Cases

Writ of error was granted in this case primarily for the purpose of determining whether a summary judgment which adjudicates a severed part of a single cause of action is appealable. The suit was brought by John B. Reynolds, plaintiff, against J. W. Pierce, defendant, pursuant to Section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b), to recover minimum wages and overtime compensation claimed to be owing for the period from January 16, 1955, to May 18, 1956. Defen

OPINION Opinion by Justice Moseley Felicia Pierce’s trespass to try title suit against Debbie Blalack, et al., 1 was dismissed with prejudice for her failure to comply with court orders requiring her to amend her pleadings to join necessary parties. On appeal from this dismiss

Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Armstrong, J., concurred in by Worswick, A.C.J., and Van Deren, J. Valinda Reynolds appeals her bench trial conviction of second degree robbery. She argues that (1) the State failed to prove that she stole property and used force to obtain or retain the property; (2) because of her documented mental health problems, she lacked the mental capacity to formulate the specific intent necessary to commit the crime; and (3) counsel ineffectively re

Lisa Nicole Pierce appeals her conviction, following jury trial, for forgery. She contends the district court erred in admitting evidence of statements she made to the police because such statements were involuntary. We reverse and remand for new trial. I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDINGS. The record reveals the following facts. On November 19, 2005, Pierce attempted to purchase items from the Dollar General Store in Story City with a counterfeit one-hund

WELLS, Judge. Although not addressed by either party to this appeal, we must address its interlocutory nature. As the judgment below did not dispose of all claims as to all parties, and the trial court did not certify it for immediate appeal, its immediate appeal would contravene the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 54(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Our review of the record reveals that: (1) defendant Reynolds’

Phyllis Dianne Hayes, the primary beneficiary of a contested will, appeals the entry of a summary judgment in favor of the adult children of Clayton M. Reynolds ("Reynolds"), deceased, that invalidated the will. Claiming that Reynolds lacked the requisite testamentary capacity when he executed the will, Paula R. Baran, Jamie R. Caldwell, and Clayton M. Reynolds III ("the children"), all of whom are the children of Reynolds, contested the will's validity in the probate court of Macon C

King Automobiles, Inc., sued Reynolds and Reynolds Company, Inc., and fictitiously named defendants, alleging breach of contract, negligence, and various fraud claims arising from an agreement under which Reynolds had sold a computer system and system maintenance program to King Automobiles. The transaction involved a printed "master agreement," which contained an arbitration clause and which had certain attachments; the transaction also involved a handwritten agreement. Reynolds move

(2008) Nathaniel RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO., Defendant. Case No. 07C0834. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. September 26, 2008. DECISION AND ORDER LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge. Pro se plaintiff Nathaniel Richardson brought this action against defendant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in state court, alleg

[Cite as Pierce v. Workman, 2023-Ohio-2022.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT AUGLAIZE COUNTY EDWIN A. PIERCE, AUGLAIZE COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE NO. 2-22-21 v. TIMOTHY SCOTT WORKMAN, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Auglai

Cox, J. Pam and Allen Brower appeal the summary dismissal of their damages action pursuant to RCW 64.401 against Pierce County. Notwithstanding the County’s suggestion to the contrary, we hold that the Browers timely filed their notice of appeal. But the exhaustion of their administrative remedy through the hearing examiner provided them adequate relief. Consequently, they have no cause of action ag

296 Ga. 461 FINAL COPY S14A1656. REYNOLDS v. REYNOLDS. HUNSTEIN, Justice. We granted the discretionary application of Appellant Dorothy M. Reynolds (Wife) pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 34 in this divorce case. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the trial court’s order denying Wife’s motion to set aside. Appellee Rex E. Reynolds (Husband), proceeding with counsel, filed a complaint for divorce alleging that Wife was a “non-resident of the Sta

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 93-2-09115-5, Grant L. Anderson, J., entered October 28, 1994. Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Morgan, J., concurred in by Seinfeld, C.J., and Turner, J.

HUNSTEIN, Justice. We granted the discretionary application of Appellant Dorothy M. Reynolds (Wife) pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 34 in this divorce case. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the trial court’s order denying Wife’s motion to set aside. Appellee Rex E. Reynolds (Husband), proceeding with counsel, filed a complaint for divorce alleg

OPINION OF THE COURT The appellant in this workers’ compensation case is claimant’s treating chiropractor, Dr. Ausmus. After suffering a work-related back injury on July 13, 1987, this workers’ compensation claim was settled for 75% occupational disability benefits apportioned equally between the employer and the Special Fund. The employer reopened the case to contest the reasonableness and necessity of chiropractic treatments perform

87 F.3d 827 Frank REYNOLDS, d/b/a Reynolds Fisheries; Port Clinton FishCompany; James Maricque, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Frances S. BUCHHOLZER, Director of Ohio Department ofNatural Resources; Richard B. Pierce, Chief of the Divisionof Wildlife; George B. Voinovich, Governor of the State ofOhio, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-4294. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth C

SILER, Circuit Judge. Frank Reynolds, a commercial fisherman, Port Clinton Fish Company, a fish distributor, and James Maricque, a Wisconsin restaurateur [collectively “the plaintiffs”], appeal the district court’s dismissal of their cause of action. The plaintiffs filed a claim for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Ohio Department of Natural Resources [“ODNR”]. They argue that the Ohio statutes and regulations [“

903 P.2d 317 (1995) Margaret BECK and Bill Beck, Appellees, v. Jack H. REYNOLDS, M.D., Kathryn Pierce, as Personal Representative of the Estate of C.J. Pierce, Jr., Deceased, Pierce Pharmacy, Inc., and Smith Kline & French Laboratories, a division of Smithkline Corp., Defendants, Physicians Liability Insurance Company, Appellant. No. 82376. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. Ju

433 S.E.2d 902 (1993) Henry C. KEELS, Jr., and Keels Music Company, Inc., Respondents, v. B.J. PIERCE, Appellant. No. 2036. Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard April 20, 1993. Decided June 21, 1993. Rehearing Denied August 19, 1993. *903 Hugh L. Willcox, Jr., and W. Reynolds Williams, both

McFarland, J. {¶1} Isaac J. Pierce appeals the November 3, 2015 judgment entry of the Meigs County Common Pleas Court. Appellant had previously entered guilty pleas to felonious assault, aggravated burglary, and violation of protection order. On appeal, Appellant asserts that (1) the trial court erred in imposing sentence because his sentence is void, in part; and (2) the trial court er

320 S.W.2d 376 (1959) John B. REYNOLDS, Appellant, v. J. W. PIERCE, D/B/A Pierce Pump Company, Appellee. No. 15969. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth. January 16, 1959. Rehearing Denied February 6, 1959. *377 Fritz & Vinson and Edward C. Fritz, Dallas, for appellant. Malone, Lipscomb & Se