Cases

07/15/2025 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs June 3, 2025 MARSHALL TURLEY v. JOHN MENDEZ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-0338-24 Yolanda Kight Brown, Judge _________

SAVOIE, Judge. Lin this insurance coverage dispute, at issue is whether a “garage policy” issued to a car dealership provides uninsured motorist coverage and/or medical payments coverage to the Plaintiff for damages she sustained in an auto accident while she was driving a vehicle she had borrowed from the dealership. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court’s summary judgment finding that neither type of coverag

ORDER Richard Mark Gergel, United States District Court Judge This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R. & R.”) of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that the Court grant the Petitioner’s writ of habeas corpus on the basis of Ground Two of the petition. (Dkt. No. 98.) After a careful review of the voluminous record in this matter, the decisions of the state courts, the brief

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 06/02/2026 08:11 AM CDT - 309 - Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets 34 Nebraska Appellate Reports BENNETT v. BENNETT Cite as 34 Neb. App. 309 Daniel C. Bennett, appellee and cross-appel

MEMORANDUM OPINION SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN, District Judge. This case is before the court on the Motion for Partial Dismissal filed by ap-pellee Jefferson County, Alabama, (doc. 4),1 and Motion to Consolidate, (doc. 14), *616and Motion to Strike, (doc. 15), filed by appellants — Andrew Bennett; Roderick V.

OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the Court on Kendra Marshall’s (“Plaintiff’) Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence [19] (“Motion”). I. BACKGROUND From October 20, 1992, to October 19, 2011, Plaintiff was employed by DentFirst, P.C. (“Defendant” or “DentFirst”) in

MOORE, Chief Justice (dissenting). For the reasons stated below I dissent from this Court’s decision to affirm without opinion the judgment of the Montgomery Circuit Court granting the motion of the Secretary of State to dismiss this action. Hugh Mclnnish and Virgil H. Goode, Jr. (hereinafter “the plaintiffs”), appeal from an order of the Montgomery Circuit Court dismissing their complain

MEMORANDUM OPINION RICHARD D. BENNETT, District Judge. Plaintiff William Aubry Marshall, Jr. filed this action, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, against Defendant James B. Nutter & Company, for alleged unlawful activities under the Maryland Finder’s Fee Act and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act. Currently pending before this Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, and

ELI RICHARDSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *793The instant case requires the Court to wrestle with, among other things, the fallout from the use of a variant of a word that is widely-although, remarkably, not universally-reviled, perhaps more than any other word in the English language. It is the "n-word"- a word that, for reasons so obvious

OPINION Chief Justice GAPPY. The issue before the Court is whether Appellant is entitled to reinstatement of his Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”)1 appeal rights nunc pro tunc in a second PCRA petition, filed more than one year after the date his judgment of sentence became final, when his original PCRA appeal was dismissed because of PCRA counsel’s failu

612 F.Supp.2d 185 (2009) Jesse LEWIS, Petitioner, v. Luis MARSHALL, Superintendent, Sing Sing Correctional Facility, Respondent. No. 9:08-CV-00339 (JKS). United States District Court, N.D. New York. March 6, 2009. *188 Jesse Lewis, Ossining, NY, pro se. Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, Thomas B.

*1265 CRICHTON, J. hWe granted the writ application in this case to determine whether La.C.Cr.P. art. 887(A) and La.C.Cr.P. art. 895.1(B) permit the district attorney and sheriff to impose costs of prosecution and costs of investigation on convicted criminal defendants where those costs are not extra

OPINION VAIDIK, Judge. Case Summary J. Michael Kummerer appeals the trial court’s failure to award him prejudgment interest and its failure to grant his motion to correct errors. He contends that the decision to deny him prejudgment interest was contrary to law because contract damages could be determined by simple mathematical c

548 F.3d 155 (2008) ESTATE OF Daniel BENNETT, II, Arlene Bedard, Isabel Bedard, and Laurie Hart, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. Christopher WAINWRIGHT, Matthew Baker, Timothy Turner, James Miclon, James Davis, Lloyd Herrick, and County of Oxford, Maine, Defendants, Appellees. No. 07-2169. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard April 7, 2008. Decided N

MEMORANDUM-DECISION, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER AND PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATIONS STEPHEN D. GERLING, Chief Judge. Before the Court are two motions related to the August 29, 1996 Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) filed by Richard C. Breeden, Trustee (“Trustee”) in The Bennett Funding Group, Inc. case. The first is a motion filed on Sept. 28, 2005 by th

782 F.Supp.2d 466 (2011) James L. BENNETT, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, LEBANON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, Respondent. Civil Action No. 2009-cv-00622 (WOB). United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. March 15, 2011. *471 James L. Bennett, Lebanon, OH, pro se. Diane Duemmel Mallory, Ohio Attorney General, Elizabeth A

60 S.W.3d 513 (2001) Tyrone P. MARSHALL, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, Appellee. No. 1999-SC-0936-MR. Supreme Court of Kentucky. November 21, 2001. *516 Emily Holt, Euva D. Hess, Department of Public Advocacy, Frankfort, Counsel for Appellant. A.B. Chandler, III, Attorney General, Kent T. Young, Assistant Attorne

ON REHEARING EN BANC PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1614 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. ALEX M. AZAR, II, in his official capacity as the Secretary of Health and Human Services; DIANE FOLEY, M.D.,

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION ONE STERLING BENNETT, ) No. ED108713 ) Appellant, ) Appeal from the Labor and ) Industrial Relations Commission vs. )

OPINION RUCKER, Judge. This is a summary judgment action involving the ability of a claimant to gain access to the Patient’s Compensation Fund (Fund) established by the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act. On motion by the Insurance Commissioner of the State of Indiana (Commissioner), the trial court denied such access to claimant Michael J. Wisniewski. Wisniewski now appeals contending the trial court err