⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Larry L Thompson”

Indiana Court of Appeals · 2011-09-28 · Published · cited 3× · 954 N.E.2d 1056; 2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 1781; 2011 WL 4483659
954 N.E.2d 1056 (2011) In re the Matter of the LARRY L. THOMPSON REVOCABLE TRUST. Deanna Thompson Stull, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Larry L. Thompson Revocable Trust, Derek Thompson and Vicki Thompson Craver, Appellees-Respondents. No. 54A01-1011-TR-592. Court of Appeals of Indiana. September 28, 2011. *1058 David W. Stone IV,
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2006-11-20 · Published · cited 1× · 856 N.E.2d 1252; 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 2370; 2006 WL 3350688
856 N.E.2d 1252 (2006) In re the Matter of LARRY L. THOMPSON REVOCABLE TRUST, Larry L. Thompson Revocable Trust, Derek Thompson and Vicki Thompson Craver, Appellants, v. Deanna Thompson Stull, Appellee. No. 54A01-0602-CV-56. Court of Appeals of Indiana. November 20, 2006. Gregory E. Steuerwald, Steuerwald, Zielinski & Witham, Danville, IN, for Appellant.
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2017-11-15 · Published · cited 0×
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Nov 15 2017, 8:12 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017-02-23 · Published · cited 1× · 849 F.3d 602; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20715; 2017 WL 727148
. LESLIE H. SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: We are yet again required to determine whether a contract is a maritime one. Here, the focus is on a contract to perform flow-back services to improve the performance of an offshore natural-gas well when performance eventually required the use of a crane barge. Plaintiffs Larry Doiron, Inc. and Robert Jackson argue that maritime law applies. Defendants Specialty Rental Tools & Supply
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2017-11-15 · Published · cited 0× · 94 N.E.3d 756
MATHIAS, J. Affirmed. VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs. BAILEY, J., Concurs.
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2016-03-24 · Published · cited 21× · 53 N.E.3d 420; 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 87; 2016 WL 1158610
CRONE, Judge. Case Summary [1] Roukaya Ali appeals a ‘ summary judgment in favor of Alliance Home Health Care, LLC (“Alliance”), L.J.L. Enterprises, Inc. (“LJL”), and LJL’s sole owner Larry J. Logsdon (collectively “Ap-pellees”) on her claims of defamation, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and vicar
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-05-31 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 2398; 195 L. Ed. 2d 770; 84 U.S.L.W. 3654; 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3544
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Thompson v. Denneypublic domain
Supreme Court of the United States · 2014-01-13 · Published · cited 0× · 134 S. Ct. 938; 187 L. Ed. 2d 807; 82 U.S.L.W. 3406; 571 U.S. 1143; 2014 WL 102728; 2014 U.S. LEXIS 408
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2012-01-09 · Published · cited 0× · 181 L. Ed. 2d 800; 2012 U.S. LEXIS 501; 132 S. Ct. 1082; 565 U.S. 1151; 80 U.S.L.W. 3398; 2012 WL 33798
Petition for rehearing denied. Former decision, 565 U.S. 947, 132 S. Ct. 406, 181 L. Ed. 2d 265, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 7356.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2011-10-11 · Published · cited 0× · 181 L. Ed. 2d 265; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 7356; 132 S. Ct. 406; 565 U.S. 947; 80 U.S.L.W. 3217
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. Same case below, 433 Fed. Appx. 156.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015-08-04 · Published · cited 32× · 798 F.3d 938; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13612; 2015 WL 4620466
McHUGH, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur in many respects with the majority’s thoughtful and nuanced discussion of a difficult topic. But because I do not agree the resolution of this case turns on whether the license plate at issue consti*965tutes pure or symbolic speech, I write separately. The majority first decides the graphic image o
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008-05-29 · Published · cited 0× · 280 F. App'x 38
SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED. Defendants-appellants Kevin Thompson and Maurice Clarke were convicted, after a jury trial, of participating in defendant Larry Williams’ crack distribution operation, whose locale shifted from the Bronx to Newport News, Virginia, and back to the Bronx with a short foray into South Caro
Supreme Court of the United States · 2011-06-06 · Published · cited 0× · 180 L. Ed. 2d 261; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4332; 131 S. Ct. 2981; 563 U.S. 1041; 79 U.S.L.W. 3685
Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. Same case below, 396 Fed. Appx. 971.
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2011-11-18 · Published · cited 5× · 312 Ga. App. 697; 719 S.E.2d 592; 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 3738; 2011 Ga. App. LEXIS 1033
Phipps, Presiding Judge. Michelle Thompson and other residents of East Point sued William C. Meredith Company, Inc. (the corporation), alleging that operations at the corporation’s nearby facility were tortiously emitting chemicals and noxious odors upon their properties and that they were entitled to injunctive relief and damages. Among the other defendants,1 the residents named three individuals
District Court, E.D. California · 2014-10-30 · Published · cited 2× · 63 F. Supp. 3d 1200; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154224; 2014 WL 5514163
ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant DeLallo’s Italian Foods, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 35.) Plaintiff Kevin Thompson (“Plaintiff’) opposes Defendant’s motion. (ECF No. 46.) For the reasons explained below, the court hereby DENIES Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2012-05-16 · Published · cited 0× · 871 F. Supp. 2d 1176; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68236; 2012 WL 1795210
ORDER JOE HEATON, District Judge. Plaintiff Keith Cressman filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988 and 51 Okla. Stat. § 251 against Michael C. *1178Thompson, Secretary of Safety and Security and the Commissioner of Public Safety for the State of Oklahoma, Paula Allen, a licensing services hearing officer with the Oklaho
Sloan v. Thompsonpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Washington · 2005-07-05 · Published · cited 1× · 128 Wash. App. 776
*780¶1 Larry Thompson knew what the building codes were for framing a house and yet proceeded, without permits, to build one that was woefully defective. Thompson, by his own, admission, possessed the requisite knowledge of a defect to support a finding of fraudulent concealment. Because the trial court erred in applying the law of fraudulent concealment to the facts of this case, we reverse and re
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2016-01-21 · Published · cited 9× · 811 F.3d 717; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1036; 2016 WL 278305
W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: Defendant-Appellant Larry Wayne Thompson appeals his conviction for failure to register as a sex offender. We affirm. I. The relevant facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, 1 are as follows:
Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · 2024-09-04 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED September 4, 2024 BRIAN BOLEY, ASHLEY N. DEEM, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK Plaintiff Below, Petitioner INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS
A.C. v. L.H.public domain
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2014-06-27 · Published · cited 0× · 160 So. 3d 15; 2014 WL 2919780; 2014 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 107
MOORE, Judge. A.C. (“the father”) appeals from a judgment of the Montgomery Juvenile Court (“the juvenile court”) modifying custody of his children, S.C. and Ar.C. (“the children”). Procedural History On March 1, 2018, L.H. (“the mother”) filed separate petitions asserting that the children were dependent because of the father’s alleged physical abuse of the children while the c