domain
Jose O. Canales-Yanez v. State of Maryland, No. 2209, September Term 2018. Opinion by Beachley, J. BRADY VIOLATION—MATERIALITY After a non-jury trial, defendant was convicted of first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and other related offenses. Defendant moved for a new trial on the basis that the State failed to provide the recording and transcript of a police interview of the parents of a State’s witness prior to trial. The witness spoke with police the day after the undisc
ACCEPTED 03-13-00300-CV 3790076 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS