Cases

ORDER Movant appeals after his Rule 24.035 motion was denied without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Ruiz, Senior Judge: This petition for review challenges the denial of Jacqueline Dent’s claim for workers’ compensation. Petitioner argues, inter alia, that the D.C. Department of Employment Services Compensation Review Board (CRB) erred in allowing the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to consider the absence of wage loss in deciding that she was not permanentl

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 14-AA-527 JACQUELINE DENT, PETITIONER, V. DISTRICT OF COLUM

824 A.2d 586 (2003) 2003 VT 27 UNION MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Elmer J. and Jacqueline JOERG. No. 01-336. Supreme Court of Vermont. March 28, 2003. *587 Paul R. Bowles, Montpelier, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Stephen J. Soule of Paul, Frank & Collins, Inc., Burlington, for Defendants-Appelle

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Casa Clara Condo. Ass’n v. Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc., 620 So.2d 1244 (Fla.1993) and Slavin v. Kay, 108 So.2d 462 (Fla.1958). HAZOURI, DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

135 Mich. App. 267 (1984) 354 N.W.2d 312 PEOPLE v. JACQUELINE WALKER CITY OF WARREN v. WALKER Docket No. 61924. Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided June 18, 1984. David Griem, City Attorney, and John J. Murray, Chief Assistant City Attorney, for plaintiff. Kenneth A. Webb, for defendant on appeal.

SECOND DIVISION BARNES, P. J., MILLER and RAY, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules/ March 19,

62 S.W.3d 377 (2001) Michelle L. TAYLOR, Appellant, v. Geoffrey MORRIS, Judge, Jefferson Circuit Court; Patrick J. Curry, Real Party in Interest; and Allstate Insurance Company, Real Party in Interest, Appellees. No. 2000-SC-0939-MR. Supreme Court of Kentucky. December 20, 2001. Jacqueline K. Schroering, Harry L. Gregory, III, Dina Abby Jones, Louisville, Steven D.

| .MAX N. TOBIAS, JR., Judge. In these consolidated applications for supervisory writs of relators, Jan T. McClanahan, M.D., and Chalmette Medical Center, Inc. (“Chalmette Medical Center”), we grant certiorari to review judgments of the trial court overruling exceptions of prescription. On 21 February 1999, the plaintiff, Eloise Poche (“Ms.Poche”), sought treatment at the Chalmette Medical Center emergency r

458 S.W.2d 639 (1970) Luther Thomas BOWLING, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Tennessee, Defendant in Error. Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee. July 1, 1970. Certiorari Denied September 21, 1970. *640 Richard Stair, Jr., Donald R. Coffey, Knoxville, for plaintiff in error. David M. Pack, Atty. Gen., Arnold Peebles, Jr.

Andreyeva v Haym Solomon Home for the Aged, LLC (2021 NY Slip Op 00281) Andreyeva v Haym Solomon Home for the Aged, LLC 2021 NY Slip Op 00281 Decided on January 20, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published b

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2022-KA-01127-COA MARLON JOHNSON A/K/A MARVIN APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/18/2022 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ALBERT B. SMITH III COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: COAHOMA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY F

Allen v Morningside Acquisition I, LLC (2022 NY Slip Op 03219) Allen v Morningside Acquisition I, LLC 2022 NY Slip Op 03219 Decided on May 18, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law R

PATTERSON, Chief Justice, for the Court: L. C. Rodgers filed a bill of complaint for divorce charging his wife, Jacqueline, with habitual cruel and inhuman treatment. In her answer she denied the allegations of the bill and filed a cross bill charging the complainant with habitual cruel and inhuman treatment and prayed for a divorce. These allegations were denied and thereafter, on the day of trial, the compl

Appeal from County Court, Lauderdale County; H. C. Mike Watkins, Judge. Before SMITH, P. J., and WALKER and BROOM, JJ. AFFIRMED. PATTERSON, C. J., ROBERTSON, P. J., and SUGG, LEE, BOWLING and COFER, JJ., concur.

*31ORDER EDENFIELD, District Judge. Before the Court is the defendant’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s Order of June 20, 1985. In that Order, the Court granted plaintiff Rufus Mack’s motion to delete his class action allegations in this employment discrimination action. Plaintiff also was permitted to add a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 to his T

Zhi Eric Zhang v ABC Corp. (2021 NY Slip Op 03213) Zhi Eric Zhang v ABC Corp. 2021 NY Slip Op 03213 Decided on May 19, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant

OPINION BY Judge McCULLOUGH. Kellie McGowan, Esquire (Requester), petitions for review of the January 6, 2014 final determination of the Office of Open Records (OOR), denying her request for certain information from the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) under the Pennsylvania Righb-to-Know Law (RTKL).1 Requester contends that the OOR erred in determining that the

ORDER AND REASONS ELDON E. FALLON, District Judge. The Court has pending before it Defendant Mark Ryan’s motion to dismiss (Rec. Doc. 7) and motion for sanctions (Rec. Doc. 11). The Court has reviewed the briefs and the applicable law and now issues this Order and Reasons. I. BACKGROUND This case arises out of divorce proceedings and subsequent malpractic

*742OPINION OF THE COURT DITTER, District Judge. Appellant, Jacqueline Smith, a sergeant on the East Greenwich Police Department, brings this appeal from a decision of the District Court granting summary-judgment in favor of the appellees, the Township of East Greenwich, the East Greenwich Police Department, Police Chief William E. Giordano, and Deput