Cases

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 1999-CA-00272-SCT ROBERT C. JACKSON v. CITY OF WIGGINS, A MISSISSIPPI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/07/1999 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JERRY O. TERRY, SR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: STONE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: THOMAS M. MATTHEWS, JR. ATTORNEYS FOR A

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-21-00135-CV ROBERT MICHAEL PHILIPPS, APPELLANT V. CYNTHIA JANE JACKSON AND WADE JACKSON, APPELLEES On Appeal from the 181st District Court Randall County, Texas

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-21-00027-CV ROBERT MICHAEL PHILIPPS, APPELLANT V. CYNTHIA JANE JACKSON AND WADE JACKSON, APPELLEES On Appeal from the 181st District Court Randall County, Texas

THOMPSON, Associate Judge: This matter arose when plaintiffs/appel-lees, individuals who had been longtime congregants of Jericho Baptist Church Ministries, Inc. (also known as Jericho City of Praise) during its existence as a District of Columbia non-profit corporation (“Jericho D.C,”), sued a number of. individuals (the “individual appellants”) who (1) incorporated under Maryl

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CALVIN O’NEIL JACKSON,  Petitioner-Appellant, No. 09-17239 v. D.C. No. STATE OF NEVADA; BRIAN  3:03-cv-00257- SANDOVAL; ROBERT LEGRAND, RLH-RAM Warden, OPINION Respondents-Appellees.  Appeal from the

KANNE, Circuit Judge. At issue in this appeal is whether a wage-garnishment action under Illinois law is a “legal action” on a debt against a consumer under the venue provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). We hold that such actions are not against the consumer and therefore affirm the dismissals made by the respective district courts in this consolidated appeal.1

KITCHENS, PRESIDING JUSTICE, DISSENTING: ¶ 42. I respectfully dissent. I would find that the amended complaint filed by Robert Hammons, Jr., properly made substitutions for fictitious parties under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 9(h). Therefore, I would reverse and remand the case to the circuit court for further proceedings, including a determination of whether Hammons exercised reasonable diligence in identifying

Justice Ketchum: The defendants below, Robert Paul Jackson (“Defendant Jackson”) and the Joelynn Family Preservation Trust (“the Trust”), appeal from" the July 6, 2016, order of the Circuit Court of Ritchie County denying their motion for a new trial following a jury verdict of $543,202.17 -in favor of Plaintiff Pamela S. Brown (“plaintiff’) in a wrongful death action arising from

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered April 24, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff’s motion to strike defendants’ answer, unanimously reversed, on the facts, without costs, and the motion denied. Order, same court and Justice, entered July 17, 2015, which denied defendants’ motion to vacate the note of issue or to compel discovery, una

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 8th of November 2016 by Defendant:"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of November 2016."Defendant shall have up to and including the 28th day of December 2016 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 19th of January 2017 by State of NC:"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of January 2017."State of NC shall have up to and including the 3rd day of March 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 4th of November 2016 by Defendant for Current Appellate Counsel to Deliver Entire File to the Office of Appellate Defender:"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of November 2016."

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2021-CA-01210-SCT CITY OF CANTON, MISSISSIPPI BOARD OF ALDERMEN v. L.C. SLAUGHTER AND ISIAC JACKSON DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/29/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. M. BRADLEY MILLS TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: EDWARD BLACKMON, JR. BARBARA BLACKMON BRADFORD JE

************************************************ The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of an opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it is released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for the filing of postopin- ion motions and petitions for certification is the “offi- cially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical cor

1. Def’s Motion for Removal of Current Appellate Counsel and Reappointment of the Office of the Appellate Defender 2. Defs Motion for Current Appellate Counsel to Deliver Entíre File to the Office of the Appellate Defender 1. Allowed 11/07/2016 2. Allowed 11/07/2016

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 28th of December 2016 by Defendant:"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of December 2016."Defendant shall have up to and including the 4th day of January 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.

TIMOTHY J. KELLY, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Michael Ellis, Robert McNeil, and Harold Stanley have embarked on a seemingly unending quest to stop the federal government from collecting unpaid income taxes. Courts in this Circuit have repeatedly dismissed Plaintiffs' cases for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. These rulings have not dissuaded Plaintiffs from tilting at windmills, however, and judges themselves have

INMAN, Judge. *642 Adam Robert Jackson ("Defendant") appeals from a Judgment Suspending Sentence following his plea of no contest to one count of *643 manufacturing marijuana. On appeal, Defe

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Advanced Technology Building Solutions, L.L.C. (“ATBS”), and Donald Hewitt, its owner, brought a First Amendment retaliation claim against the City of Jackson, alleging that the mayor, acting through city employees, ended support for a development project proposed by ATBS after Hewitt had made public statements claiming corruption in city governmen

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 22nd of December 2015 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Wake County: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of January 2016."