Cases

JUSTICE TIMPONE, delivered the opinion of the Court. Certain core principles underpin our search and seizure jurisprudence. Individual privacy rights, especially in the home, are among the most protected. As Justice Robert L. Clifford wrote for the Court, “we are not dealing with a mere formality but with an underlying great constitutional principle embraced b

DECISION AND ORDER ELIZABETH A, WOLFORD, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Rickey L. .Bryant, Jr, (“Plaintiff’) filed this, action on November 29, 2016, alleging various claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as claims under New York state law, arising out of an alleged vicious and unprovoked attack of Plaintiff while he was riding his bicycle, by unidentified o

ORDER LESLIE J. ABRAMS, JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Before the Court is Defendant Progressive Mountain Insurance Company’s Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs claims 1-4 and 6-11. (Doc. 4). For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff, Charles Bryant, commenced this action on April 5, 2016 in the Super

PER CURIAM: Alice Bryant appeals the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of Bryant’s applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bryant v. Colvin, No. 1:13-cv00012-MOC, 2013 WL 5540296 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 8, 2013). We dispense with oral ar

JOHNSON, Justice. |tWe granted this writ application to determine whether the court of appeal erred in overturning defendant’s conviction for aggravated burglary. Finding the evidence sufficient to support the trial judge’s finding that defendant, Jerome Bryant, Jr., entered the victim’s home, we reverse. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On February 5, 2009, Jason Goetz, who resided at 433 Pen

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-19-00406-CR CHARLES HARVEY BRYANT, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 46th District Court

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: The Governor of Mississippi and the Executive Director of the Mississippi Department of Human Services appeal a preliminary injunction. Because the plaintiffs do not have standing, we reverse the injunction and render a judgment of dismissal. I. A. The plaintiffs challenge t

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 16-60477 September 29, 2017

78 P.3d 148 (2003) 190 Or. App. 253 Angela Nicole BRYANT, Respondent, v. Charles Edward WALKER, Jr., Appellant. 02-01548CV; A118386. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted May 14, 2003. Decided October 22, 2003. *150 Karen M. Oakes argued the cause and filed the brief for appella

801 F.Supp.2d 898 (2011) Claude BRYANT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, et al., Defendants. No. C 08-01190 SI. United States District Court, N.D. California. July 12, 2011. Order Granting Motion to Amend September 12, 2011. *900 Annette Gifford, J. Nelson Thomas, Patrick Solomon, Cristin

161 S.W.3d 758 (2005) The STATE of Texas, State, v. David Arthur BRYANT, Appellee. No. 2-03-460-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth. March 24, 2005. *760 Tim Curry, Criminal District Atty., Charles M. Mallin, Tanya Sue Dohoney, Shannon Prellwitz, Raquel Jones, Asst. Criminal District Attys., Fort Worth, for Appellee.

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-18-00177-CR ___________________________ CHARLES DEAN BRYANT, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 371st District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1510666R Before Sudderth, C.J.; Gabriel and Bassel, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Bassel

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2018-CA-00235-SCT CHARLES ARAUJO, CASSANDRA OVERTON - WELCHLIN, ARTHUR BROWN, EVELYN GARNER ARAUJO AND LUTAYA STEWART v. GOVERNOR PHIL BRYANT, JPS, MS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GLADYS OVERTON, ANDREW OVERTON, SR., ELLA MAE JAMES, TIFFANY MINOR, THE MISSISSIPPI CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION, MIDTOWN PARTNERS, INC. AND MIDTOWN PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/13/2018 TRIAL JUDGE: HON.

NUMBER 13-23-00387-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG BRYANT CHARLES PIERCE, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE 117TH DISTRICT COURT OF

OPINION AND ORDER J. LEON HOLMES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Brenda Tuohey and Malvorn May,1 individually and on behalf of. all residents and estates of .residents who resided at. Chenal Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center from July 23, 2010, through the present, commenced this putative class action against the defendants in - the. Circuit Court of Pulaski County on June 23

| TWOODARD, J., concurring. I respectfully concur from the majority’s opinion. I agree with the majority opinion but believe that it is important to note the following alleged occurrences, which relate to the defendants’ “extreme and outrageous” conduct, since their basic premise and the trial court’s decision to grarit their summary judgment are based on a conclusion that Ms. King would

OPINION ON THE STATE’S CROSS-PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. LEE ANN DAUPHINOT, Justice. Pursuant to Rule 50 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we have reconsidered our prior opinion upon the State’s cross-petition for discretionary review. Our opinion and judgment of November 15, 2001 are withdrawn and the following are substituted. A jury convicted Appellant Casey Den-undr

OPINION LEE ANN DAUPHINOT, Justice. A jury convicted Appellant Casey Den-undra Bryant of the offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years of age and assessed his punishment at forty years’ confinement. Appellant raises a single issue on appeal, contending that the trial court abridged his right to qualified appointed counsel under articles 1.051 and 26.04 of the Texas Code o

OPINION AND ORDER REBECCA BEACH SMITH, District Judge. This matter comes before the court on defendant Hampton Roads Transit’s filing of a Bill of Costs. For the reasons set forth below, the court DENIES the Bill of Costs. I. Procedural History On May 2, 2005, twenty-five (25) plaintiffs filed a Complaint against Hampton Roads Transit (“HRT”) a

336 S.C. 340 (1999) 520 S.E.2d 319 The STATE, Respondent, v. Lavar K. BRYANT, Appellant. No. 24988. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Heard May 11, 1999. Decided August 16, 1999. *341 Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, fo