Cases

CASANUEVA, Judge. The State of Florida appeals the trial court’s order granting Jacqueline Faye Jones’s motion to suppress evidence found in her residence pursuant to a search warrant. Although the affidavit filed in support of the application for a search warrant set forth facts describing two controlled buys occurring outside the residence, Ms. Jones’s motion to suppress contended the search warrant was issued without probab

ALVIN B. RUBIN, Circuit Judge: A non-tenured instructor at a state junior college contends that she was impermissi-bly discharged in retaliation for her exercise of freedom of speech and that the college’s failure to give her timely notification of her discharge violated the equal protection clause. Because we find that her speech did not address a matter of public concern and t

384 S.C. 1 (2009) 681 S.E.2d 6 W. Harold JONES, Appellant, v. Mandy LEAGAN, Jeff Leagan, James D. Owens and Helen M. Owens, Respondents. No. 4551. Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard April 22, 2000. Decided May 27, 2009. *7 C. Joseph Roof, of Columbia, for Appellant. William P

ROSEMARY LEDET, Judge. | t This is a class action arising out of a project to sandblast and paint a large, elevated water tower that abuts a residential neighborhood in Algiers, Louisiana (the “Algiers Water Tower”). Alleging damages directly resulting from the adverse effects of the project, the plaintiffs brought this class action against the general contractor, Capitol Enterprise, Inc. (“Capitol”); and the owner of the wa

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DOUGLAS P. WOODLOCK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This racial discrimination case was brought by ten black plaintiffs against the Boston Police Department, the City of Boston, and the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department (collectively “BPD”). Plaintiffs challenge the hair drug test administered by the BPD to officers and cadets from 1999 through 2006.

944 S.W.2d 121 (1997) 328 Ark. 684 Christine M. JONES, Petitioner, v. Jerry A. JONES, Respondent. No. 97-212. Supreme Court of Arkansas. May 27, 1997. *122 McNutt Law Firm by Mona J, McNutt, Conway, for petitioner. Lueken Law Firm by Patty Lueken and Helen Rice Grinder, Little Rock, for respondent.<

KAYATTA, Circuit Judge. Making their second appearance before this court are eight police officers, a police cadet, and a provisionally hired 911 operator (collectively, the “Officers”), who claim that they suffered adverse employment actions by the Boston Police Department (“Department”) as a result of a racially discriminatory hair drug test. Eschewing any claim that the Departm

992 F.2d 1335 61 USLW 2739 Helen B. BARNES, M.D., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.The STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, et al., Defendants-Appellants. No. 92-7264. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. May 26, 1993. T. Hunt Cole, Jr., Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Mike Moore, Atty. Gen., Jackso

Robert L. Brown, Justice, concurring. While I certainly agree that the writ of prohibition should be denied, I disagree with that part of the per curiam opinion that holds that Jerry Jones is limited in arguing his son’s emotional needs as a reason to change custody. This court did not reach the merits of that issue in Jones v. Jones, 326 Ark. 481, 931 S.W.2d 767 (1996) (Jones I). Rather, w

(2008) Helen D. MARTIN, Pro Se, Plaintiff, v. PACHULSKI, STANG, ZIEHL, YOUNG & JONES, P.C., Defendant. Civil Action No. 06-303 GMS. United States District Court, D. Delaware. March 10, 2008. MEMORANDUM GREGORY M. SLEET, Chief Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On May 8, 2006, the plaintiff, Helen D. Martin ("Martin"), filed th

Per Curiam. In November 1990, the Faulkner County Chancery Court awarded Christine Jones, the appellant, a divorce from Jerry Jones, the appellee, and awarded custody of the Joneses’ son, Cameron, to Ms. Jones. In December 1992, Mr. Jones petitioned the Chancery Court to modify its original decree and award him custody of Cameron. The Chancery Court issued a series of ex parte orders that per

PER CURIAM. The petition for extraordinary relief and expedited proceedings is granted. The Faulkner County Chancery Court is directed to reinstate the original custody order forthwith.

931 S.W.2d 767 (1996) 326 Ark. 481 Christine M. JONES, Appellant, v. Jerry A. JONES, Appellee. No. 95-1150. Supreme Court of Arkansas. November 4, 1996. *768 Samuel A. Perroni, Mona J. McNutt, Little Rock, for appellant. Helen Rice Grinder, Conway, for appellee. JESSON, Chief Justice.

The opinion of the court was delivered by FUENTES, J.A.D. This appeal requires us to consider under what circumstances a plaintiff, who brings an action pursuant to statutes containing fee-shifting provisions, may be deemed a prevailing party under the catalyst theory when the underlying action is dismissed as moot without a final judicial determination on the merits of the case. Plainti

Judith Rogers, Judge, dissenting. I dissent. The chancellor’s decision is clearly contrary to a preponderance of the evidence, and the affirmance of it promotes an injustice. It is rare that a custody decision is reversed on appeal and rightly so, given our standard of review and the deference afforded chancellors on such a sensitive and fact-intensive issue. However, we should not hesitate or lack the courage

898 S.W.2d 23 (1995) 320 Ark. 449 Christine M. JONES, Appellant, v. Jerry A. JONES, Appellee. No. 94-1088. Supreme Court of Arkansas. May 8, 1995. *24 Samuel A. Perroni, J. Nicole Graham, Little Rock, for appellant. Helen Rice Grinder, Conway, for appellee. BROWN, Justice. This case in

Per Curiam. Jerry A. Jones, the appellee, by motion asked the Court of Appeals to allow him to submit a brief of 40 pages, 15 pages in excess of the 25-page limit for argument found in Rules of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals 4-1 (a). The Court of Appeals denied the motion. Mr. Jones then submitted a brief the argument section of which was within the 25-p

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 13, 2017 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-09-00203-CV IDA MAE ANDERSON, SALLIE BAYLOR, CHRISTAL BOONE, ELAINE COLEMAN, KATIE DELANEY, RAYMOND C. GREEN, DORIS M. HALL, MARGARET HARRIS, MARY LEE JONES, WILBUR JONES, HARVEY L. MCMURRAY, BENJI NEWMAN, CADINO NEWMAN, RUBY SHAW, HELEN SMITH, HOSEA W. TATE, SR., Appellants v. CIRCLE X LAND & CATTLE CO., LTD.

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS <