Cases

OPINION BY KEITH RAPP, JUDGE: ¶ 1 The plaintiff, Wrangler J. Gee (Gee), appeals an Order dismissing his action against the defendants, Jeffrey A, Belair and April D. Belair (collectively, Belairs). BACKGROUND ¶ 2 On September 21, 2014, Chloe Rose (Rose) gave birth to R.B. On February 18, 2015, Belairs finalized the

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Carnegie v. Pan American Linen, 476 So.2d 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). JOANOS, ALLEN and KAHN, JJ., CONCUR.

OPINION SCHRODER, Judge. This is a planning and zoning ease which asks how binding a preliminary plat is. Street dedications under subdivision regulations, adopted pursuant to Chapter 100 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes, are compared to dedications under KRS 82.400 and common law dedications. The parties are well aware’ of who played which part in this case scenario, so for

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner' guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. While a correction officer was conducting a pat frisk of petitioner, petitioner appeared to swallow a foreign object that had been secreted in his mouth. Petiti

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a disciplinary determination finding him guilty of disobeying a direct order and failing to comply with frisk procedures. The misbeh

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a disciplinary determination finding him guilty of disobeying a direct order and failing to comply with frisk procedures. The misbeh

PER CURIAM: The district court, on August 5, 1983, signed an order granting the defendantsappellees’ motions to dismiss Frank Edward Fischer’s civil rights complaint. Thereafter, the district court, on August 10, 1983, entered judgment in favor of the defendants-appellees. Fischer appeals from that judgment.

795 S.W.2d 532 (1990) William A. GEE, Appellant, v. BELL PEST CONTROL and National Union Fire Insurance Company, Respondents. No. WD 42912. Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District. July 24, 1990. Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied August 28, 1990. Application to Transfer Denied October 16, 1990.

Matthias, J. The issue in this cause is whether an employer whose premium rate under the Workmen’s Compensation Act is increased due to the allowance of a claim by the Industrial Commission for the death of an employee can recover the amount of such increase from a third person whose negligence caused the death of the employee. This problem is not new to this court. In the case of Truscon Steel Co. v.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review two determinations of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. After correction officials obtained a letter authored by petitioner indicating that he possessed a weapon, petitioner was ordered to undergo a strip frisk. During the strip frisk, petitioner was unc

Matter of Gonzalez v Annucci (2019 NY Slip Op 00508) Matter of Gonzalez v Annucci 2019 NY Slip Op 00508 Decided on January 24, 2019 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau p

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review two determinations of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. After correction officials obtained a letter authored by petitioner indicating that he possessed a weapon, petitioner was ordered to undergo a strip frisk. During the strip frisk, petitioner was unc

JANE P. WISEMAN, Judge. ¶ 1 Lafe C. Coldwater (Father) appeals from the trial court’s “Order Setting Forth Findings of Fact Regarding Child Support Deviation.” 1 After review of the *674 record and relevant law, we reverse and remand for further proc

McCarthy, J.P. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. After prison officials learned that petitioner had sw

ON PETITIONS FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (Opinion 02/13/86, 5 Cir., 1986, 782 F.2d 533) Before GEE and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges, and SCHWARTZ*, District Judge. PER CURIAM: The Petitions for Rehearing are DENIED and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having request

MEMORANDUM OPINION NORA BARRY FISCHER, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This lawsuit started as a straightforward individual action brought by Plaintiffs, Lori and Paul Graham, against their insurance company, Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company (“Defendant” or “Progressive”), seeking to recover for underinsured motorists benefits pursuant to their automobile insurance

GEE, Circuit Judge: Today we consider the appeals of seven men convicted of committing various crimes as part of an ongoing criminal operation in Louisiana. For their efforts, most were found guilty of violating, and conspiring to violate, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68. Two of the appellants were convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 for using the United States mail in furtherance of

[Cite as State v. Clay, 2016-Ohio-424.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MIAMI COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : : Appellate Case No. 2015-CA-17 Plaintiff-Appellee : : Trial Court Case No. 07-CR-518 v.

Per Curiam. This case presents several issues for determination. The board appeals, contending first, that the grant of the writ of mandamus for back pay was improper and second, that if it was proper, certain deductions must be made from the figure reached by the court of appeals. Hamlin cross-appeals claiming that he is entitled to certain additions to that figure. This court concludes that the board is correct with

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING Before GEE, REAVLEY and HIGGIN-BOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: In our original opinion we cited Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, 709 F.2d 6 (5th Cir.1983) to have applied the Louisiana law as not affording contributory negligence as a defense to a products liability action. At rehearing of that case the question has been certified to the Lo