Cases

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON ORDER ON MOTION Cause Number: 01-18-01037-CV Trial Court Cause Number: 18-DCV-250022 Style: Joseph Andrew Beach v. Christine Nicole Beach Date motion filed*: December 30, 2019 Type of motion: Motion for Rehearing Party fili

Opinion issued March 6, 2025 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00937-CR ——————————— CARLANGE JOSEPH, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Ap

OPINION JESSON, Judge A long-standing disagreement between two neighbors who share a common driveway lies at the heart of this appeal. Appellant Sarah Janecek challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain her conviction of misdemeanor disorderly conduct after her neighbors video-recorded her knocking over their trash bins.- Because a contemporaneous witness is not

OPINION {¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant, Beth Dvorak, appeals two judgment entries of the Geauga County Court of Common Pleas, one journalizing an Agreed Judgment Entry prepared by counsel for defendant-appellee, Michael Petronzio, and the other overruling her objections thereto. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand the decision of the court below. *Page 2 <

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 14-0781 Filed March 25, 2015 JOHNA LEDDY, MALCOLM YEH, MAUREEN BROOKHART, STEVE CONNELL, JR., JOSEPH LAWTON and LORI LAWTON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, Defendant-Appellee, and BETH BEWLEY-RANDALL and TOM RANDALL, Intervenors. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal f

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued September 30, 2021 Decided April 4, 2023 Reissued April 12, 2023 No. 19-5079 ABDULSALAM ALI ABDULRAHMAN AL-HELA, DETAINEE CAMP DELTA, ALSO KNOWN AS ABD AL-SALAM ALI AL-HILA AND ABDULWAHAB ALI ABDULRAHMAN AL-HELA, AS NEXT FRIEND OF ABDULSALAM ALI ABDULRAHMAN AL-HELA, APPELLANTS v. JO

640 F.Supp.2d 626 (2009) CENTURY INDEMNITY COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FENCOURT REINSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., Respondent. No. 09-MC-53. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. July 22, 2009. Eric A. Haab, Joseph T. McCullough, IV, Peter B. Steffen, Lovells LLP, Chicago, IL, Julie Beth Negovan, Cozen & O'Connor, Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioner. John V.H

BENHAM, Justice, dissenting. I respectfully dissent from Division 1 of the majority opinion because I disagree that former OCGA § 17-10-6 was unconstitutional. First, the majority opinion ignores the fact that our constitu*137tion expressly authorizes the General Assembly to “abolish, create, consolidate, or modify . . . courts. . . (Emphasis sup

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in Skagit County Superior Court in order to challenge the constitutional adequacy of the public defense system provided by the City

684 F.Supp.2d 357 (2010) Todd BOHMER, Plaintiff, v. State of NEW YORK, City of New York, New York State Police, New York City Police Department, Queens County District Attorney, and each of their respective agents, officers, and employees, Wayne E. Bennett, individually and in his capacity as New York State Police Superintendent, Joseph F. Loszinski, individually and in his capacity as Chief Inspector of Internal Affairs, New York State Police, G

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. ORDER PER CURIAM. Appellant SAS Institute, Inc. filed a petition for rehearing en banc. Responses to the petition were invited by the court and filed by intervenor Michelle K. Lee and cross-appellant Complementsoft, LLC. The petition was fi

ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on “Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification.” Dkt. # 82. The three named plaintiffs seek to go forward with this litigation as representatives of a class, described as follows: All indigent persons who have been or will be charged with one or more crimes in the municipal courts of ei

Justice BREYER, concurring in part and dissenting in part. Our precedents warn us against interpreting statutes in ways that would likely render them unconstitutional. Virginia v. American Booksellers Assn., Inc. , 484 U.S. 383, 397,

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ No. 1D2023-0221 _____________________________ JENNIFER MURRAY and GREGORY JOY, Appellants, v. NAPIER, INC. OF PENSACOLA, CHUMUKLA CUSTOM HOMES, LLC, COLVIN CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, LLC, FRANKLIN RESTORATION & STUCCO, LLC, LOWERY ROOFING, LLC, NEWKIRK LANDSCAPING, INC., ROCKY’S MASONRY, INC., and SEAN BARBER CONSTRUCTION, LL

713 N.E.2d 1269 (1999) 306 Ill. App.3d 216 239 Ill.Dec. 419 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sarah K. NESTROCK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 2-98-0341. Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District. July 15, 1999. Rehearing Denied August 13, 1999. *12

227 S.W.3d 237 (2007) The CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Appellant, v. EN SEGUIDO, LTD., Appellee. No. 04-06-00206-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. March 14, 2007. *239 Casey L. Dobson, Jane M.N. Webre, Sara M. Wilder, Scott, Douglass & McConnico, L.L.P., Austin, Michael D. Bernard, City Atty., Fred R. Jones, Joseph Casseb,

735 N.E.2d 1101 (2000) 316 Ill. App.3d 1 249 Ill.Dec. 276 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sarah K. NESTROCK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 2-98-0341. Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District. September 8, 2000. *1104 John F. Donahue, Law Offices of Donahue

336 S.W.3d 286 (2010) In re K.L. & J. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and David Torres. No. 04-10-00070-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. December 10, 2010. *288 Richard W. Espey, Espey & Associates, PC, Nik A. Mimari, Plunkett & Gibson, Inc., San Antonio, TX, R. Russell Hollenbeck, Shelley Jean White, Wright Brown & Close,

The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) denied the application based on a provision of federal law prohibiting the registration of trademarks that may "disparage ... or bring ... into contemp[t] or disrepute" any "persons, living or dead." 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (a). We now hold that this provis

OPINION J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge. Plaintiffs, the United States (“Department of Justice” or “DOJ”) and the Baltimore City Substance Abuse Directorate (“BCSAD”), bring related actions against Defendant, City of Baltimore (“the City”). In both cases it is alleged' that the City of Baltimore Zoning Code discriminates against individuals receiving treatment in residential substance abuse trea