Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Emma Godwin”
Baptist Memorial Hospital v. Marsawpublic domain
13 F.Supp.2d 696 (1998) BAPTIST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, Plaintiff, v. Emma MARSAW, individually and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of David Marsaw, Deceased, Bakery & Confectionery Union & Industry International Health Benefits Fund, Donna Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Ford UAW Retiree Program, Defendants. No. 95-2241-TUV. United States District Court, W.D. Tenne
Godwin v. Kingpublic domain
Mabry, J.; Alexander R. Godwin departed this life intestate on the 27th day of January, A. D. 1889, leaving appellant as his widow and seven living children and an heir of a deceased child. Decedent dwelt before his death in Jackson county, Florida, and letters of administration were granted in said county to his widow. In April, 1889, she filed a petition in the Circuit. Court for Jack-* son county to have set apart her dower
Gonzalez v. McALLEN MEDICAL CENTER, INC.public domain
A jury rejected the medical negligence claims brought by the family of Enrique Gonzalez against McAllen Medical Center and Dr. Jose Igoa. The plaintiffs appealed, challenging the factual sufficiency of several jury findings. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals rejected these points in a memorandum opinion, concluding in a single sentence that the evidence was factually sufficient without stating any reason why. 2003 WL 21283132, (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi
Newman v. Newmanpublic domain
CULPEPPER, Judge. Pierce Phillips Newman, Jr. filed a rule against his former wife, Emma Ruth Newman, to show cause why the alimony in the sum of $200 per month previously awarded to her in a divorce judgment should not be reduced or terminated. The alleged basis for the rule is that Mrs. Newman has sufficient means for her maintenance. After a trial on the merits, the district judge terminated the alimony to Mrs. Newman. Sh
Goodwin v. Culpepper Enterprises, Inc.public domain
DICKINSON, Justice, for the Court. ¶ 1. Plaintiffs, Barbara Gray Goodwin, Raphael Goodwin, Jr., and Emma Delores Goodwin (collectively, the “Goodwins”) appeal the circuit court’s order transferring venue of their claims from Lauderdale County to Covington County on the basis of forum non conveniens. Finding that, at *1167the time this suit
Raphael Goodwin, Jr. v. APAC Mississippi, Inc.public domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2006-IA-00863-SCT RAPHAEL GOODWIN, JR., ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF BARBARA GRAY GOODWIN; RAPHAEL GOODWIN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY; EMMA DELORES GOODWIN, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND VALERIE HUGHES; AND THE ESTATE OF RAPHAEL GOODWIN, SR. v. CULPEPPER ENTERPRISES, INC., AND APAC MISSISSIPPI, INC. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/03/2006 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ROBERT WALTER BA
State of Tennessee v. Amado Rubio Taverapublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs September 28, 2010 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. AMADO RUBIO TAVERA Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2006-C-1911 Steve Dozier, Judge No. M2010-00572-CCA-R3-CD - Filed February 24, 2011 The Defendant-Appellant, Amado Rubio Tavera, has filed a petition for writ of certiorari se
Ingram v. Henderson Cnty. Hosp. Corp.public domain
STROUD, Judge. Plaintiff sued defendants for medical malpractice arising out of the care they provided to her for sepsis. A jury ultimately found all defendants not liable. On appeal, plaintiff contends the trial court erred in several evidentiary rulings and in dismissing her claim arising out of nursing care against defendant Henderson County Hospital Corporation, Inc., d/b/a Margare
Tyson v. Henrypublic domain
514 S.E.2d 564 (1999) Elizabeth J. TYSON, Plaintiff, v. Lacy M. HENRY, Administrator, CTA of the Estate of William Francis Tyson, Vance B. Taylor, Julie McKenzie Jones, Connie Tyson Bunn, James Austin Congleton, a minor, and Brett Tyson Congleton, a minor, all Unknown and Unborn Beneficiaries under the Will of William Francis Tyson, Defendants. No. COA98-222. Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
