Cases

FILED IN st 1 COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TX 12/07/2015 CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE, NO. CLERK IN THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TE

The opinion of the court was delivered by Dixon, J. This writ of error brings up a judgment rendered in the Supreme Court- upon a verdict for the plaintiff obtained in the trial at the Camden Circuit. The errors are assigned upon bills of exceptions sealed by the trial judge. It is necessary for us to notice only one of these assignments, that directed against the refusal to nonsuit the plai

The opinion of the court was delivered by Reed, J. This action was brought to recover damages for an injury received by the plaintiff in the mill of the defendant. The plaintiff is a machinist, and while at work upon the water-wheel of defendant’s saw-mill the wheel was suddenly put in motion by the engineer employed by the defendant, and the hand of the plaintiff was crushed. The trial ju

*** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER *** Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAP-XX-XXXXXXX 31-OCT-2023 08:57 AM Dkt. 74 OP

OPINION DEBORAH A. BATTS, District Judge. Plaintiff Nzingha M. Kellman (“Plaintiff’ or “Kellman”), an African-American female, together with eight African-American plaintiffs and one Hispanic plaintiff, all of whom are current or former employees of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) Police Department (“MTA PD”), commenced this action against the MTA and four MTA executive office

TIMBERS, Circuit Judge: This appeal involves the consequences of a nail protruding from the floor of a trailer that punctured the right foot of John Anello while he was employed as a shipping foreman at the plant of the Fedders Corporation (Fedders) in Buffalo, New York, on October 29, 1968. After a jury trial in the Western District of New York before John T. Curtin, Chief Judge, a judgment was

525 F.2d 276 John ANELLO and Phyllis Anello, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.MURPHY MOTOR FREIGHT LINES, INC., and Maislin BrothersTransport Limited, Defendants-Appellants,andHarrison Radiator Division of General Motors Corporation, Defendant.MURPHY MOTOR FREIGHT LINES, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff,v.MAISLIN BROTHERS TRANSPORT LIMITED et al., Third-Party Defendants.MAISLIN BROTHERS TRANSPORT LIMITED, Third-Party Plaintiff,

In an action to recover for personal injuries the jury returned a verdict for the defendant. The trial court granted the plaintiff's motion for a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. The appeal is from that order. It is the defendant's contention that there was no evidence sufficient to support a verdict for the plaintiff. The action arose out of an accident which occurred on October 10, 1957, in the vicinity of the Permanente Cem

202 Cal.App.2d 720 (1962) MELVIN R. GARNER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PACIFIC ELECTRIC RAILWAY COMPANY et al., Defendants and Respondents. Civ. No. 25352. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. One. Apr. 24, 1962. Betts, Ely & Loomis and Albert H. Ebright for Plaintiff and Appellant. E. D. Yeomans, William E. Still, John H. Gordon and John

48 N.W.2d 917 (1951) SCHUKNECHT v. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & P. R. CO. et al. No. 9090. Supreme Court of South Dakota. August 2, 1951. Rehearing Denied October 2, 1951. *918 Dwight Campbell, Philo Hall, Aberdeen, for appellants. Stordahl, May & Boe, Sioux Falls, for respondent. ROBERTS, Judge.</

The plaintiff, to have been entitled to replevy the lumber in suit when he did, must then have been entitled to the immediate possession of it. It belonged originally to Clarke Co., of Boston. December 10, A.D. 1886, they sent it by railroad to Providence, consigned to themselves. It remained in the car on the tracks for a while, and was then turned over to warehousemen, who held it for Clarke Co. until June 24, A.D. 1887, and then delivered it, pursuant to the order of Clarke Co., to the

The opinion of the court was delivered by Mague, J. One of the reasons assigned in support of this-rule is based on the contention that Cannon, whose act occasioned the injury of plaintiff, was a fellow-servant of plaintiff, and that their common employer, the defendant, is not liable' for Cannon’s negligence (if his act was negligent), unless it appears that defendant did not exercise proper care in employin

Mr. Justice Reed delivered the opinion of the Court. The Secretary of the Interior on May 22, 1943, issued Public Land Order 128. It is set out in full below.1 In this case the significant part of No. 128 is that the Secretary included in the reservation, by paragraph 2, adjacent tidelands and coastal waters along tht entire shore line of the uplands that touched Shelikof StrL H b

Mr. Justice Hand delivered the opinion of the court: This was a bill in chancery filed in 'the superior court of Cook county on October 9, 1903, by the Chicago Typothete, a voluntary association established for the purpose of advancing and improving the binding and printing business engaged in by its members in the city of Chicago, and for the purpose of employin

Jayne, C. C. J. If the election laws oí this state do not accomplish all that may be fairly expected from them, the fault should not repose in the indifference of the courts. At the general election on November 3d, 1936, in the county of Cape May, William C. Hunt and Jesse H. Ludlam were candidates for the office of state senator. The subsequent examination of the statements of the several district boards of the