Cases

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-21-00016-CR ___________________________ Ex parte Jay Allen Rotter On Appeal from the 211th District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. F20-2507-431 Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Ja

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed February 5, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D21-1987 Lower Tribunal No. 07-99-M ________________ Rodney Shands, et al., Appellants,

MAY, District Judge: Rodney Keister appeals the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. Mr. Keister sought to enjoin University of Alabama (“UA”) officials from applying UA’s grounds use policy to the intersection of University Boulevard and Hackberry Lane. Application of this grounds use policy prevents him from speaking on UA’s campus u

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 19-10065 Plaintiff-Appellee, 19-10420 v. D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00209- RODNEY FLUCAS, AKA Rodney J. KJM-1 Flucas, AKA Rodney Rochea Flucas, AKA Rodney Rochen Flucas, OPINION Defendant-Appell

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RODNEY GENE BEELER, No. 20-99014 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:96-cv-00606- v. GW RONALD BROOMFIELD, Acting Warden, California State Prison at San OPINION Quentin, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. AP-75,693

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. AP-75,693 EX PARTE RODNEY REED, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE NUMBER 8701 IN THE 21ST DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY K EASLER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court in which M EYERS, P RICE, J OHNSON, H ERVEY, H OLCOMB, and C OCHRAN, JJ., joined. K ELLER, P.J.,

Affirm in part; Reverse and Remand in part; Opinion Filed April ii, 2013. In The Qnurt uf i\pj.ira1i fiftb Jiitrirt nf Lrxa at Jat1a No. 05-1 l-00162-CV CANI)ACE GUNN, IN1)IV1I)UALLY, AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF GA

HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge. Jay Hiatt filed this diversity of citizenship action to recover damages for injuries he suffered as a passenger in an automobile involved in a one-car accident on a rural road near Morrilton, Arkansas. Hiatt named as defendants in the action the manufacturer of the vehicle, Mazda Motor Corporation (Mazda Motor), and the distributor, Mazda Motor, of

BRORBY, Circuit Judge. Rodney Lee Morgan appeals his conviction by jury trial of the two-count indictment filed against him on September 6, 1989. The indictment charged Defendant with the following offenses: Count 1, armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d), and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2; and Count 2, possession of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime in violation

WIGGINS, Circuit Judge: BACKGROUND For almost three years, until his arrest in December 1993, Jay Franklin Yought was involved in a cocaine distribution ring in Alaska, conducting the operation with the help of at least seven other individuals. Although he was arrested and briefly jailed in early 1993 for a parole violation,

OPINION Opinion By Justice MOSELEY. The issue in both of these cases is this: what constitutes an offense under the City’s Property Maintenance Code? The City of Plano asserts it is an offense to fail to comply with specific sections of the International Property Maintenance Code, as adopted by the City as part of its Property Maintenance Code. Jay Sandon Cooper asserts the City’s Property

ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT LEWIS M. KILLIAN, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge. THIS MATTER came on for hearing on the cross-motions of the plaintiff, Mark Jay Kaufman, P.A. and the defendants, Howell, Milton & Liles, P.A. for summary judgment in this adversary proceeding. Having considered the evidence presented by way of affidavits and deposition transcripts, and having considered the memoranda of

Mongeau v SR Taxi Corp. (2025 NY Slip Op 00918) Mongeau v SR Taxi Corp. 2025 NY Slip Op 00918 Decided on February 18, 2025 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431

435 So.2d 1051 (1983) JOHN JAY ESTHETIC SALON, INC. v. Frances WOODS and Neubie Culver. No. 5-117. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit. June 6, 1983. Writ Denied September 30, 1983. Anthony J. Russo, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellee. Richard J. Boutall, Metairie, for defendants-appellants. Before CHEHARDY, BOWES and GRISBAUM

Dismissed and Opinion Filed February 24, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-01352-CV IN RE JOHN LANIER BURNS, JR., M.D., HENRY STEPHENSON BYRD, M.D., JASON KYLE POTTER, M.D., RICHARD YOUNGMIN HA, M.D., ALTON JAY BURNS, M.D., MATTHEW JOHN TROVATO, M.D., BRADLEY ALAN HUBBARD, M.D.

75 F.3d 1252 34 Fed.R.Serv.3d 541 Jay HIATT, Appellant,v.MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION, formerly known as Toyo Kogyo Co.Ltd.; Mazda Motor, of America, Inc., Appellees.MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION, formerly known as Toyo Kogyo Co.Ltd.; Mazda Motor, of America, Inc., Third Party Plaintiffs,v.Rodney D. WADLOW, Appellee,Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., Amicus Curiae.

233 S.W.3d 779 (2007) Rodney ALLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent. No. ED 89068. Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One. September 25, 2007. *782 Kristina Starke (Public Defender), St. Louis, MO, for appellant. Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Dora A. Fichter, Jefferson City, MO, for re

99 P.3d 625 (2004) 140 Idaho 672 Tarah GALLOWAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jay WALKER, Defendant-Respondent, and Does 1-10, Defendants. No. 29771. Court of Appeals of Idaho. October 4, 2004. *627 Saetrum Law Offices, Boise, for appellant. Rodney R. Saetrum argued. Sasser Inglis, Boise, for respond

Thomas J. Tucker, United States Bankruptcy Judge I. Introduction This case came before the Court for a hearing on May 8, 2019, on several motions, including the following four motions (collectively, the "Motions"): (1) the motion filed by the Debtor, entitled "Debtor's Second Motion to Dismiss" (Docket # 155); (2) the motion filed by Prime Financial, Inc. ("Prime"), entitled "Second Creditor Motion