Sadler v. Lynchpublic domain
192 Va. 344 (1951) ALISON E. SADLER v. EMMA P. LYNCH, ADMINISTRATRIX, ETC. Record No. 3770. Supreme Court of Virginia. May 7, 1951. Charles B. Godwin, Jr., and Mills E. Godwin, Jr., for the plaintiff in error. Thomas L. Woodward and Jacob L. Woodward, for the defendant in error. Present, Eggleston, Spratley, Buchanan, Miller and Smith
Hicks v. Brownpublic domain
Mr. Judge Hickman delivered the opinion of the Commission of Appeals, Section A. Defendant in error, Edna Brown, sustained personal injuries in a collision at a street intersection in Amarillo between two taxicabs. She was a passenger in a taxicab owned and operated by Emma Hicks, doing business under the trade name of Yellow Cab & Baggage Company. The other taxicab in the collision was owned and operated b
State v. Haynespublic domain
2025 UT App 75 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, Appellee, v. JIMMY JOSEPH HAYNES, Appellant. Opinion No. 20220420-CA Filed May 22, 2025 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Matthew Bate
Focus Healthcare Medical Center, Inc. v. O’nealpublic domain
558 S.E.2d 818 (2002) 253 Ga. App. 298 FOCUS HEALTHCARE MEDICAL CENTER, INC. v. O'NEAL. No. A01A1851. Court of Appeals of Georgia. January 15, 2002. *819 Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, Elizabeth C. Whealler, Marietta, for appellant. ELDRIDGE, Judge. Focus Healthcare Medical Center, Inc.
O'Donnell v. Statepublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT Alan C. Marin, J. *605This is the decision following the trial, on liability, of the claim of James O’Donnell brought under the Unjust Conviction and Imprisonment Act, which is codified as section 8-b of the Court of Claims Act. Early in the morning of Saturday, May 24, 1997, Emma E was assaulted in Clove Lake
In Re the Purported Last Will & Testament of Barnespublic domain
579 S.E.2d 585 (2003) In the Matter of the Purported Last Will and Testament of Francis M. BARNES, Dated November 22, 1989 and In the Matter of the Purported Last Will and Testament of Francis M. Barnes, Dated May 25, 1967. No. COA01-1437. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. April 15, 2003. *586 Bass, Bryant & Fanney, by John Walter
Brown v. Byrdpublic domain
Bobbitt, J. Plaintiffs allege that the four children of Will Johnson “were called 'the children’ by the said Hassie M. Johnson during his lifetime.” The answers deny this allegation. The answer of *456Mrs. Gwendolyn J. Avery, et al., alleges that Hassie M. Johnson referred to all of his nieces and nephews as “the children.” The court made no finding of fact as to
Hicks v. Brownpublic domain
This is an action for damages filed by appellee, Edna Brown, a colored woman, against appellants, Emma Hicks, doing business under the trade name of Yellow Cab Company, and Hammond Taxi Baggage Company, a private corporation, both of whom operate taxi cabs in the city of Amarillo. Appellee alleged that on the 8th of November, 1937, at about three o'clock A. M. she was a passenger in the Yellow taxi cab, traveling south on Harrison Street in Amarillo and that, as the cab reached the intersect
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER HAL J. BONNEY, Bankruptcy Judge. If ... she had read the raft of papers; they had had a customer-oriented system in operation. “Pity the Unicorn, Pity the Hippogriff, Souls that were never born Out of the land of If!” —Ostenso We might wish people didn
Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (2022 NY Slip Op 05127) Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a 2022 NY Slip Op 05127 Decided on September 1, 2022 Appellate Division, Third Department Published
Bowers Welding and Hotshot, Inc. v. Bromleypublic domain
ROONEY, Justice, specially concurring. I agree with the majority opinion with reference to its holding on the issues pertaining to nuisance and attorney fees. I do not agree with all of that said in the majority opinion relative to the restrictive covenants issue. And I believe the court need not have addressed such issue inasmuch as the case could have been disposed of on the nuisance issue.