Cases

Kennedy, J. *463 *146 {¶ 1} In this discretionary appeal from a judgment of the Eighth District Court of Appeals, we consider the parameters established by R.C. 4905.61

Belfance, Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part. {¶ 38} I concur in the majority of the opinion. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s resolution of Mrs. Satterfield’s first and second assignments of error. {¶ 39} “Traditionally, an insured’s recovery has been limited to the amount due

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS July 2, 2014 RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS NE OPERATIONS HOLDINGS, LLC,

877 F.2d 57 Satterfield (Paul), Picchione (JoAnne)v.Owens (David S., Jr.), Freeman (Robert M.), Libhart (LamarL.), Ditty (Jeffrey), Moore (Fred), Williams (Cyrus) NO. 88-5785 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. MAY 15, 1989 Appeal From: M.D.Pa., Kosik, J.

90 Md. App. 660 (1992) 603 A.2d 877 GIANT FOOD INCORPORATED v. REGINA E. SATTERFIELD. No. 167, September Term, 1991. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. April 1, 1992. Christopher R. Dunn (William B. Spellbring, Jr., Timothy E. Howie and O'Malley & Miles, on the brief), Upper Marlboro, for appellant. Robert L. Siems (John R. Fran

The opinion of the court was delivered by Miller, J.: Charles A. Satterfield appeals from an order denying his second successive motion under K. S. A. 60-260 (b) for relief from portions of a divorce decree fixing paternity and requiring child support payments. Charles commenced this action by filing a verified petition for divorce. He alleged that the parties had two children. The tr

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jerome Frederick Satterfield appeals from the district court’s order granting his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006), and reducing his sentence from 190 months to 152 months. He contends that the court should have also ordered that his

02/11/2022 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 5, 2022 Session ISAAC D. WALKER v. ROBERT L. MCMILLIN ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 13C3420 Joseph P. Binkley, Jr., Judge ________________________

01/08/2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 6, 2023 Session Heard at Martin 1 ROBERT L. TRENTHAM v. MID-AMERICA APARTMENTS, LP ET AL. Appeal by Permission from the Court of Appeals Circuit Court for Williamson County No. 19C

EARL E. O’CONNOR, District Judge. This action was brought by the plaintiffs against several defendants arising from various transfers of securities owned by the plaintiffs. The district court granted the motions for summary judgment filed by defendants-appellees Shatkin Investment Corp. and Brandt and Associates. Satter-field, v. Haymond, et al. (D.Utah 1985) [available on WESTLAW, 1985 WL 17576]. The lower court ent

FAIR, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. William Satterfield was employed by the Mississippi Department of Human Services (DHS) as a child support enforcement attorney. Satterfield filed a lawsuit against the State and various agencies and officials (collectively “the State”) contending that his position was underpaid. He alleged the violation of numerous statutes and as

[Cite as State v. Satterfield, 2013-Ohio-5551.] STATE OF OHIO, BELMONT COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO, ) ) CASE NO. 12 BE 22 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, ) ) - VS -

[Cite as Satterfield v. Ameritech Mobile Communications, Inc., 2017-Ohio-928.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 104211 CINDY SATTERFIELD, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES

3 Kan. App. 2d 212 (1979) 592 P.2d 135 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. MICHAEL L. SATTERFIELD, Appellant. No. 49,902 Court of Appeals of Kansas. Opinion filed March 23, 1979. Petition for review denied June 13, 1979. Robert D. Hecht, of Scott, Quinlan & Hecht, of Topeka, for appellant. Philip E. Winter,

269 S.C. 532 (1977) 238 S.E.2d 215 Richard Eugene WORRELL, Appellant, v. SATTERFIELD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., of South Carolina, Dickerson Incorporated, Marlboro Construction Company, Inc., and South Carolina State Highway Department, of which Satterfield Construction Company, Inc., is, Respondent. 20530 Supreme Court of South Carolina. October 18, 19

FILED September 18,2015 TICOURTOF WORKERS' CO~'lPE);SATIO); CLAn,r s

HILL, Justice. [¶1] Plaintiffs, the Robert L. Kroenlein Trust and Chugwater Brewing Co., Inc., brought an action against Defendants alleging claims for conversion and fraud arising out of Defendant Gary Kirchhefer's alleged theft of beer from Plaintiffs' store and his subsequent sale of that stolen beer to the other named Defendants. The district court found Plaintiffs' claims barred by the governing statutes of limitation and

64 Cal.2d 419 (1966) In re JAMES W. SATTERFIELD on Habeas Corpus. Crim. No. 9726. Supreme Court of California. In Bank. Apr. 12, 1966. James W. Satterfield, in pro. per., and Saul M. Weingarten, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Petitioner. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, Robert R. Granucci and Jackson L. Smith, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respond

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant, Danny Satterfield, a Deputy with the Sumner County Sheriffs Department (“S.C.S.D.”), appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss based on absolute or qualified immunity. Plaintiffs-Appellees, Robert Spurlock and Ronnie Marshall, alleged that Satterfield committed various acts that violated their constitutional and/or statutory rights. For the reas

88 F.Supp.2d 288 (2000) Charles M. SATTERFIELD, III, Plaintiff, v. MONSANTO COMPANY and Solutia, Inc., Defendants. No. 98 Civ. 8040 LLS. United States District Court, S.D. New York. March 27, 2000. Joseph A. Barbaccia (of counsel), Law Offices of Joseph A. Barbaccia, Freeport, NY, for plaintiff. Robert R. Reed, Louis F. Bonacorsi (of counsel), Bryan Cave, LLP