Cases

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00373-CV David Allen Hall, Appellant v. <

[1] Leslie Van Gorham, who shall hereinafter be referred to as the defendant, was charged by information in the District Court of Washington County with the crime of Burglary Second Degree, After Former Conviction of a Felony; was tried before a jury who found him guilty and assessed his punishment at ten years in the penitentiary. It is from that judgment and sentence that he lodges his appeal to this Court alleging numerous assignments of error. [2] The facts out of which thi

ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX

448 P.2d 301 (1968) Glenn J. SHARPE, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION, Appellee. No. 1. Court on the Judiciary of Oklahoma. Appellate Division. October 4, 1968. Rehearing Denied November 1, 1968. Charles Hill Johns, James F. Howell, Toney M. Webber, Midwest City, for appellant. Howard K. Berry, Oklahoma City, D

806 N.E.2d 667 (2004) 346 Ill. App.3d 799 282 Ill.Dec. 370 David ALBERS and Christine Albers, Individually and as Parents and Next Friends of Shea Albers, a Minor, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Melissa BREEN; Rural Champaign County Special Education Cooperative; Steven Fink; and the Board of Education of Gifford Community Consolidated Grade School District No. 188, Defendants-Appellees.

278 S.W.3d 536 (2009) David Allen HALL, Appellant, v. PEDERNALES ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.; John Worrall, individually and as representative of others similarly situated; Glenn Van Shellenbeck, individually and as representative of others similarly situated; Linda Evans, individually and as representative of others similarly situated; Bennie R. Fuelberg; Will Dahmann; W.W. "Bud" Burnett; E.B. Price; O.C. Harmon; R.B. Felps; Val Smith; and Vi Clo

999 So.2d 311 (2008) BRYAN D. SCOFIELD, INC., et al. v. SUSAN A. DAIGLE, LTD., et al. No. CA 08-798. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. December 10, 2008. *312 Edwin Gustav Preis, Jr., Richard J. Hymel, Preis, Kraft & Roy, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiffs/Appellants, Bryan D. Scofield, Inc., Rivera, Ltd. Randall

429 A.2d 1006 (1981) Theodore LITTLEFIELD v. STATE of Maine et al. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Argued January 13, 1981. Decided May 19, 1981. Murray, Plumb & Murray, E. Stephen Murray (orally), Ellyn C. Ballou, Portland, for plaintiff. Charles K. Leadbetter, Asst. Atty. Gen., Augusta, Paula Van Meter, Asst. Dist. Atty. (orally), Bath, for defendants.

340 B.R. 316 (2006) In re Duane L. ROBINSON, Debtor. Dominion Virginia Power, Plaintiff, v. Duane L. Robinson, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 05-70479. Adversary No. 05-07029. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. March 17, 2006. *317 *318

741 A.2d 533 (1999) 129 Md. App. 221 Glenn Ivan ROSENBERG v. STATE of Maryland. No. 1772, Sept. Term, 1998. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. December 3, 1999. *537 Bradford C. Peabody, Assistant Public Defender (Stephen E. Harris, Public Defender, on the brief), Baltimore, for appellant. Steven

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER SPATT, District Judge: Presently before the Court is a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by the Plaintiffs to enjoin the implementation of Nassau County Local Law No. 8-2012, also known as Clerk Item No. 315-2012, asserting that it violates the Plaintiffs’ fundamental constitutional rights secured by Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution (the “Cont

714 F.Supp. 973 (1989) CINDY'S CANDLE COMPANY, INC., an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, v. WNS, INC., a Texas corporation, Defendant. No. 88 C 1125. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. June 14, 1989. *974 William Van Hagey, David C. Bogan, Van Hagey & Bogan, Ltd., Mundelein, Ill., Drew E. Baker, Schulze, Baker

911 P.2d 1075 (1996) Harold "Frenchy" BRAUN, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee. No. 1463. Court of Appeals of Alaska. March 1, 1996. David E. George, Anchorage, for Appellant. *1077 Kenneth M. Rosenstein, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Special Prosecutions and Appeals, Anchorage, and Bruce M. Botelho, Attorney

222 Cal.App.3d 541 (1990) 271 Cal. Rptr. 738 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GLENN L. BOYD, JR., et al., Defendants and Appellants. Docket No. E005961. Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Two. July 25, 1990. *547 COUNSEL Marilee Marshall and Michael Satris, under appoi

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00373-CV David Allen Hall, Appellant v. Pedernales Electric Cooperative, Inc.; John Worrall, individually and as representative of others similarly situated; Glenn Van Shellenbeck, individually and as representative of others similarly situated; Linda Evans, individually and as representative of ot

[Cite as State v. Sanders, 2009-Ohio-5437.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT ALLEN COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE NO. 1-09-01 v. MARVIN L. SANDERS, OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Allen County Common Pleas Court T

862 F.Supp. 1552 (1994) Jerry B. HODGEN and Bobbie Sue Hodgen v. FOREST OIL CORPORATION, Ronald J. Doucet, A & A Boats, Inc. and C & G Marine Service, Inc. Civ. A. No. 93-0322. United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lafayette-Opelousas Division. April 26, 1994. *1553 *1554 Jerry

665 S.E.2d 103 (2008) CITY OF ASHEVILLE, a municipal corporation, Plaintiff, v. Wake County STATE of North Carolina, and County of Buncombe, et al., Defendants. No. COA07-516. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. August 19, 2008. *109 Robert W. Oast, Jr., City Attorney for the City of Asheville, and Moore & Van Allen, PLLC, by

283 Pa. Superior Ct. 517 (1981) 424 A.2d 929 David SPATZ, Si Richard Wynn, Howard R. Slater, and Donald A. Kahan, d/b/a Orchard Park Associates, a joint venture, Appellants, v. Frank J. NASCONE and Frank J. Zappala, Jr. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Argued November 15, 1979. Filed January 16, 1981. *520

OPINION AND ORDER HUBEL, United States Magistrate Judge: If ever there were a case where the Court hoped that the “parties [would just decide] to chill,” Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 296 F.3d 894, 908 (9th Cir.2002), this would be it. Indeed, it is an understatement to say that this case has been hotly contested, or that there is some animosity between the two business competitors involve