Cases

ORDER ROBERT D. POTTER, Chief Judge. I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT THIS MATTER is before the Court on (1) Defendant Elaine A. Price’s and Defendant *536Joseph Icard’s Motion for Sanctions Under Rule 11, filed November 16, 1988, and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial, filed November 22,1988, pursuant to Rule 59 of the Fed

MEMORANDUM ON DISMISSAL HUGHES, District Judge. The motion of Aero-Colours to dismiss this suit under Rule 41(a)(1), which gives the plaintiff the right to dismiss a lawsuit without intervention of the court before the defendants have served an answer, will be granted. Although Rule 41 is explicit about what, each party must do to dismiss or pursue litigation, its application in this c

Civil action to recover damages for death of plaintiff's intestate, alleged to have been caused by the negligence, default or wrongful acts of the defendant when its truck collided with an automobile near Selma, Johnston County, N.C. causing war munitions in the truck to explode and kill plaintiff's intestate, who was riding in another automobile near the scene of the explosion. Summons was issued against Hughes Trucking Company and forwarded to the sheriff of Wake County for service u

695 A.2d 132 (1997) 346 Md. 80 Michael Patron HUGHES v. STATE of Maryland. No. 60, Sept. Term, 1996. Court of Appeals of Maryland. June 17, 1997. *134 Richard K. Jacobsen, Asst. Public Defender (Stephen E. Harris, Public Defender, on brief), Baltimore, for petitioner. Mary Ellen Barbera, Asst. Atty.

This is a bill in equity, as amended, by D. F. Propst and members of the late firm of Propst Bros., to foreclose a mortgage given by defendants W. C. Dillard and his wife, L. E. Dillard, on certain real estate described therein, to secure a note for $800, given by them to Propst Bros., dated May 1, 1909, and payable October 15, 1909. The complainants aver that D. F. Propst is the owner of the note and mortgage by transfer or assignment prior to the commencement of this suit. W. C. Dill

STONE, C. J. One of the defenses in this case was contributory negligence. In maintenance of that defense, it was attempted to be shown that one of the rules of running the trains of the defendant corporation was, that car-coupling should not be done with the hand, but with coupling-sticks kept on its trains for the purpose; that these rules were printed and carried on its trains, and that plaintiff had knowledge of that rule, hav

463 F.Supp.2d 1324 (2006) Glenn William HOLLADAY, Petitioner, v. Donal CAMPBELL, Respondent. No. CV 03-PT-1323-M. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Middle Division. October 12, 2006. *1325 *1326 James D Sears, Sears Law Firm, Daphne, M Bradley Almond, Almond & Cheshire LLC, Tusca

BIRCH, Circuit Judge: In this appeal, we apply the law as certified by the Supreme Court of Georgia and affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment, which declared a non-competition agreement (“NCA”) between Convergys Corporation and James A. Keener unenforceable under Georgia law. However, we hold that the district court abused its discretion when it enjoined Con-ve

PER CURIAM: CERTIFICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA PURSUANT TO SECTION 25.031 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES AND RULE 9.150 OF THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA AND ITS HONORABLE JUSTICES. Indemnity Insurance Company of North America (“Indemnity”) and Profile Aviation Services, In

PER CURIAM: The procedural history, facts and issues in this case are summarized in our previous opinion in which we certified disposi-tive questions of state law to the Supreme *1276 Court of Florida. Indemnity Insurance Company of North America v. American Aviation,

PER CURIAM: CERTIFICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA, PURSUANT TO O.C.G.A. § 15-2-9. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA AND ITS HONORABLE JUSTICES: Convergys Corporation appeals a declaratory judgment granted to James A. Keener and a permanent injunction imposed against Convergys. The

TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge: This is the latest in a series of appeals arising out of a dispute involving the Alabama Department of Transportation (the “Department”), classes of black merit system employees and prospective merit system employees (the plaintiffs), and a class of white employees (the “Adams Intervenors”). See Reynolds v. Roberts, 202 F.3d 1303 (11th

The appellant was indicted by a Morgan County grand jury for assault in the second degree, in violation of § 13A-6-21, Codeof Alabama (1975). The appellant, who conducted his own defense, was convicted in a jury trial of the offense charged, and was sentenced under the Split Sentence Act to a term of 41 years' imprisonment, with one year to be spent in the state penitentiary, and the remainder of his sentence to be suspended. He rai

Reversed and Rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed June 8, 2023. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-22-00091-CV JANE NELSON, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant V. NEAL DIKEMAN, SHAWN KELLY, ROY ERIKSEN, JARED WISSEL, SCOTT FORD, BILLY PIERCE, CHRISTINA FORD, CHARLIE

GRANTED PD-1053-19 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS PER CURIAM AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 12/9/2020 2:05 PM 12/14/2020 Accepted 12/10/2020 9:26 AM

132 F.Supp.2d 937 (2001) BEAR MGC CUTLERY CO., INC., Plaintiff, v. ESTES EXPRESS LINES, INC., Defendant. No. CV-00-PT-3591-E. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Eastern Division. February 22, 2001. *938 RM Woodrow, Doster & Woodrow, Anniston, AL, for Bear MGC Cutlery Co, Inc., plaintiff. Lawrence J Roberts, Sh

ORDER EMILY C. HEWITT, Chief Judge. Before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Certify Interlocutory Appeal (defendant’s Motion to Certify or Def.’s Mot. Certify). The United States (government or defendant) requests that the court amend its July 31, 2008 Opinion (Opinion) to include the express findings required by 28 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(2) to certify the Opinion for interlocutory appeal. Def.’s M

NAHMIAS, Justice. Appellants Margarita Gomez and Alejandro Martinez Huitron challenge their convictions for felony murder and other crimes related to injuries to and the resulting death of their three-year-old daughter, Esmerelda. We vacate three of each Appellant’s convictions (Counts 4, 11, and 16) to correct sentencing errors, but we reject Appellants’ many other contentions and affirm their remaining convictions.

113 S.E.2d 889 (1960) 252 N.C. 434 G. Frank KENNEDY v. Viola Carter JAMES. No. 525. Supreme Court of North Carolina. April 27, 1960. John R. Boger, Jr., Clyde L. Propst, Jr., and Hartsell & Hartsell, Concord, for plaintiff, appellee. John Hugh Williams, Concord, for defendant, appellant. PARKER, Justice. Defendant ass

Katzmann, J. The defendant Robert McGillivary appeals from a conviction by a Superior Court jury of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor (OUT), fourth offense, in violation of G. L. c. 90, § 24(l)(a)(l).1 His principal issue focuses on the meaning of “operation” under that statute. We affirm. 1. Operation of the motor vehicle. A. Operati