Cases

628 S.W.2d 155 (1982) Billy Roy CRAVER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas. No. B14-81-503-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). January 14, 1982. Rehearing Denied February 4, 1982. Discretionary Review Refused April 14, 1982. *156 Lawrence Rousseau, Houston, for appellant. Jo

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS TAUREAN RAMON CRAVER, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. § §

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § TAUREAN RAMON CRAVER, No. 08-10-00118-CR § Appellant, Appeal from § v.

GWIN. J. Defendant-appellant, James B. Craver (appellant), appeals from the judgment entered by the Cambridge Municipal Court of Guernsey County, wherein it found appellant guilty of the charge of reckless operation in violation of R.C. 4511.20. Appellant seeks our review and assigns the following as error: ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT GUILTY OF RECKLES

EAGLES, Judge. The Cravers and Nakagamas appeal the trial court’s grant of respondent Burton’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the *160verdict. The issue is whether the name Lutz-Austell Funeral Home and its concomitant goodwill is a partnership asset which may be sold in conjunction with the physical assets owned by the partnership. Specifically, the issues befor

By the Court.*—Parker, J. [After stating the facts.]—The case as proved clearly shows, I think, that there was no consideration for the bond and mortgage, as well as a clear, misappropriation thereof to a purpose for which it was not intended, to defendant’s detriment. The bond and mortgage were made expressly as a security for one thousand dollars in money to be advanced, and the defendant gave no co

Agree to affirm on opinion of PARKER, J., in Supreme Court.

PORFILIO, Circuit Judge. Francis Brown, Michael Olsen, and Kirk Smith, named plaintiffs in an uncertified class action, 1 appeal a district court order granting summary judgment for defendant Royal Maccabees Life Insurance Company (Maccabees). This appeal requires us to answer the following question of state law:

Upon review of all of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good ground to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, or rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Opinion and Award of the deputy commissioner with minor modifications as follows: The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were agreed upon by the parties at the hearing before t

Mr. Justice Waterman deliveeed the opinion of the Coubt. The order appointing a receiver is as follows: “ 148,879. The Whitman & Barnes Manufacturing Company v. Craver & Steele Manufacturing Company et al. This cause coming on to be heard upon the verified bill of complaint he

274 S.E.2d 897 (1981) T. W. BROWN v. Bruce L. SCISM. No. 8022SC558. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. February 17, 1981. Discretionary Review Denied March 24, 1981. *899 Smith & Michael by R. B. Smith, Jr., Phyllis S. Penry, Lexington, Martin & Van Hoy by Henry T. Van Hoy, II, and D. Duncan Maysilles, M

The plaintiff was employed by the defendant as a night-watchman. It was his duty to keep watch on three floors of the mill, and once an hour in winding his clock to use keys which were "fastened to the upstairs and posts over the room." In the performance of this duty he had to go up and down a stairway. At 9 o'clock on the night of 7 September, 1927, while he was going from the second floor to the basement his foot was caught in the loop of a small wire each end of which had been fastened by

HILL, Judge. Appellant violated Rule 10(b) and (c) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure by failing to number its exceptions in the record and by failing to list the exceptions after the assignments of error identified by their number and by pages in the record at which they appear. It further violated Appellate Rule 28(b)(1) by failing to give a statement of questions presented for review in its brief. It likewise failed to p

The objection by appellee to the consideration of appellant's assignments, because no motion for new trial was filed in the court below, and hence the alleged errors presented by these assignments were not there urged or called to the attention of the trial court, is not well taken. When the trial below is before the court, the appellant is not required to file a motion for new trial presenting alleged errors as a prerequisite to urging such errors in the appellate court, where the court has

Appellee brought this suit to recover a balance for merchandise sold by it to appellant, as evidenced by verified itemized account attached to its petition, and on trial before the court without a jury recovered judgment for the full amount claimed, to wit, $345.45, from which judgment this appeal is prosecuted. There was no motion filed by appellant for a new trial in the court below, for which reason appellee insists that we should not consider any of the assignments of error, since

LOCKEMY, C.J.: **408In this action Clair Craver Johnson appeals the circuit court's entry of summary judgment in favor of John Roberts, M.D. and the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) (collectively Respondents). Johnson asserts the circuit court erred in finding her claims were time barred by the statute of repose applicable to medical

JUSTICE HEARN : **258 *911 Petitioners Dr. John Roberts and the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) sought a writ of certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in Johns

954 N.E.2d 1056 (2011) In re the Matter of the LARRY L. THOMPSON REVOCABLE TRUST. Deanna Thompson Stull, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Larry L. Thompson Revocable Trust, Derek Thompson and Vicki Thompson Craver, Appellees-Respondents. No. 54A01-1011-TR-592. Court of Appeals of Indiana. September 28, 2011. *1058 David W. Stone IV,

*166MARTIN, Chief Judge. Plaintiffs, Tony and Bonnie Lambeth, brought this action asserting a claim for conversion against defendants Brown, Craver and Barber and a claim of negligence against defendant Media General, Inc. (Media General). Plaintiffs' claims arise out of a break-in of their home on 16 September 2002 by the individual defendants

470 S.E.2d 570 (1996) Kay Hamrick BRADLEY, Appellant, v. CHEROKEE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. ONE OF CHEROKEE COUNTY, South Carolina and Joe Dean Spencer, Sandra B. Greene, Ola Copeland, J. Arthur Bridges, Jr., James W. Brown, John A. Leazer, Jerry W. McDaniel, V. Stephen Moss, and Fleming J. Means, in their official capacity as Board Members of the Cherokee School District No. One of Cherokee County, South Carolina, Respondents. No