Cases

February 22, 2022 Supreme Court No. 2019-489-Appeal. (PC 13-4013) Katherine Baker and Morgan : McCarthy, Individually and p.p.a. Autumn McCarthy v. : Women & Infants Hospital of Rhode : Island.

*71 Adkins, J. Statutory access to commercial information contained in public records requires courts to strike a balance between government transparency and the protection of private commercial interests. Petitioner Jayson Amster seeks access to a lease betwe

Garry, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Hall Jr., J.), rendered December 7, 2012, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal sexual act in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree. Defendant was indicted on various charges arising out of several incidents between January and October 2004 in which she allegedly sexually abused two young victims.

Garry, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Hall Jr., J.), rendered December 7, 2012, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of criminal sexual act in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree. Defendant was indicted on various charges arising out of several incidents between January and October 2004 in which she allegedly sexually abused two young victims.

122 N.H. 171 (1982) CAROLYN A. BAKER v. LOUIS B. McCARTHY, JR. & a. No. 81-122. Supreme Court of New Hampshire. March 5, 1982. *172 Flynn, McGuirk & Blanchard, of Portsmouth (Raymond P. Blanchard on the brief and orally), for the plaintiff. Tybursky & Watson, of Portsmouth, and McLane, G

McCarthy, J. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County (Ames, J.), entered July 13, 2009, which granted petitioners’ applications, in three proceedings pursuant to Family Ct Act article 6, for visitation with the subject children. Keith R. Blanchard (hereinafter the father) and Jacqueline S. *1428Youngs (hereinafter the mother) are

McCarthy, J. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Demarest, J.), entered April 27, 2009 in St. Lawrence County, which, among other things, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff slipped and fell on ice in the driveway outside his apartment, injuring his arm. He commenced this action against defendants, his landlords, alleging that they negligently maintained the property. Defendants m

FORST, J. Appellant Linda McCarthy filed a personal injury complaint against Appellee Broward College when she slipped and fell on an unidentified liquid in an elevator on the College’s Coconut Creek campus on August 25, 2011. Broward College moved for summary judgment, arguing the Plaintiff could not prove actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition, as

Filed 10/2/23 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

383 F.Supp.2d 858 (2005) PROVIDENT BANK OF MARYLAND T/A Provident Bank Plaintiff v. David J. McCARTHY Defendant. David J. McCarthy Counter-Plaintiff v. Provident Bank of Maryland T/A Provident Bank Counter-Defendant No. CIV WDQ-05-00630. United States District Court, D. Maryland, Northern Division. August 23, 2005. *859

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EDWARD ALEXANDER LAPOTSKY, Plaintiff, v. No. 20-cv-93-MAU CHRISTINE WORMUTH, Secretary of the Army, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff Edward Alexander Lapotsky’s (“Plaintiff” or “Lapotsky”) Motion for Reconsideration of the Court

[Cite as McCarthy v. Lee, 2022-Ohio-1033.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Kathleen McCarthy et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 21AP-105 v. : (C.P.C. No. 20CV-554) Peter K. Lee, M.D. et al., : (ACCELERATED C

129 Argued and submitted January 5; decision of Court of Appeals reversed, order of circuit court affirmed December 30, 2021 STATE OF OREGON, Respondent on Review, v. CHARLES STEVEN McCARTHY, Petitioner on Review. (CC 16CR75546) (CA A165026) (SC S067608) 501 P3d 478 Law enforcement off

287 F.Supp.2d 207 (2003) Sherman Scott BAKER, Plaintiff, v. Drill Instructor KRIEGER, et al., Defendants. No. 01-CV-6017L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. September 4, 2003. *208 Sherman Scott Baker, Plattsburg, NY, Pro se. Kelly Ann McCarthy, Office of the New York State Attorney General, Rochester, NY, for D

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) DORIAN VAN HORN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 18-38 (RBW) ) CARLOS DEL

829 N.E.2d 1068 (2005) ST. MARY'S MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Appellant, v. Vincent McCARTHY, Appellee. No. 82A01-0411-CV-462. Court of Appeals of Indiana. June 29, 2005. Rehearing Denied September 15, 2005. *1070 R. Thomas Bodkin, Bamberger Foreman Oswald and Hahn, LLP, Evansville, N. Kent Smith, Hall Render Killian H

169 S.W.3d 915 (2005) Charles BAKER, Appellant, v. SECOND INJURY FUND, Respondent. No. WD 64338. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. September 6, 2005. *916 Nancy Lee Jackson, Thomas C. Locke, Co-Counsel, Independence, MO, for appellant. Carolyn Biersmith McCarthy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, MO, for respondent

Dooley, J., concurring. I concur in Part I of the majority opinion, the holding of Part II, and the mandate. I do not, however, concur in the reasoning of Part II. I recognize that to most observers the significance of this decision lies in its result and remedy. In the cases that come before us in the future, however, the significance of this case will he in its rationale — that is, how we interpret and apply Chapter I, Artic

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Frank J. Bailey, United States Bankruptcy Judge Before the Court for a determination of damages only is the “Debtors’ Motion for Contempt Sanctions (Discharge Violation): Massachusetts Department of Revenue” (the “Contempt Motion”) filed by Steven and Debra McCarthy, the debtors in this Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue (the “MDOR”) has previously been

People v Baker (2023 NY Slip Op 04858) People v Baker 2023 NY Slip Op 04858 Decided on September 29, 2023 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.