Cases

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered on or about August 13, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion and cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motions denied, the complaint reinstated, and the matter remanded for further proceedings. On January 2, 2000, plaintiff was a passenger in defendant Maureen Johnson’s car when it was hit by def

671 So.2d 1120 (1996) Jeff WEBB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel JOHNSON, et ux, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-1518. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. April 3, 1996. *1121 David Frank Dwight, Lake Charles, John William Pickett, Many, for Jeff Webb. William Reuel Boone, Many, for Daniel Johnson and Carlene Johnson.

In re Webb, Eugene — Plaintiff(s); applying for second motion to enforce this Court’s Order dated March 15, 1995; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “E”, No. 277-286. Denied. Moot. The trial court has acted.

In re Webb, Eugene — Plaintiff(s); applying for motion to enforce this Court’s Order dated March 15, 1995; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “E”, No. 277-286. Granted. The district court is ordered to comply with this Court’s order of March 15, 1995, within thirty days. In addition, the district court is ordered to provide this Court with proof of compliance. CALOGERO, C.J., not on panel.

In re Webb, Eugene; — PIaintiff(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “E”, No. 277-286. Relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on an application for post conviction relief he filed on or about January 4, 1995. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the application. If relator’s representation is inco

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00243-CV Benjamin JOHNSON, Appellant v. Ashley JOHNSON-WEBB, Appe

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY, Chief Judge. lain this matter, appellant seeks review of the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a law firm on the basis that it was not vicariously liable for the actions of one of its attorney-notaries. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand. Facts and Procedural History In 2011, Daniel and Elizabeth Webb had been married for 39

Carpinello, J. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Maney, J.), entered November 8, 2000, which, inter alia, granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, to find respondent in violation of prior orders of custody and visitation. The parties are the joint custodial parents of a daughter born in January 1990. Pursuant to a May 24, 1999 order entered

113 P.3d 1253 (2005) The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tracy L. WEBB-JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 03CA0886. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. II. January 13, 2005. Certiorari Denied May 31, 2005. Ken Salazar, Attorney General, Anthony J. Navarro, Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee. <

In re James River Insurance Company; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 594610; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2014 CW 0207. Granted. The case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of Gorman v. City of Opelousas, 13-1734 (La.7/1/14), 148 So.3d. 888, 2014 WL 2937129 JOHNSON,

C. Johnson, J. ¶1 This case asks us to decide whether, under General Rule (GR) 34, courts have discretion to grant only partial waivers of fees and surcharges to indigent litigants. Abeda Jafar filed an action in Snohomish County Superior Court to obtain a parenting plan involving her 19-month-old son. She also filed a motion under GR 34 to waive all mandatory fees and surcharges on the basis of indigency. Jafar’s only sources o

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER R. CLARKE VANDERVORT, United States Magistrate Judge. By Violation Notice No. 3173204 dated September 13, 2012, Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol in violation of 36 C.F.R. 4.23(a)(2). (Document Nos. 1 and 2.) National Park Service Law Enforcement Ranger Justin Cawiezel stated in the Violation Notice’s Statement of Probable Cause for arr

Reiber, C.J. ¶ 1. In these parallel criminal and civil suspension proceedings, defendant is charged with driving under the influence (DUI) and driving with a suspended license. He appeals from a district court order denying his motion to suppress an evidentiary breath test. He contends that the court erred in: (1) holding that the police did not improperly interfere with his right to

MEMORANDUM ** David Webb appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action arising from his purchase of a used vehicle. We have jurisdiction under 28 *609U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Peralta v. Hispanic Bus., Inc., 419 F.3d 1064, 1068 (9th Cir.2005). We affirm the dismissal of each defendant because the district c

4 So.3d 1078 (2009) Barbara Patton WEBB, Melvin Eugene Johnson and Floyd Michael Johnson, Appellants, v. John Bill DREWREY and Glenda J. Drewrey, Appellees. No. 2007-CA-01935-COA. Court of Appeals of Mississippi. February 24, 2009. *1080 Lawrence Lee Little, Tara Beth Scruggs, attorneys for appellants. Omar D. Craig, Oxfor

Madsen, J. ¶1 Defendant Michael Webb filed a notice of appeal of his conviction but died shortly after he was sentenced. His appointed counsel moved for abatement of *472Webb’s conviction. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal and declined to abate the conviction or any of the monetary amounts that Webb was ordered to pay, relying on this court’s decision in State

Opinion CORRIGAN, J. Plaintiff William B. Webb was injured by exposure to asbestos products and sued a raw asbestos supplier for failing to warn him about the danger. His case raises a question about the extent of a supplier’s duty to warn. Specifically, when a company supplies a hazardous raw material for use in making a finished product, what is the scope of the supplier’s duty to warn ultimate users of the f

LOUGHRY, Justice: This matter is before this Court upon a June 9, 2017, order of the United States *856Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit certifying the following question: Whether West Virginia law permits a claim of failure to warn and negligent misrepresentation against a branded drug manufacturer when the dr

JOYNER, District Judge. Before the Court are Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 50), Plaintiffs' Opposition thereto (Doc. No. 54), Defendants' Reply in Support thereof (Doc. No. 56), and Plaintiffs' Sur-reply thereto (Doc. No. 57). For the reasons set forth below, we grant Defendants' Motion. This case arises from Plaintiffs' Walgreen Co. and The Kroger Co. ("Retailer Plaintiffs") allegations that Def

174 P.3d 1082 (2007) 217 Or. App. 165 Terry Fifi WEBB, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Richard Raymond LOVETTE, Respondent-Appellant. Donald Lee Webb, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Richard Raymond Lovette, Respondent-Appellant. 0505-04669, 0505-04668; A129217 (Control); A129248. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted October 4, 2007.