Cases

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 22-1073 Filed January 10, 2024 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. DAYTON EARL MICHAEL ELLIOTT, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Tom Reidel, Judge. A defendant appeals his criminal convictions, challenging the sufficiency of the eviden

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE CLEVELAND INTEGRITY ) SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware ) Limited Liability Company, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2024-0371-MTZ ) RANDY BYERS, )

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS David Ballard, Warden, FILED May 17, 2013 Respondent Below, Respondent RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME C

497 S.E.2d 276 (1998) 348 N.C. 29 STATE of North Carolina v. Joseph Earl BATES. No. 145A91-3. Supreme Court of North Carolina. April 3, 1998. *277 Michael F. Easley, Attorney General by Barry S. McNeill, Special Deputy Attorney General, Greensboro, for the State-appellant. Walter K. Burton and David

Rel: September 27, 2024 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-0650), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published in Southern Reporter. Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals

461 S.E.2d 655 (1995) 341 N.C. 569 STATE of North Carolina v. Edward Earl VICK. No. 7A94. Supreme Court of North Carolina. September 8, 1995. *657 Michael F. Easley, Attorney General by Thomas F. Hicks, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State. Jeffrey B. Foster, Greenville, for defendant-appe

473 S.E.2d 269 (1996) 343 N.C. 564 STATE of North Carolina v. Joseph Earl BATES. No. 145A91-2. Supreme Court of North Carolina. July 31, 1996. *273 Michael F. Easley, Attorney General by David F. Hoke, Assistant Attorney General, for the State. W. David Lloyd, Greensboro, for defendant-appellant.

345 S.E.2d 267 (1986) Gregory David FRYE v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record Nos. 850793, 850794. Supreme Court of Virginia. June 13, 1986. *270 J. Chris Alderson, Edward K. Stein (St. Clair, Alderson & Stein, Covington, on brief), for appellant. James William Osborne, Lexington, for appellant, on ineffective assistanc

*451Justice Frye dissenting. I join Justice Webb’s dissenting opinion, but with one caveat. State v. Robinson, 339 N.C. 263, 451 S.E.2d 196 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135, 132 L. Ed. 2d 818 (1995), seems at odds with State v. Bond, 345 N.C. 1, 478 S.E.2d 163 (1996), cert. denied, - U.S. —, 138 L. Ed. 2d 1022 (1997)

MOORE, Circuit Judge. Appellant Malcolm Earl Thomas appeals his conviction for distribution of crack cocaine, arguing that the district court made three erroneous evidentiary rulings. *678 First, Thomas argues that the district court erred by allowing his co-defendant, Darryl Nicholson, to testify a

Affirm in part; Reverse and Render in part; Remand and Opinion Filed August 13, 2013 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas __________________________________ NO. 05-12-00963-CV CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellant V. ANTHONY ARREDONDO, CHARLES S. SWANER, JAM

455 S.E.2d 627 (1995) 340 N.C. 1 STATE of North Carolina v. Edward Earl DAVIS, Roger Dale Hood. No. 135A92. Supreme Court of North Carolina. April 7, 1995. *630 Michael F. Easley, Atty. Gen. by Jeffrey P. Gray, Asst. Atty. Gen., for State. J. Clark Fischer, Winston-Salem, for defendant-appellant Dav

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge MICHAEL wrote the opinion, in which Judge TRAXLER and Judge JONES joined. OPINION MICHAEL, Circuit Judge: The plaintiffs, a former candidate for the North Carolina Supreme Court and two *432political action committees, challenge the constitutionality of three provisions of North Carolina’s Ju

Justice Frye concurring in part and dissenting in part. This Court has decided, in two very recent cases, one involving the same parties as in this case, that the protest requirements of N.C.G.S. § 105-267 are valid. I cannot join the majority in overruling those cases today. Accordingly, I dissent from the portion of the majority opinion dealing with the protest requirements of

Chief Justice Frye dissenting. I respectfully dissent from the majority decision. Assuming, as the majority so painstakingly asserts, that the Attorney General does not have standing to appeal the award of attorneys’ fees in this case; that this Court does not have authority to grant certiorari; and that this Court cannot review the trial court’s decision under Rule 2; I would, nevertheless, review the trial cou

Locher, J., concurring in judgment only. I concur separately to express my concern about a problem highlighted by this case and to invite the legislature to do something about it. Because school district revenues are directly dependent on the valuation and apportionment of the taxable value of the personal property of public utilities, school districts have a very great interest in these determinations by

Opinion by JUDGE WEBB ¶ 1 A jury convicted Kevin Earl Dunham of attempted second degree murder and first degree assault. He raised, and the jury was instructed on, self-defense. On appeal, he contends only that the trial court erred in prohibiting his attorney from cross-examining the victim about having been under the influence of methamphetamine on the night of the shooting that gave rise to the charges.</

Justice Frye concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in the holding of part III of the majority opinion with respect to the siblings’ claim. I concur in the result reached by the majority in denying the wrongful life claim on behalf of the child. I dissent from that portion of the opinion which denies the validity of a medical malpractice claim in

OPINION FRYE, District Judge. The matter before the court is the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (# 11). BACKGROUND The plaintiff, Rhonda Ravin, brings this action against the defendant, TEK Chemical, Inc. (TEK), alleging that she was discriminated against on the basis of her race in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and O.R.S. 659.029 and 659.0

*38 OPINION BY JUDGE SIMPSON This workers’ compensation appeal involves cancer contracted by a Philadelphia firefighter. In particular, Earl Hutz (Claimant) petitions for review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming a decision of a Workers’ Compensation