Cases

DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM: In conformance with our opinion in Adams v. Rankin County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1973, 485 F.2d 324 which *929ordered the implementation of a unitary school system in Rankin County, Mississippi, the District Court, upon remand, made a detailed report to the Fifth Circuit on July 10, 19741 which was supplemented

PER CURIAM: In this school desegregation case we are called upon to issue rulings with respect to five of the “sextet of indicia —student bodies, faculty, staff, transportation, extracurricular activities, and facilities,” Carr v. Montgomery County Board of Education, 5 Cir., 1970, 429 F.2d 382, applicable in such cases. As usual, t

KITCHENS, Justice, concurring in part and dissenting in part: ¶23. I agree with the majority’s reasoning that whether the Rankin County School District was entitled to discretionary-function immunity under the Mississippi Tort Claims' Act (MTCA) should be determined by the test this Court articulated in Brantley v. City of Horn Lake, 152 So.3d 1106 (Miss.2014), and not

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1248 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1249 OPINION Plaintiff Adam Rankin filed this lawsuit alleging that defendant Longs Drug Stores California,

[Cite as Rankin v. Kirsh, 2023-Ohio-3371.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO PRINCE RANKIN, : APPEAL NO. C-220632 TRIAL NO. A-2004225 and : NAJAH ABDEL AZIZ, : O P I N I O N. Plaintiffs-Appellants, : vs.

MEMORANDUM ** California state prisoner James Albert Rankins appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. Rankins contends that his Sixth Amendment rights were violated pursuant to Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and Cunningham v. Cali

MEMORANDUM ** California state prisoner James Albert Rankins appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. Rankins contends that his Sixth Amendment rights were violated pursuant to Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and Cunningham v. Cali

This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition. Before HOLIFIELD, KIRKBY, and DALY Appellate Military Judges _________________________ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Austin E. RANKIN Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 20, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert

PER CURIAM: * Appellants appeal the district court’s (1) March 30, 2009, 2009 WL 900726, order dismissing Defendants City of Flowood, Wealton Beverly, Dimitri Ellison, Cheryl Lott, and Jerry Cox; (2) January 29, 2010 order dismissing defendant Hinds Community College; (3) April 16, 2010, 2010 WL 1541471, order granting summary judgment for the remaining Defendants Rankin County School District, Kal

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 23A18 Filed 21 December 2018 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ANGELA MARIE RANKIN Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 809 S.E.2d 358 (2018), vacating defendant’s conviction upon appeal from a judgment entered on 6 July 2016 by Judge Michael D. Duncan in Superior

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Rankin v. State, Slip Opinion No. 2025-Ohio-4483.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typogr

Appellants, plaintiffs below, bring this appeal from an order dated December 20, 1988, entered by the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of appellees, defendants below. Appellants filed a libel and slander action alleging that on or about February 11, 1987, during a program entitled "The Davis Rankin Morning Show," appellees disseminated a radio broadcast that by inuendo, insinuation, and/or implication stated that Pete Diaz, III, and Pete Diaz, Jr., are "drug deale

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

CPIIEF JUSTICE DUVALL delivered the opinion of the court : This was an action for slander. The words alleged to have been spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff are these: “ He, the defendant, had had sexual intercourse with the plaintiff at divers different times.” The Revised Statutes provide that a charge of incest, fornication, or adultery, against a female, shall be actionable; and in

ACCEPTED 04-014-00494-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 1/30/2015 4:41:33 PM

Justice MARTIN dissenting. I respectfully dissent. On 12 September 1984 the state filed a motion in this appeal asking this Court to take judicial notice of certain records of the North Carolina Department of Correction. Ruling on the motion was reserved until the determination of the appeal. The records in question indicate that George Totten was not in prison at the time the motion for his p

711 S.E.2d 377 (2011) 309 Ga. App. 817 RANKIN v. The STATE. No. A11A0006. Court of Appeals of Georgia. June 7, 2011. *378 Daniel L. Henderson, for appellant. Patrick H. Head, District Attorney, Samuel Kevin Barger, John Richard Edwards, Assistant District Attorneys, for appellee. PHIPPS, Pres

PER CURIAM. Defendant-appellant, ex-wife, appeals an order (1) modifying final judgment of divorce wherein the alimony provision thereof was eliminated and (2) denying appellant attorney’s fees. The parties in this action were divorced on April 20, 1970 and • pursuant to the judgment entered thereon, appellant, ex-wife, was awarded $1,500 yearly alimony. Having retired from his job, petitioner-ap-pellee,