Cases

782 N.W.2d 147 (2010) IOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Complainant, v. Ross G. HAUSER, Respondent. No. 09-1445. Supreme Court of Iowa. May 14, 2010. *149 Charles L. Harrington and David J. Grace, Des Moines, for complainant. Ross G. Hauser, Cedar Rapids, pro se. WIGGINS, Justice. This matter co

DAVIS, Judge. *11 This appeal presents the issues of whether (1) North Carolina law recognizes a cause of action for tortious interference with an expected inheritance by a potential beneficiary during the lifetime of the testator; and (2) in cases where a living parent has grounds to bring cla

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge DAVIS wrote the opinion, in which Judge NIEMEYER and Judge SHEDD joined. OPINION DAVIS, Circuit Judge: Appellants, Elena M. David, Arleen J. Stach, and Victor Hernandez, are the named representatives of a putative class of participants in two retirement plans sponsored by the Bank of America C

[Cite as State v. Hauser, 2016-Ohio-7710.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 103880 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs.

DAVID T. PROSSER, J. ¶ 158. (concurring in part, dissenting in part). The majority opinion affirms the decisions of the circuit court and the court of appeals that the buyout (Buy-Sell) agreement, under all the facts and circumstances, is unenforceable; and it remands the case to the circuit court for appointment of a receiver. I concur in these determinations. ¶ 159. I

COFFEY, Circuit Judge. On March 31, 1998, a federal grand jury in the Northern District of Illinois returned a one-count indictment against the defendant-appellant, David Aldaco, a convicted felon, 1 charging him with possession of a shotgun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At trial Aldaco offered no defense, an

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 09–1445 Filed May 14, 2010 IOWA SUPREME COURT ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Complainant, vs. ROSS G. HAUSER, Respondent. On review of the report of the Grievance Commission of the Supreme Court of Iowa. Grievance commission recommends attorney‟s license be suspended for nine months. LICENSE SUSPENDED. Charles L. Harrington and David J.

BENSON, Chief District Judge. Wayne G. Hauser brought this action for damages against Physicians Mutual Insurance Company, his disability insurer, and Equifax, Inc., a consumer reporting agency which, at Physicians’ request, prepared an investigative consumer report on Hauser to be used by Physicians in connection with underwriting the disability insurance. Hauser alleged the def

(2008) CAVCON INC., a West Virginia corporation, Plaintiff, v. ENDRESS + HAUSER, INC., an Indiana corporation, Todd Lucey, an individual, Fred Cappelli, an individual, L.H. Boleky Co., a Pennsylvania corporation, and John Planitzer, an individual, Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:07-0044. United States District Court, S.D. West Virginia, at Charleston. May 8, 2008. </

LOMBARD, Circuit Judge: In this diversity ease, G. Crohn & Company (“Crohn”)1 appeals from a March 26, 1985 judgment of the Southern District of New York, after a bench trial before Charles L. Brieant, J., granting plaintiff bank recovery of $292,445.42 plus interest on a bill of exchange. Crohn claims 1) that the district court erred in finding that European Asian Bank, A.G. (“Eurasbank”)

SHON HASTINGS, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff David G. Velde, Chapter 7 Trustee, filed a Complaint seeking to avoid a $ 22,000 payment Debtor Ronald G. McMartin, Jr., made to Defendant Scott Morrison, as Trustee of the Morrison Family Trust, on an obligation owed by McM, Inc. Doc. 1.1 The Trustee alleges the payment is a voidable transfer under

03/22/2021 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 13, 2021 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RONALD LYONS, JAMES MICHAEL USINGER, LEE HAROLD CROMWELL, AUSTIN GARY COOPER, AND CHRISTOPHER ALAN HAUSER Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County Nos. 2017-A-79; 2

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued December 4, 2018 Decided July 2, 2019 No. 18-1003 DAVID T. MYERS, APPELLANT v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, APPELLEE On Appeal from the Decision of the United States Tax Court Joseph A. DiRuzzo III argued

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DAVID W. ROBERTS and ROYAL PALM PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellants, v. CHRISTIE'S GREAT ESTATES, INC., n/k/a CHRISTIE'S INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE, INC. a Florida Corporation; PREMIER ESTATE PROPERTIES, INC.; GERALD P. LIGUORI; CARMEN N. D'ANGELO, JR.; JOSEPH G. LIGUORI; RICK S. FELBERBAUM, Individually; and FELBERBAUM

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DAVID W. ROBERTS and ROYAL PALM PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellants, v. CHRISTIE’S GREAT ESTATES, INC. n/k/a CHRISTIE’S INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE, INC., a Florida Corporation, PREMIER ESTATE PROPERTIES, INC., GERARD P. LIGUORI, CARMEN N. D’ANGELO, JR., JOSEPH G. LIGUORI, RICK S. FELBER

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DAVID W. ROBERTS and ROYAL PALM PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellants, v. RICK S. FELBERBAUM, individually, and FELBERBAUM & ASSOCIATES, P.A., a Florida professional association, CHRISTIE'S GREAT ESTATES, INC., n/k/a CHRISTIES INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE, INC., a Florida corporation, PREMIER ESTATE PROPERTIES, INC., GERARD P. LIGU

PER CURIAM. Appellant challenges the adequacy of his attorney’s. fee award, pursuant to section 627.428, Florida Statutes (2010), rendered in this first-party insurance dispute. As the first of two issues raised on appeal, we address whether the trial court erred by refusing to' consider the hours expended by Appellant’s attorney while he was

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Jun 28 2019, 9:20 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals esto

ROTHENBERG, J. Centennial Homeowners Association, Inc. (“Centennial”) appeals from an order granting Dolomite Co., Inc.’s (“Dolomite”) motion in limine to exclude evidence in Centennial’s betterment action, filed pursuant to section 66.041, et seq., Florida Statutes (2009), and from a final judgment entered in favor of Dolomite following a jury trial. We affirm. H.G. Enterprises at Centennial, In

47 So.3d 863 (2010) CENTENNIAL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellant, v. DOLOMITE CO., INC., a Colorado corporation, Appellee. No. 3D10-1256. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. October 13, 2010. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied November 18, 2010. William J. Motyczka, Miami; G. David O'L