Cases

602 F.Supp.2d 521 (2009) Kenneth M. SMITH, Plaintiff, v. Warden Thomas CARROLL and First Correctional Medical, Inc., Defendants. Civ. No. 07-269-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. March 16, 2009. *523 Kenneth M. Smith, James T. Vaughn Correctional Center, Smyrna, DE, Pro Se Plaintiff. Stacey X. Stewart, Deputy

441 F.Supp.2d 656 (2006) Walter L. SMITH, Petitioner, v. Thomas CARROLL, Warden, and Carl C. Danberg, Attorney General for the State of Delaware, Respondents. No. Civ. 05-571-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. July 31, 2006. *657 Walter L. Smith, petitioner, pro se. Elizabeth R. McFarlan, Deputy Attorney Gener

Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. Certiorari denied.

Ct. App. Tex., 14th Dist. Certiorari denied.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2005-CP-00415-SCT IN RE: SUSAN C. SMITH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/11/2005 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. EDWARD C. PRISOCK COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: CARROLL COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: PRO SE ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.

The orders of the lower court are affirmed.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2022-KA-00664-COA DAVID CARROLL SMITH A/K/A DAVID APPELLANT SMITH v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/19/2022 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. KENT E. SMITH COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: UNION COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2021-CP-00959-COA WILEY ZACHARY CARROLL A/K/A WILEY Z. APPELLANT CARROLL A/K/A WILEY ZACHERY CARROLL v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/09/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. KENT E. SMITH COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: T

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County (Judith S. Claire, J.), entered October 24, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order denied the motion of respondent to vacate a prior court order awarding sole custody of the subject child to petitioner. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Same memorandum as in Matter

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County (Judith S. Claire, J.), entered October 24, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order denied the motion of respondent to vacate a prior court order awarding sole custody of the subject child to petitioner. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Same memorandum as in Matter

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County (Judith S. Claire, J.), entered June 24, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, awarded petitioner sole custody of the subject child. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In appeal No. 1, respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia,

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County (Judith S. Claire, J.), entered June 24, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, inter alia, awarded petitioner sole custody of the subject child. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In appeal No. 1, respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia,

The Third Circuit applies a three-part test to determine whether the deliberate indifference requirement has been met: *505it must be shown that (1) municipal policymakers know that employees will confront a particular situation; (2) the situation involves a difficult choice or a history of employees mishandling; and (3) the wrong choice by an

Memorandum Opinion And Order Manish S. Shah, United States District Judge George Carroll and Robert Lansing co-founded a real-estate investment business in which each owned equal interests. Years later, however, the relationship between the two co-owners soured, and Lansing elected to invoke the “buy/sell” provisions of various governing agreements. Pursuant to those agreements, Lansing offered to purchase C

OPINION STUMBO, Judge: The appellant, Larry “Butch” Carroll, appeals an order of the Edmonson Circuit Court denying his motion to alter, amend, or vacate an order granting summary judgment to the appellees, N.E. Reed and the Edmonson County Fiscal Court (hereinafter “Fiscal Court”). We find that the Fiscal Court was entitled to judgment as a matter of law; therefore, the decision of the circuit co

Opinion of the Court by Justice SCOTT. I. BACKGROUND Appellant Reuben Wright was driving a tractor-trailer, owned by Appellant Matthew Keeton Trucking, in the southbound lane of a two-lane road when he approached a blind curve that is closely followed by an intersection. On Wright’s side of the road, there was a road sign located in the curve warning of the upcoming intersection. Wright dr

DOUGLAS G. CARROLL, III AND DEIRDRE M. SMITH, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RespondentCarroll v. Comm'rDocket No. 5445-13United States Tax Court

WILSON, Circuit Judge: This case involves the dissemination of child pornography through a peer-to-peer file sharing program called Ares. A jury convicted appellant Charles Carroll of knowingly possessing and distributing hundreds of images and videos depicting the sexual exploitation of minors,

Modify in part and affirm as modified; Opinion Filed December 10, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00106-CV GORDON CARROLL FISHER, Appellant V. DANIEL K. HAGOOD, P.C. AND FITZPATRICK HAGOOD SMITH AND UHL, INC., Appellees