Cases

RILEY, Judge. STATEMENT. OF THE CASE [1] Appellant-Plaintiff, Pamela Marlow as guardian and next friend of Kenneth Marlow (Marlow), appeals the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Appellee-Defendant, Better Bars, Inc., d/b/a Bubbaz Bar & Grill (the Bar), in Marlow’s negligence action. [2] We reverse and remand. ISSUE

This is an action for damages by a widow for the death of her husband who was killed when a truck, belonging to defendant, struck a buggy in which he was riding with his son. The charges of negligence, which were submitted to the jury, were: Driving at a high and dangerous rate of speed and driving to the left of the center of the highway. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $8,000 and from the judgment entered thereon the defendant has appealed. Plaintiff's account of th

The appellant, Richard Frasca (husband), appeals from the second corrected judgment of divorce nisi, which incorporates the original judgment and the first corrected judgment of divorce nisi, issued in the Probate and Family Court (judgment). On appeal, he maintains that the judge erred in: (1) assigning his ex-wife, Hemalatha Frasca (wife), thirty-five percent of any future inheritances he may receive; (2) failing to consider the wife's interest in a proper

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered August 27, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant Morrissey’s motion for partial summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The “continuous treatment” doctrine applied to the decedent’s visit in December 1997, during which Dr. Morrissey performed the colonoscopy that is central to plaintiffs failure-to-d

*256Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered March 31, 2004, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff executors’ motion for partial summary judgment on their fifth cause of action for partition to the extent of determining that their decedent was a tenant in common of the real property located at 233 East 32nd Street in Manhattan (the E

*336Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), entered on or about October 7, 2002, which granted defendant’s motion to suppress evidence and dismissed the indictment, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion denied, and the indictment, charging defendant with criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, reinstated. On May 3, 2002, Sergeant Christophe

658 N.W.2d 769 (2003) 2003 SD 24 Daniel C. RINDAL and Raymond J. Shape, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. Gail SOHLER and Janet Sohler, Defendants and Appellants. Nos. 22246, 22258. Supreme Court of South Dakota. Considered on Briefs November 30, 2000. Decided March 5, 2003. *770 Frank B. Morri

Resettled judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered November 26, 2004, which, inter alia, awarded the wife $89,141 for her share in the parties’ Connecticut condominium, permitted her to buy out husband’s share of the New York co-op apartment for $324,670, determined that the distributions from the Drake Land Trust were separate property and that the alleged loans he received from his

OPINION CLAY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Kevin Murray appeals a judgment in favor of Defendants United States Department of Treasury (“Treasury Department”) and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board of Governors”) on his Establishment Clause Claim. Plaintiff alleges that the Treasury Department violated the First Amendment’s Establis

OPINION OF THE COURT Saxe, J. The determination of equitable distribution made by the Special Referee and incorporated in the court’s judgment is both inequitable and unsupported by the record in numerous respects; in particular, the conclusion that plaintiff had no right to any portion of the marital residence or its appreciation in value was contrary to fundamental principles of equitable distribution.

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 12a0163p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X - KEVIN MURRAY, -

OPINION DRUKE, Judge. Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant pled guilty to two counts of attempted fraudulent scheme or artifice, a class 3 felony, two counts of attempted theft by misrepresentation, a class 4 felony, one count of theft by control and/or controlling stolen property, a class 3 felony, one count of criminal trespass in the first degree, a class 6 felony, and one count of theft by misrepre

401 Mass. 506 (1988) 517 N.E.2d 472 RICHARD PRYOR vs. HOLIDAY INNS, INC. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. November 4, 1987. January 12, 1988. Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., LIACOS, LYNCH, & O'CONNOR, JJ. Marjorie Heins (Lynn Weissberg with her) for the plaintiff. Carol A. Griffin for the defe

954 F.Supp. 230 (1996) Frank McGUIRE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SANTA FE, et al., Defendants. No. Civil 95-995 BB/WWD. United States District Court, D. New Mexico. December 4, 1996. *231 Phillip A. Martinez, Miguel P. Campos, Albuquerque, NM, for Plaintiff. Janet Clow, Santa Fe, NM, for Defendants. MEMORANDU

9 A.3d 1150 (2010) Teresa M. VINE, Appellant v. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, STATE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT BOARD, Appellee. No. 49 MAP 2009. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued December 1, 2009. Re-Submitted November 22, 2010. Decided December 21, 2010. *1151 James J. West, West Long LLC, Harris

394 S.E.2d 807 (1990) 327 N.C. 419 James Eugene WILSON, Jeannette Wilson by her guardian ad litem, Ronald J. Short, and Christopher Wilson by his guardian ad litem, Ronald J. Short v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company. No. 45PA89. Supreme Court of North Carolina. August 29, 1990.

ARNOLD, Judge. Defendant’s first argument challenges the sufficiency of the complaint to place the defendant on notice as to the basis for the plaintiff’s claim. We find this contention to be wholly without merit. Plaintiff stated in its complaint that Gladys Dorsey was the wife of defendant’s named insured and that defendant was obligated under the terms of the policy to pay the amount of plaintiffs judgment against Mrs. Dors

Per Curiam. I. NATURE OF CASE This is a negligence action brought under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-901 et seq. (Reissue 1991 & Cum. Supp. 1994). Appellee, C. Patricia Skinner, sued appellant, Ogallala Public School District No. 1 (District), for injuries she suffered when she fell through a trapdoor in the floor that had been left open at the school. Both parties

Lynch, J. This appeal arises out of a judgment of divorce nisi *239issued on August 20, 1996.1 Jeffrey P. Kendall, the defendant, appeals from provisions of the divorce judgment and a temporary order issued after Barbara Zeitler Kendall, the plaintiff, filed a complaint against him in the Probate Court for contempt of the divorce judgment.

542 F.Supp. 927 (1982) L. Patrick GRAY, III, Plaintiff, v. Griffin BELL, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 81-836. United States District Court, District of Columbia. July 9, 1982. *928 Alan I. Baron, Ellen Scalettar, Frank Bernstein, Conaway & Goldman, Baltimore, Md., Robert F. Condon, Finley, Kumble, Wagner, Heine, Underberg