Cases

Bassett, J. The petitioners, Scott L. Bach and the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, Inc. (ANJRPC), appeal a decision of the Superior Court (Smukler, J.) entering summary judgment in favor of the respondent, the New Hampshire Department of Safety (Department). The petitioners had challenged, as ultra

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District SHUTTLEWAGON, INC., ) ) Appellant, ) WD83882 ) v. ) OPINION FILED: June 22, 2021 ) SCOTT HIGGINS, ET AL.,

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District SCOTT W. ECKERT, ) ) Appellant, ) WD83749 ) v. ) OPINION FILED: ) September 7, 2021 STATE O

685 S.E.2d 288 (2009) 286 Ga. 69 MARTIN v. MARTIN. No. S09A1185. Supreme Court of Georgia. November 2, 2009. *289 Joel E. Dodson, Douglasville, for appellant. Debra L. Hardin Scott, The Scott Practice, LLC, Atlanta, for appellee. BENHAM, Justice. This appeal concerns a dispute over a t

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District RUSSELL SCOTT LYNCH, ) ) Appellant, ) WD81790 ) v. ) OPINION FILED: ) February 13, 2019 JAMES HURLEY,

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District GARRETT LOOMIS, ) ) Appellant, ) WD84424 ) v. ) OPINION FILED: April

JOSH R. MORRISS, III, Chief Justice, concurring. I agree with the disposition of this appeal made by the majority opinion of this Court. I write, however, to respectfully set out my differing analysis of Section R of the Dynasty Trust. My analysis leads me to conclude that Section R was not intended to insulate Scott from potential liability for filing the Harris County lawsuit against MRMC.

Chief Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court. *2167The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment states that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." In Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City ,

Leben, J.: Daniel Phillips appeals the district court’s enforcement of child-support orders against him based on a claim that the orders arose out of Washington state and that the claims should no longer be collectible under a 10-year Washington limitation period. But the applicable statute in both Kansas and Washington provides that in an interstate proceeding for arrearages—or ove

PER CURIAM. Mr. Scott R. Martin seeks enforcement of a claim of $4,250,000 in damages against *915the United States for alleged breach of an implied contract. For reasons stated by the Court of Federal Claims, we affirm the dismissal of Mr. Martin’s claim for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Court of Federal Claims. AFFIRMED

Mark E. Walker, United States District Judge This Court is not the Vote-Restoration Czar. It does not pick and choose who may receive the right to vote and who may not. Nor does it write the rules and regulations for the Executive Clemency Board. Instead, this Court possesses the well-known and unsurprising "province and duty ... to say what the law is." Marbury v. Madison , 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 177,

ORDER PER CURIAM: Jerome Scott appeals from the trial court’s judgment convicting him of one count of forgery after a jury trial. Scott claims that the trial court erred in entering its judgment because the State’s evidence failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Scott acted with the purpose to defraud Jack Martin when he signed the credit card receipt after using Martin’s credit card. We affirm. R

HAWKES, J. William Scott Martin appeals the final judgment dissolving his marriage to Rhonda J. Martin. He contends the trial court abused its discretion in three ways: first, by not awarding him permanent periodic alimony when his former wife earns approximately two and one-half times more income than he does; second, by not partitioning the marital residence despite the special circumstances of this case; and third, by sum

RHONDA K. WOOD, Justice, concurring. In this matter, we have original jurisdiction and therefore sit as a trial court. See Ark. Const, art. 5, § 1. The petitioners filed a complaint containing ten charges against the proposed ballot title. The majority has randomly selected one charge and used that to grant the petition, thus avoiding addressing the remaining charges. I co

MARTIN, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part: The U.S. Constitution allows states to ban people convicted of felonies from exercising their right to vote. See Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24, 56,

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC12-1252 ____________ CHARLES L. ANDERSON, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ____________ No. SC14-881

LOKEN, Circuit Judge. Howard Lapides (Howard) and his wife, Mary Holter-Lapides (collectively, “the Lapideses”), renewed a loan from Venture Bank secured by a third mortgage on their home. Howard subsequently filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. After Howard’s personal debts were discharged, the Lapideses executed two “Change in Terms Agreements,” each of which extended the maturity

612 F.3d 1279 (2010) Richard L. SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dawn K. ROBERTS, In Her Official Capacity as Interim Secretary of State of the State of Florida, Defendant-Appellee, Ira William McCollum, Jr., Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee. No. 10-13211. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. July 30, 2010. *1280 Enu

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth No. 02-19-00438-CV MIKE FARHAT, US GLOBAL ASSET § On Appeal from the 17th District Court INVESTMENTS, LLC, JOHN MARTIN FAUBUS, TRACY L. TRIMBLE, MARY MARTINEZ, MICHAEL W. BROOME, AND MICHAEL W. BROOME, P.C., § of Tarrant County (017-308014-19) Appellant

PERRY, J., dissenting. I respectfully dissent. In my view, the challenged provisions of chapter 2011-68, Laws of Florida, amount to an insufferable and unconstitutional “bait and switch” at the expense of public employees who were members of the Florida Retirement System (FRS) prior to July 1, 2011.8 I would affirm the trial court’s ruling and hold that the plain meaning of the pres