Cases

MEMORANDUM ** We AFFIRM the judgment of the district court with respect to the administrative law judge’s step three determination but REVERSE as to the ALJ’s determination at step four. We REMAND to the Commissioner for further proceedings. *286Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s step three determination that Mason’s severe i

Callahan, J. The defendant, Michael Reddick, was convicted of first degree robbery and of assault of a victim sixty or older in the third degree, in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-134 (a) (4) and 53a-61a (a),1 respectively,, and was sentenced to an effective term of imprisonment of not less than nine nor more than eighteen years. He appeals from the judgment of conviction, claiming that his righ

Mr. Justice Adams delivered the opinion of the court. It is evident from the facts alleged in the petition that there was a disagreement between the sanitary district and appellees as to the amount due to appellees, the sanitary district claiming that there was no interest due to appellees on account of deferred payments, and appellees claiming the contrary. Hence t

Mr. Justice Wilkin delivered the opinion of the court: This is a petition by Horatio P. Mason, Charles E. Hogue, and others, to the circuit court of Cook county, for a writ of mandamus to compel James Reddick, clerk of the Sanitary District of Chicago, and the sanitary district, to pay to petitioners a sum of money alleged to be due them by virtue of an order o

372 Mass. 460 (1977) 362 N.E.2d 519 COMMONWEALTH vs. LESLIE A. REDDICK. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk. March 8, 1977. April 29, 1977. Present: HENNESSEY, C.J., BRAUCHER, WILKINS, LIACOS, & ABRAMS, JJ. Lois M. Lewis for the defendant. Kathleen M. Curry, Assistant District Attorney (James M.

CUDAHY, Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellant Norman C. Reddick was convicted of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. The fraudulent scheme alleged in the indictment related to defendant’s marketing in Wisconsin of a utility rate and cost consulting service which he claimed would save subscribers money on their utility bills.

190 So.2d 340 (1966) William REDDICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 6551. District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District. August 10, 1966. On Rehearing and/or Clarification October 5, 1966. *341 Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender and John J. Duffy, Special Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, f

PER CURIAM. We adopt that portion of the opinion of the chancellor which is quoted below as the opinion of this court. “THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the Complaint of Plaintiff, LUCY DAVIS MASON, for Declaratory Relief, the Answer, Counterclaim and Cross-Claim of Defendant, SALLY MASON, the Answer to Counterclaim by Plaintiff, and the Answer of MARTIN W. GARY, Administrator Ad Litem of the Es

M'r. Chief Justice Beard delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an action of ejectment in which the plaintiff must show title and also the right of possession to the real estate in controversy. To maintain her right of recovery the plaintiff below invoked the rule of res judicata, in aid of her deed, and the failure of the trial judge to give her the benefit of the rule is insist

Cooper, J., delivered the opinion of the court. Smith & Harris brought an action before a justice -of the peace against Alfred Lacy upon a promissory note. The justice rendered a judgment, February 6, 1880, in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendant for $156.80. Lacy appealed to the circuit e'ourt, the present appellants becoming his sureties on the appeal bond. The bond was, however, only con

Wagner, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court. Substantially the case is this: Plaintiff sold to defendant a certain tract of land and executed a conveyance therefor; the purchase-money was due in installments, and a mortgage was made on the same land to secure the payment thereof. The mortgage contained a power of sale authorizing the creditor, or the sheriff at his request, to sell the premises to satisfy

ORDER Reddick Borkins, III, appeals a district court judgment that dismissed his civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Bor

GARWOOD, Circuit Judge: Defendants-appellants James Truesdale (Truesdale), Ronald Hamilton (Hamilton), Richard E. Jones (Jones), and Sandra Milner (Milner) (collectively appellants) were convicted on multiple counts for their involvement in a gambling operation. Finding that there is insufficient evidence supporting the convictions, we reverse on all counts.

[Cite as State v. Meadows, 2023-Ohio-3469.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 111950 v. : REGINALD MEADOWS, :

BENHAM, Justice. Appellant Juan Antonio Cannon stabbed the victim Terrence Wiggins in the neck because appellant believed Wiggins owed him money.1 The record shows the stabbing took place in a DeKalb County *328restaurant. Anthony Daniels, who was closing up the restaurant, witnessed the stabbing. Shaquanna Fields, who was sitting inside t

[Cite as State v. Welch, 2012-Ohio-3351.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 95577 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

[Cite as State v. Havergne, 2012-Ohio-4270.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96951 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

[Cite as State v. Gray, 2012-Ohio-3565.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 92646 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Appellant, Dwain Farrow, challenges the denial of his application to reopen his direct appeal under App.R. 26(B). *206{¶ 2} Farrow was tried and convicted in Cuyahoga County for the 1975 murder of William Prochazka. The court of appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence in 1978. State v. Farrow (Feb. 9, 1978), Cuyahoga

[Cite as State v. Harrison, 2012-Ohio-4397.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 77929 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.