Cases

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Kansas denied.

Denied. Unpublished

265 S.W.3d 386 (2008) Sean P. KENNEDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent. No. WD 69026. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. October 7, 2008. Ruth Sanders, Esq., Kansas City, MO., for appellant. Jayne Woods, Esq., Jefferson City, MO., for respondent. Before JOSEPH M. ELLIS, P.J., RONALD R. HOLLIGER and JOSEPH P. DANDURAND, JJ.

ORDER PER CURIAM. Christopher Kennedy appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value but a memorandum explaining our reas

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ROBERT E. LARSEN, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Michelle Kennedy seeks review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiffs application for disability benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (“the Act”). Plaintiff argues that the ALJ erred in (1) failing to address the dosage or

107 S.W.3d 306 (2003) STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Christopher KENNEDY, Appellant. No. WD 60990. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. March 4, 2003. Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied April 24, 2003. Application for Transfer Denied July 1, 2003. *309 Rebecca L. Kurz, Kansas

IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion) STATE V. KENNEDY NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY NEB. CT. R. APP. P. § 2-102(E). STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE, V.

Justice Stevens, concurring in part and dissenting in part. With the exception of Part II, I join the Court’s opinion. In dissenting from Part II, I adhere to the views that we expressed in Kansas v. Colorado, 533 U. S. 1, 13-16 (2001) (Kansas III).1 In K

PAUL KELLY, JR., Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-Appellees are disabled persons who have attended the Kansas State Fair in the past, and who plan to attend future fairs. They alleged intentional discrimination and violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134, by Defendants-Appellants the State of Kansas, the Kansas State Fair Board, its m

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2025 ND 130 State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Kamauri Siede Kennedy, Defendant and Appellant No. 20240346 Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial District, the Honorable Gary H. Lee, Judge. AFFIRMED. Opinion of the Court by Bahr,

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

30 Kan. App.2d 332 (2002) 42 P.3d 110 KANSAS INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS, Petitioner/Appellant, v. THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF KANSAS, Respondent/Appellee. No. 88,012. Court of Appeals of Kansas. Opinion filed March 8, 2002. *333 David J. Roberts and James P. Zakoura, of Smithym

*409Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. This case concerns the constitutional requirements substantively limiting the civil commitment of a dangerous sexual offender — a matter that this Court considered in Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U. S. 346 (1997). The State of Kansas argues that the Kansas Supreme Court has interpreted

Malone, J.: The Kansas Industrial Consumers Group, Inc. (KIC), representing large commercial and industrial consumers of electricity, collectively and individually appeal the order of the Kansas Corporation Commission (Commission) approving a net revenue increase for Westar Energy, Inc. (WEI) and Kansas Gas and Electric Company (KG&E) of approximately $3,000,000. The petitioners challenge various aspects of the Commission’s o

Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court. The Arkansas River rises in the mountains of Colorado just east of the Continental Divide, descends for about 280 miles to the Kansas border, then flows through that State, Oklahoma, and Arkansas and empties into the Mississippi River. On May 20, 1901, Kansas first invoked this Court’s original jurisdiction to seek

81 F.Supp.2d 1103 (2000) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Michael R. KENNEDY, Defendant. No. 99-10105-01. United States District Court, D. Kansas. January 3, 2000. *1104 *1105 Debra L. Barnett, Office of United States Attorney, Wichita, KS, for plaintiff. Daniel E. Monnat, Monnat

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions by email at: JUD.Reporter@vermont.gov or by mail at: Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801, of any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press. 2020 VT 6

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 17, 2013 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSICA KENNEDY Appeal from the Criminal Court for Monroe County No. 11058 Walter C. Kurtz, Senior Judge No. E2013-00260-CCA-R3-CD - Filed July 30, 2014 The Defendant, Jessica Kennedy, was convicted by a Monroe County Criminal Court jury of facilitation of felo

ORDER PER CURIAM: Direct appeal from a jury conviction for promoting prostitution, in violation of § 567.070, RSMo 1978. Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).

[Cite as State v. Kennedy, 2013-Ohio-4221.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : APPEAL NO. C-120337 TRIAL NO. B-1104558 Plaintiff-Appellee, : vs. : O P