Cases

316 S.W.3d 820 (2010) McAFEE, INC., Appellant, v. AGILYSYS, INC., Appellee. No. 05-08-01168-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. July 21, 2010. Rehearing Overruled August 26, 2010. *823 Mark A. Shank, Vanessa Jean Rush, Gruber Hurst Johansen & Hail LLP, Dallas, TX, for Appellant. Robert M. O'Boyle, S

CHIEF JUSTICE HECHT delivered the opinion of the Court. The trial court temporarily enjoined the District Clerk of Tarrant County from billing' court costs to parties who had filed unconte'sted affidavits of indigency. A divided court of appeals vacated the injunction and dismissed the case because the trial court had not rendered the judgments in the cases

Appellant, Andy McAfee, filed this suit against appellees in the nature of a bill of review and seeking an injunction against the execution of a judgment which appellees had procured against him in the county court of Childress County on the 17th of October, 1939. The original suit was upon a promissory note signed by appellant and Lee McAfee in the principal sum of $257.20, bearing interest at the rate of ten per centum per annum and providing for ten per cent additional as attorneys' fees i

OPINION AND ORDER RUSSELL E. SMITH, Chief Judge. For the reasons stated plaintiff’s motion to remand is granted. Plaintiff, a Montana citizen, the employee of Castle Mountain Livestock Company, alleges that he was injured by breathing ammonium nitrate fertilizer which had spilled from a broken sack. Plaintiff’s employer had ordered the fertilizer from Teslow, Incorporated, (Teslow) of

*931OPINION REID, Judge. This case presents an appeal as of right from a conviction of first degree murder and robbery. Appellant assigns for review the sufficiency of the evidence, admission of prior convictions, admission of photographs and jury conduct. The record does not show reversible error.

These consolidated appeals are from summary judgments for the defendants in two medical malpractice cases. In each case, after the defendant physician or physicians produced evidence that their actions did not cause the patient's condition to worsen, the trial court ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to present substantial evidence that the alleged negligence of the physicians probably caused the injuries that the plaintiffs complained of, and in each case the court entered a summar

BARBIERI, Senior Judge. Clifford A. McAfee (Claimant) petitions this Court to review an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which affirmed the referee’s decision dismissing Claimant’s reinstatement petition. Claimant was employed by the Allegheny General Hospital (Employer) from August 31, 1953 until October 1, 1985. On July 19, 1978, while working as a paint foreman for Employer, Claima

STOKES, Justice. This is an original application for permission to file a petition for mandamus filed in this court by the relator, Andy McAfee, against the respondent, N. T. Shirley, clerk of the county court of Chil-dress County. Accompanying the motion for permission to file the petition for a mandamus is the petition itself. We have concluded that the motion for permission to file the petition for mandamus should be grante

Opinion. Campbell, J., delivered the opinion of the court: The course of examination of the witness Bobertson by the counsel of the defendant below was proper and should have been permitted. The plaintiff was not a competent witness, for he was testifying to prove his own claim against the estate of a deceased person, which originated in the lifetime of such person. Althoug

A. J. WALKER, C. J. The evidence in this case conduced to show, that Rutledge, the appellant’s intestate, joined in the execution of three promissory notes, to be delivered as collateral security for pre-existing debts, for *712which he was in no wise liable; and that those notes were made payable to the creditors whose debts they were designed to secure. It seems, also, f

77 F.3d 1215 Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,056, 33 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1389 Ivan A. ANIXTER; Blanche Dickenson; Dolly K. Yoshida, onbehalf of themselves and all others similarlysituated, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.HOME-STAKE PRODUCTION COMPANY, an Oklahoma corporation;Home-Stake 1971 Program Operating Corporation; Home-Stake1970 Program Operating Corporation; Home-Stake 1969 ProgramOperating Corporation;

827 F.Supp.2d 377 (2011) BRASS SMITH, LLC, Plaintiff, v. RPI INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendants. Civil No. 1:09-cv-6344 (NLH). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. December 8, 2011. *379 Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, P.A., A Professional Corporation, Bridgewater, NJ, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Denver, CO, for Pla

431 B.R. 914 (2010) In re Jennifer Lynn ROBERTS, Debtor. Tiffany Woods, Plaintiff, v. Jennifer Lynn Roberts, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 08-15099-JKC-13. Adversary No. 09-50267. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division. January 26, 2010. *915 Daniel Townsend McAfee, Katzman & Katzman, Indianapolis

ORDER VICKI MILES-LaGRANGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Liability for Their Trespass Claim and for a Permanent Injunction, filed April 1, 2016. On May 3, 2016, defendants filed their response, and on May 10, 2016, plaintiffs filed their reply. Based upon the parties’ submissions, the Court makes its determination.

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

HARTZ, Circuit Judge. Eureka Water Company contends that a 1975 agreement grants it the exclusive license in 60 Oklahoma counties to sell spring water and other products using the Ozarka trademark. It sued Nestle Waters North America, Inc., the current owner of the Ozarka trademark, to obtain a declaratory judgment of that right and to obtain monetary relief under several theo

ORDER TIM LEONARD, District Judge. Plaintiff, Dr. Jan K. Voda, is the holder of United States Patent No. 6,083,213 (“the '213 patent”), which was issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office on July 4, 2000. Exhibit 1 to Complaint (Doc. No. 1). The '213 patent contains method claims; that is, it relates to plaintiffs inventive technique for using a guiding catheter to perform angioplast

106 F.Supp.2d 869 (2000) The CUSTOMER COMPANY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. E-COMMERCE TODAY, LTD., etc., Defendant. No. 2:00CV00054. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Big Stone Gap Division. June 14, 2000. Kenneth Callaway King, Jr., King & Higgs, P.C., Roanoke, VA, Dirk B. Foster, Townsend & Townsend & Crew, LLP., San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs

719 A.2d 941 (1998) Edith BROWER, Individually and as Guardian Ad Litem for Shayne Townsend, a Minor Child, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. METAL INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant Below, Appellee. No. 70, 1998. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: September 22, 1998. Decided: November 2, 1998. Rehearing Denied December 15, 1998. Ralph K.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge. Plaintiffs Devi Khoday (“Khoday”) and Danise Townsend (“Townsend”) seek to bring this action on behalf of a class against Symantec Corp. (“Symantec”) and Digital River, Inc. (“Digital River”). Plaintiffs accuse Symantec and Digital River of selling an unnecessary product