Cases

ORDER AIKEN, Chief Judge: Plaintiff Carol Giles moves to limit defendant St. Charles Health System, Inc.’s communications with putative class members pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(d). Plaintiffs motion is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is employed as a registered nurse at one of defendant’s hospitals. Defendant obliges its hourly nurses (“caregivers”), such as plaintiff, t

OPINION AND ORDER AIKEN, Chief Judge: Plaintiffs Carol Giles, Shawn Dunlap, Cheryl Fischer, Melodin Cornis, and Mary Ann Adler move for class certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. Defendant St. Charles Health System, Inc. opposes plaintiffs’ motion. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs’ motion is granted. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs are employed as registered

W.H. “Dub” Arnold, Chief Justice. Appellant, Brenda Head, raises an issue of first impression concerning the interpretation of Ark. R. Civ. P. 36 and 41 (2000). Specifically, Head questions whether a second cause of action involving the same parties and claims, filed after a previous voluntary nonsuit, is an “other proceeding” under Rule 36, and whether admissions made under Rule 36 in the nonsuited actio

David C. Nye, Chief U.S. District Court Judge I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court is Defendants Curtis Giles, David Funk, Funk Daily, Inc., and Shoesole Farms, Inc.'s (Collectively "Defendants" or "Funk Dairy") Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 35) and Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosure (Dkt. 36). On January 9, 2019, the Court held oral argument and took the motions

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CESAR MARTÍNEZ-RODRÍGUEZ; No. 19-35526 DALIA PADILLA-LÓPEZ; MAYRA MÚÑOZ-LARA; BRENDA GASTÉLUM- D.C. No. SIERRA; LESLIE ORTIZ-GARCÍA; 1:17-cv-00001- RICARDO NERI-CAMACHO, DCN Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. OPINION CURTIS GILES, an individual; DAVID FUNK, an individual; FUNK DAIRY, INC.

Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part II-D-2. We consider whether a defendant forfeits his Sixth Amendment right to confront a witness against him when a judge determines that a wrongful act by the defendant made the witness unavailable to testify at trial. *356

WERDEGAR, J., Concurring. I concur in the judgment of affirmance. Like the majority, I conclude the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing is not confined exclusively to witness-tampering cases, in which a defendant commits malfeasance in order to procure the unavailability of a witness, but can be applied to these facts as well, where defendant’s actions in procuring a witness’s unavailability were the same actions for which he

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON August 4, 2015 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BRENDA WOODS Appeal from the Circuit Court for McNairy County No. 3171 J. Weber McCraw, Judge No. W2014-01850-CCA-R3-CD - Filed October 7, 2015 The Defendant, Brenda Woods, was convicted by a McNairy County Circuit Court jury of three counts of procu

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 25, 2011 Session W. ALLEN BARRETT v. GILES COUNTY ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Giles County No. 4800 Robert L. Jones, Judge No. M2010-02018-COA-R3-CV - Filed October 5, 2011 The losing candidate filed an election contest alleging that the election commission made a mistak

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 965 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 966 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT

GIBBONS, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which STEEH, D.J., joined. CLAY, J. (pp. 706 - 709), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. OPINION JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. On May 17, 1993, Earl Giles was convicted on one count of felonious sexual penetration in violation of Ohio Revised Code § 2907.12 and one count of gross sexual imposition in violation of Ohio Revised

OPINION By the Court, Pickering, C.J.: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has certified the following questions to this court: 1. Is a quiet title action under Nevada Revised Statutes § 40.010, which is premised on an allegedly invalid trustee’s sale under Nevada Revised Sta

REMITTITUR SUGGESTED; and Opinion Filed May 11, 2016. Court of Appeals S In The Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01616-CV LONE STAR ENGINE INSTALLATION CENTER, INC. AND RAFAEL SANCHEZ, Appellants V. BRENDA

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION BILL PARKER, Bankruptcy Judge. On this date the Court considered the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Defendant, Athol W. Packer (“Defendant”), in the above-referenced adversary proceeding (the “Motion”), the amended response in opposition filed thereto by the Plaintiff, Judgment Factors, L.L.C. (hereafter the “Response”), and the Defendant’s reply thereto (hereafter

632 So.2d 577 (1993) Ex parte Arthur Lee GILES. (Re Arthur Lee Giles v. State.) 1920375. Supreme Court of Alabama. October 29, 1993. On Application for Rehearing January 14, 1994. *578 Bernard E. Harcourt, Montgomery, and Herbert B. Sparks, Jr., Birmingham, for petitioner. James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Melis

Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court

[Cite as State v. Harvey, 2022-Ohio-4650.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. L-22-1029 Appellee Trial Court No. CR0202101334 v. Quincy Harvey DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant

The appellant, Arthur Lee Giles, was charged by an indictment returned against him by the Grand Jury of Blount County for a first degree assault of Annie M. Nelson. He entered a plea of not guilty, was found guilty of assault with intent to murder as charged in the indictment, and was duly sentenced to be imprisoned in the penitentiary for a term of twenty years. He appeals to this Court. Appellant was at all proceedings in the trial court, and is in this Court represented by c

Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr

554 So.2d 1073 (1984) Arthur Lee GILES, alias v. STATE. 6 Div. 86. Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama. January 10, 1984. On Return to Remand January 22, 1985. Rehearing Denied December 9, 1986. *1076 Dennis N. Balske and John L. Carroll, Montgomery, for appellant. Charles A. Graddick, At