Cases

Sup. Ct. Fla. Cer-tiorari denied.

PER CURIAM. Bridgid Johnson challenges the trial court’s final judgment enforcing the parties’ 1995 Consent Final Judgment dissolving their marriage, arguing that the court impermissibly deviated from the parties’ agreement in regard to the calculation of the former wife’s portion of the former husband’s military retirement benefits. Specifically, the former wife challenges the trial court’s reliance on Boyett v. Boyett, <

The facts most favorable to the appellee, which we are required to consider, are substantially as follows: One George F. Rowe, was the owner of a 40-acre tract of land in DeKalb County, Indiana, which he deeded to his four children: Ora E. Rowe, Dayton Rowe, Daisy Johnson, and Ethel Goescheuis, as tenants in common, without any reservation. This deed was duly placed of record in the recorder's office of DeKalb County, Indiana. The grantees in the deed permitted the grantor to us

50 S.W.3d 216 (2001) Irvin C. ROWE, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. No. 1999-CA-002300-MR. Court of Appeals of Kentucky. July 6, 2001. *217 Paul J. Neel, Jr., Louisville, KY, for Appellant. A.B. Chandler, III, Attorney General, Gregory C. Fuchs, Assistant Attorney General, Frankfort, KY, for Appellee.

Mrs. Dorothy Johnson, the widow of Ivey Johnson, brought an action in the district court of Stephens county, Okla., against H. Rowe et al., to establish a constructive trust in and to a certain oil and gas lease to the extent of an undivided one-fourth interest, on behalf of herself and children. The judgment of the trial court was in favor of Rowe, and she appeals. Rowe cross-petitioned, and was denied the relief sought, but does not appeal. Several propositions of law are argued, but

PER CURIAM. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). This Court reserves jurisdiction to consider the imposition of sanctions. ROWE, MAKAR, and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.

801 N.E.2d 612 (2003) 344 Ill. App.3d 772 279 Ill.Dec. 938 John L. MOSS, Independent Administrator of the Estate of John E. Moss, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROWE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a/k/a Cullinan & Son, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-Appellee (Laesch Electric, Inc., Third-Party Defendant). No. 4-03-0004. Appellate Court of Illinois,

Rowe v Jordan (2024 NY Slip Op 02456) Rowe v Jordan 2024 NY Slip Op 02456 Decided on May 3, 2024 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

2023 IL 129248 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS (Docket No. 129248) JAMES R. ROWE, Kankakee County State’s Attorney, et al., Appellees, v. KWAME RAOUL, Attorney General of Illinois, et al, Appellants.

PER CURIAM. The petition for belated appeal is granted. Petitioner shall be allowed a belated appeal from the July 8, 2015, Order Denying Motion for Post-Conviction Relief in Alachua County Circuit Court case numbers 01-2006-CF-000841-A, 01-2005-CF-001428-A, 01-2005-CF-001528-A, 01-2005-CF-001631-A, and 01-2004-CF-003788-B. Upon issuance of mandate in this cause, a copy of this opinion shall be provided to the clerk of the circuit

PER CURIAM. The petition seeking a belated appeal of the order rendered on or about November 13, 2015, denying petitioner’s motion for postconviction relief in Duval County Circuit Court case number 2009-CF-14226, is granted. Upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal. ROBERTS, C.J., ROWE and MAKAR, JJ.,

PER CURIAM. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla.2004). The court hereby reserves jurisdiction to consider the imposition of sanctions against petitioner. ROWE, MAKAR, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

PER CURIAM. Appellant raises seven issues on appeal, and we affirm on all but one. Appellant argues that pursuant to section 775.089, Florida Statutes (2013), the trial court erred in entering a restitution order without first holding a hearing to determine the amount. Absent any agreement or stipulation between the parties as to the amount of restitution to be imposed, the trial court entered a restitution order without first hold

429 F.3d 294 PHARMACEUTICAL CARE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff, Appellant,v.G. Steven ROWE, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of Maine, Defendant, Appellee. No. 05-1606. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard August 1, 2005. Decided November 8, 2005. COPYRIGHT MAT

The trial court certified a nationwide class, and the court of appeals affirmed.1 Because the trial court did not conduct the rigorous analysis of the issues to be tried that we required in Southwestern Refining Co. v. Bernal,2 we reverse the court of appeals' judgment and remand the case to the trial court. Since 1965, National Western Life Insurance Co. has sold chil

[PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-10042 ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHARLES EDWARD ROWE, Defendant-Appellant.

630 F.Supp.2d 601 (2009) Sheila ROWE, Plaintiff, v. NORTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant. No. 1:08-cv-136. United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina. June 10, 2009. *604 Sharon M. Lawson-Davis, Gray Johnson Blackmon Lee & Lawson, LLP, Greensboro, NC, for Plaintiff. John P. Scher

441 S.E.2d 156 (1994) 114 N.C. App. 36 Clyde E. ROWE, Jr., and Donna Grant Rowe v. John Thomas WALKER, C. Norman Walker, and Shirley Walker Kennedy. No. 929SC918. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. March 15, 1994. *157 Manning, Fulton & Skinner, P.A. by John I. Mabe, Jr. and Alison R. Cayton, Raleigh,

DANA, Justice. Doris Rowe appeals from a judgment entered in the Superior Court (Kennebec County, Mills, J.) following a jury trial in which she was found in breach of contract for nonpayment of her contractor, Millard Nicker-son III. Contrary to her contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to give an instruction regarding the defense of adequate assurances of performance, did not err in allow

PER CURIAM. Appellant, William Isiah Johnson, was convicted of burglary of a dwelling with assault or battery and home invasion robbery, but was adjudicated guilty and sentenced only on the burglary charge. Appellant raises two issues on appeal, only one of which merits discussion. Appellant argues, and the State concedes, that his dual convictions violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. We agree and, therefore, rev