Cases

444 B.R. 415 (2010) In re Steven EUBANKS and Jeania Eubanks, Debtors. James C. Luker, Trustee, Plaintiff v. Steven Eubanks, Jeania Eubanks, Inga Eubanks, Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 3:07-bk-15913 E. Adversary No. 3:09-ap-01258. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division. December 29, 2010. *417 Johnathan

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 26a0244p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DENNIS O’CONNOR, and all those similarly situated, │

STATEMENT OF THE CASE RILEY, Judge. [1] Appellant-Defendant, Wendell Brown, now known as Menes Ankh-El 1 (Ankh-El), appeals his conviction for burglary, a Class C felony, Ind.Code § 35-43-2-1 (2011); forgery, a Class C felony, I.C. § 35-43-5-2(b) (2011); and driving while suspended, a

28 F.Supp.2d 1024 (1998) Samuel G. EUBANKS, M.D., et al., Plaintiffs, v. R. David STENGEL, Commonwealth Attorney for Jefferson County, et al., Defendants. No. CIV. A. 398CV383-H. United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky. November 5, 1998. *1025 *1026 David A. Friedman, American Civil Libert

200 S.W.3d 473 (2004) Wendell CAMPBELL, Appellant v. ENTERGY ARKANSAS, INC., Appellee. No. CA 04-285. Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division I. December 15, 2004. Howell, Trice, Hope & Files, P.A., by: Jason Files and Eubanks, Baker & Schulze, by: J.G. Schulze, Little Rock, for appellant. Friday, Eldredge & Clark, by: Scott J. Lancaster, Little Ro

211 S.W.3d 500 (2005) Wendell CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. ENTERGY ARKANSAS, INC., Appellee. No. 05-14. Supreme Court of Arkansas. June 30, 2005. *501 Howell, Trice, Hope & Files, by: Jason Files, and Eubanks, Baker & Schulze, by: J.G. Schulze, Little Rock, for appellant. Friday, Eldredge & Clark, LLP, by: Scott J.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-98-00577-CV Rex Eubank and Bonnie Eubank, Appellants v. Wendell Estes and Lyn Estes, Appellees

*779 DENNIS, Circuit Judge: This direct criminal appeal arises from the conviction following jury trial of Appellants Wendell Alboyd Cornett (“Cornett”) and Mary Martillea Galloway (“Galloway”) for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base in violation of 21 U

Wendell L. Griffen, Judge, concurring. I join the majority because I agree that the trial judge did not err in awarding custody of Joshua to appellee. I write separately to emphasize that the change of custody in this case does not turn on appellant’s religion, be it Baptist, Methodist, Wiccan, or no religion at all. The issue is whether the trial judge’s change of custody is clearly erroneous where he

DONALD RUSSELL, Circuit Judge: This action is brought by Charles W. Crosson, Jr., plaintiff/appellee, against Wendell F. Conlee, the executor of the estate of E. Douglas Via, defendant/appellant, alleging breach of a contract of employment entered into by Crosson and Via. Subject matter jurisdiction rests on diversity of citizenship

204 S.W.3d 99 (2005) Gregory F. SMALL and Brenda Small, Appellants v. Craig KULESA, Appellee. No. CA 04-342. Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division IV. February 23, 2005. Daniel D. Becker, Hot Springs, for appellants. Eudox Patterson, Hot Springs, for appellee. WENDELL L. GRIFFEN, Judge. Gregory and Brenda Small appeal from a grant of summary ju

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DHBH ATLANTIC L.L.C. and 60 ½, LLC, Appellants, v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, Appellee. No. 4D21-852 [February 16, 2022] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach Cou

11/29/2021 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs April 13, 2021 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JOSEPH GEVEDON Appeal from the Circuit Court for Giles County Nos. CR-14841, CR-14842 Stella L. Hargrove, Judge No. M2020-00359-CCA-R

Wendell L. Griffen, Judge, dissenting. “It is the duty of a driver of a motor vehicle to keep a lookout for other vehicles or persons on the street or highway. The lookout required is that which a reasonably careful driver would keep under circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence in this case.” — AMI Civ. 901(A) (2008)

266 S.W.3d 734 (2007) Angela KELLEY, Appellant, v. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, Appellees. No. 07-367. Supreme Court of Arkansas. November 1, 2007. *736 Gary Eubanks & Associates, by: Russell Marlin, Little Rock, for appellant. Kilpatrick, Williams, Smith & Meeks, LLP, by

101 S.W.3d 252 (2003) METROPOLITAN NATIONAL BANK v. LA SHER OIL COMPANY. No. CA 02-673. Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division II. March 19, 2003. *253 Williams & Anderson LLP, by John Kooistra, III, and Kelly S. Terry, Little Rock, for appellant. Byrne Law Firm, P.A., by Russell J. Byrne, Little Rock, for appellee.

McKAY, Circuit Judge, dissenting in part: I join the majority’s opinion except as to the city employee’s bias. As to that issue, I do not suggest that ruling for Las Cruces *1249violates any binding precedent. Neither this court nor the Supreme Court has decided whether municipal employees may be jurors in cases involving their employers, and, conseq

The primary issue in this appeal from a declaratory judgment is whether a vehicle the certificate of title to which is issued in *Page 1032 the name of Williams Trucking, a sole proprietorship operated by Wendell Williams before he began operating as W W Trucking, is entitled to coverage as a temporary substitute vehicle under a policy of insurance issued by Carolina Casualty Insurance Company in the name of "W W Trucking, Wendell Williams d/b/a."

Cite as 2024 Ark. App. 128 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-22-140 Opinion Delivered February 21, 2024 CLARENCE E. TURNBO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI BEAU TURNBO TRUST NUMBER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FIFTH ONE

PER CURIAM. The plaintiffs in a slander of title suit appeal an adverse summary judgment. The record discloses the existence of genuine issues of material fact on the several elements of this cause of action as enunciated in Gates v. Utsey, 177 So.2d 486 (Fla.App.1st 1965). Thus, the case was not ripe for a disposition via summary judgment. *251