Cases

MEMORANDUM ** Petitioner-Appellant Thomas Michael Trollope appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction on two counts of child molestation and one count of attempted sexual abuse. 1. The state failed to assert procedural default as a defense to Trollope’s petition before the district court, and the district court erred whe

OPINION HOWARD, Judge. This is an appeal by Maricopa County from a judgment awarded to it by the trial court for medical care rendered to an indigent. The trial court, sitting without a jury, first awarded Maricopa County the full amount of its lien, $103,688.56. It subsequently granted the conservator a remittitur and reduced the judgment to $84,-416.78. The County contends the trial c

608 N.E.2d 266 (1992) 240 Ill. App.3d 213 181 Ill.Dec. 193 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. J.C. JONES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1-89-2382. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, First Division. December 21, 1992. *268 Rita A. Fry, First Asst. Public

275 F.Supp.2d 1013 (2003) ARNOLD & ASSOCIATES, INC., an Arizona corporation, Plaintiff, v. MISYS HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, a division of Misys, PLC; Misys Physician Systems, LLC, a North Carolina corporation, Defendants. No. CIV-03-0287PHXROS. United States District Court, D. Arizona. August 4, 2003. *1014

115 Ariz. 514 (1977) 566 P.2d 315 FREMMING CONSTRUCTION CO., an Arizona Corporation, Appellant, v. SECURITY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, a corporation, Appellee. No. 2 CA-CIV 2292. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2. April 14, 1977. Rehearing Denied May 27, 1977. Review Denied June 28, 1977.

172 Ariz. 442 (1992) 837 P.2d 1177 In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Evette MILES, a Minor. Sheila MILES, Conservator, Petitioner/Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. MARICOPA COUNTY, Claimant/Appellant/Cross-Appellee. No. 2 CA-CV 92-0046. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 2, Department A. April 14, 1992. Review Denied October 20, 1992.

Opinion by Spaeth, J., Appellant was convicted by a judge sitting without a jury of forcible rape, and on February 22, 1973, following the denial of post-verdict motions and the completion of a pre-sentence investigation, was sentenced to serve three and one half to seven years in prison and to pay the costs of prosecution. On July 1, 1974, in response to appellant’s Post Conviction Hearing Act petition, the lo

20 Ariz. App. 122 (1973) 510 P.2d 752 GENE HANCOCK CONSTRUCTION CO., and Bernard J. Thuerauf, Appellants, v. KEMPTON & SNEDIGAR DAIRY, Martin David Kempton and Suzanne Kempton, husband and wife, Robert Glenn Kempton and Barbara D. Kempton, husband and wife, Robert L. Snedigar and Shirley Snedigar, husband and wife, Appellees. No. 1 CA-CIV 1937. Court of Appeals of Arizona, D

23 Ariz. App. 565 (1975) 534 P.2d 1064 James Marvin FRIDENMAKER and Lorena Mae Fridenmaker, his wife, and Henry C. Fridenmaker, Jr., and Bonnie Jean Fridenmaker, his wife, Appellants, v. The VALLEY NATIONAL BANK OF ARIZONA, a National Banking Association, Appellee. No. 1 CA-CIV 2278. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department A. May 6, 1975.

OPINION OGG, Judge. This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee Lake Havasu Community Hospital (Community Hospital) against defendant-appellant Arizona Title Insurance and Trust Company (Arizona Title). The action arises out of a policy of title insurance whereby Arizona Title insured Community Hospital’s title to a .67 acre parcel of land located in Lake Havasu City, Arizona.

141 Ariz. 363 (1984) 687 P.2d 371 LAKE HAVASU COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, INC., an Arizona corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARIZONA TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY, an Arizona corporation, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1 CA-CIV 5973. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department C. May 1, 1984. Reconsideration Denied July 17, 1984.

Mr. Justice Harlan, whom Mr. Justice Clark joins, dissenting. Insofar as the judgment of the Court rests on the view of three of my Brethren that a State cannot constitutionally ban on grounds of obscenity the books involved in this case, I dissent on the basis of the views set out in my opinion in Jacobellis v. Ohio, ante, p. 203. It is quite plain that these so-calle

170 Pa. Superior Ct. 96 (1951) Commonwealth v. Wink, Appellant. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Argued October 4, 1951. November 15, 1951. *98 Before RHODES, P.J., HIRT, RENO, DITHRICH, ROSS, ARNOLD and GUNTHER, JJ. Lemuel B. Schofield, with him Thomas D. McBride, Fred I. Noch and Michael von Moschzisker,<

The Assistant Vice-Chancellor. The first question in this case is the effect of the deed of marriage settlement on the title and interest of Mrs. Temple in her real estate. She did not execute the deed, and has never sanctioned it. Indeed, so far as a married woman can, she has dissented from it, and refused to give it her sanction. As to her, its validity rests wholly upon the force and effect of the deed, and of the or

The opinion of the Court was delivered by Kennedy, J. The question to be determined here is, whether under the will of Eli Yarnall, and the conveyance from Walker Yarnall, the brother of the testator mentioned in the will, and the children of the testator’s sister Sarah, also mentioned therein, to the plaintiff, he has become invested with a good title in fee to the estate mentioned in, and disposed of by the w

Bland, Chancellor. Ordered, that the plaintiff Charles Salmon, make a full and sufficient answer to the foregoing interrogatory on or before the first day of October next; provided, that a copy of this order, together with a copy of the said interrogatory, be served on him on or before the thirteenth day of the present month. In obedience to which the plaintiff, by his solicitor, said, ‘the compl