Cases

DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 26, 2024 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00165-CV PSHATOIA LAROSE, Appellant V. AT&T INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas

VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DIVISION Washington Unit Case No. 24-CV-00374 65 State Street Montpelier VT 05602 802-828-2091 www.vermontjudiciary.org Christopher LaRose v. Grace Amao (fka Grace Amao Ciffo) Ruling on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Plaintiff Christopher LaRose claims that the residential property he bought from

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Neiman v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-2471.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or othe

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0251p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ BRIAN AMES, │ Plaintiff-Appellant, │

[Cite as Juergens v. House of LaRose, Inc., 2019-Ohio-94.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 106972 RALPH JUERGENS PLAINTIFF -APPELLANT

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Conrath v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-3594.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typogr

[Cite as Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose, 2020-Ohio-4778.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Ohio Democratic Party et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellees, : v. : No. 20AP-432 (C.P.C. No. 20CV-5634) Frank LaRose, in his official capacity as

Mae A. D'Agostino, U.S. District Judge I. INTRODUCTION The State of New York commenced this action in state court on December 13, 2018, *216alleging that Defendant violated state consumer protection laws with respect to toys it sold in New York that contained high levels of lead (the "Toys").1

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Maras v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-3295.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any t

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON SHEILA M. LAROSE, ) No. 78454-4-I ) Respondent, ) DIVISION ONE ) v. ) ) THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND ) INDUSTRIES, ) PUBLISHED OPINION Appellant, )

[Cite as Robinson v. LaRose, 2015-Ohio-4323.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO JACKIE ROBINSON, : OPINION Petitioner, : CASE NO. 2015-T-0051 - vs - : CHRISTOPHER LaROSE, WARDEN,

HELENE N. WHITE, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs William T. Schmitt and Chad Thompson submitted proposed ballot initiatives to the Portage County Board of Elections that would effectively decriminalize marijuana possession in the Ohio villages of Garrettsville and Windham. The Board declined to certify the proposed initiatives after concluding that the initiatives fell outside the scope of th

[Cite as Robinson v. LaRose, 2013-Ohio-4316.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TRUMBULL COUNTY, OHIO JACKIE ROBINSON, : PER CURIAM OPINION Petitioner, : CASE NO. 2013-T-0073 - vs - : CHRISTOPHER

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 20a0229p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT WALTER MELARA MARTINEZ, ┐ Petitioner-Appellant, │ │

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Maras v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-3295.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any t

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. DeMora v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-2173.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typog

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. One Person One Vote v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2023-Ohio-1992.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 4

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions by email at: JUD.Reporter@vermont.gov or by mail at: Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801, of any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press. 2023 VT 5

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Hill v. LaRose, Slip Opinion No. 2026-Ohio-1601.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any ty

GENOVESE, Judge. |TIn this malicious prosecution and defamation case, coming before this court a second time, Plaintiff, R. Chadwick Edwards, Jr., appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants, Larose Scrap & Salvage, Inc. and Paul Cummings. For the following reasons, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The facts of this case wer