Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Allen v. Lindamood”
Frederick Parks v. Cherry Lindamood, Wardenpublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs August 6, 2013 FREDERICK PARKS v. CHERRY LINDAMOOD, WARDEN Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hardeman County No. CC-2012-CR-259 Joseph H. Walker, III, Judge No. W2013-00361-CCA-R3-HC - Filed December 10, 2013 Petitioner, Frederick Parks, appeals from the trial court’s order summarily dismissing P
Stanley v. MSD OF SW ALLEN COUNTY SCHOOLSpublic domain
628 F.Supp.2d 902 (2008) STANLEY and Connie C., Individually and as Next Friends of M.C., a minor, Plaintiffs, v. M.S.D. OF SOUTHWEST ALLEN COUNTY SCHOOLS and Green-West Allen Special Education Cooperative, Defendants. Cause No. 1:07-CV-169-PRC. United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Fort Wayne Division. December 29, 2008. *905
OPINION AND ORDER PAUL R. CHERRY, United States Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the Court on (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 114], filed on May 15, 2008, by Plaintiffs Stanley and Connie C., Individually and as Next Friends of M.C., a minor (collectively “the Parents”); and (2) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 117], filed on May 15, 2008, by Defendants MSD of Southwest A
Mr. Chief Justice Beard delivered the opinion of the Court. This is the second time this case has been before this court. At the September term, 1902, it was reversed because of the admission of incompetent testimony. The opinion of the court on that reversal will be found in 109 Tenn., 407, 74 S. W., 112. Upon its remand, another trial was had, resulting in a verdict and judgment for $5,000 against the railroa
432 F.2d 132 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Steven Ray KANDLIS, Defendant-Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Julian Joseph ZEBROWSKI, Defendant-Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William Wilson QUINN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Larry Allen SLOCUM, Defendant-Appellant. No. 2477
Gollihue v. Consolidated Rail Corp.public domain
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because I find that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of subsequent remedial measures that unfairly influenced and misled the jury into determining that appellant was negligent based upon highly prejudicial and inadmissible evidence. Furthermore, contrary to the majority's casual dismissal of the issue on the basis of waiver, and despite the appellees' insistence that appellant failed to object to the introduction of the eviden
Samuel Winkfield v. State of Tennesseepublic domain
08/30/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs at Knoxville June 25, 2019 SAMUEL WINKFIELD v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C-18-1999 Donald H. Allen, Judge No. W2018-01873-CCA-R3-ECN The Peti
Springston v. Consolidated Rail Corp.public domain
OPINION BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff appeals and defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”) cross-appeals the judgment of the district court in this diversity action arising out of a collision between a Conrail train and a pick-up truck driven by plaintiff in northwest Ohio. For the reasons to follow, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. I On J
Wightman v. Consolidated Rail Corp.public domain
Cook, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in the decision to affirm the judgment of the court of appeals on the issues raised by Conrail on cross-appeal. I dissent, however, from the decision of the majority to depart from the precedent ratified just three years ago in Scioto Mem. Hosp. Assn. v. Price Waterhouse (1996), 74 Ohio St.3d 474, 479, 659 N
Stark County Bar Ass'n v. Ergazospublic domain
Per Curiam. Upon examination of the record and the findings of the board of commissioners, we conclude there are sufficient facts to justify the board’s finding that respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(3) and DR 5-105(A) and (B). Accordingly, based upon respondent’s previous public reprimand and *62pursuant to Gov. R. V(7), we accept the recommen
Fluor Corporation v. Sykespublic domain
3 Ariz. App. 211 (1966) 413 P.2d 270 FLUOR CORPORATION, Ltd., Appellant, v. Milton F. SYKES, as Administrator of the Estate of Donald D. Sykes, Deceased, Appellee.[*] No. 2 CA-CIV 91. Court of Appeals of Arizona. April 19, 1966. *212 Lesher, Scruggs, Rucker, Kimble & Lindamood, by Robert O.
Adams v. District of Columbiapublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHUNDRA ADAMS, Parent and next friend of T.J., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 17-1816 (JEB) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Chundra Adams, acting on behalf of her child T.J., brought this action alleging that the District of Co
Adams ex rel. T.J. v. Dist. of Columbiapublic domain
JAMES E. BOASBERG, United States District Judge Plaintiff Chundra Adams, acting on behalf of her child T.J., brought this action alleging that the District of Columbia is violating the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. , by failing to provide her son a free and ap
Means v. Phillipspublic domain
ORDER TO MODIFY THE DOCKET, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE PETITION FOR AN UNCONDITIONAL WRIT OF HABEAS. CORPUS AND REQUIRING PETITIONER’S UNCONDITIONAL RELEASE FROM THE JUDGMENTS AT ISSUE WITHOUT PREJUDICE JON PHIPPS McCALLA, District Judge. Before the Court is the Petition for Issuance of an Unconditional Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Petitioner, Courtney Means, Tennessee Department of Corre
United States v. Kandlispublic domain
DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: The four appellants were each charged with violations of 21 U.S.C. § 176a and 26 U.S.C. § 4744(a). They were tried before a jury, found guilty on the 21 U.S.C. § 176a charge, and each was sentenced under the Youth Corrections Act. Their common contention is that the trial court erred in failing to suppress evidence that marihuana was found in the car in which they were riding, as
Julia L. Kurtz v. Ronald D. Kurtzpublic domain
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 6, 2010. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-08-00351-C
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS AARON WHITELOCK and DONNA § No. 08-21-00185-CV WHITELOCK, § Appeal from the Appellants, § 13th Judicial District Court v.
Raymond Jones v. State of Tennesseepublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 15, 2004 Session RAYMOND ROGER JONES v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Washington County No. 21822 Robert E. Cupp, Judge No. E2003-00580-CCA-R3-PC - December 3, 2004 Petitioner, Raymond Roger Jones, appeals the Washington County Criminal Court’s
Raymond Jones v. State of Tennesseepublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 15, 2004 Session RAYMOND ROGER JONES v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Washington County No. 21822 Robert E. Cupp, Judge No. E2003-00580-CCA-R3-PC Filed September 29, 2004 Petitioner, Raymond Roger Jones, appeals the Washington County Criminal Court’
S. v. District of Columbia Public Schoolspublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) DAMARCUS S., by and through his ) Parent, K.S., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. )