Cases

482 June 10, 2026 No. 523 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON SHANE ANTHONY LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jamie MILLER, Superintendent, Snake River Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent. Malheur County Circuit Court 21CV42304; A181273 Lung S. Hung, Judge. Argued a

482 June 10, 2026 No. 523 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON SHANE ANTHONY LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jamie MILLER, Superintendent, Snake River Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent. Malheur County Circuit Court 21CV42304; A181273 Lung S. Hung, Judge. Argued a

11 TERRI F. LOVE, Judge. Defendant, Allstate Insurance Company, seeks review of the trial court’s judgment holding that La. R.S. 32:866 does not apply to the spouse of an owner/operator of an unregistered and uninsured vehicle when the spouse’s name is not on the title or bill of sale. Plaintiff, Antoinette Lewis, was a passenger in a vehicle owned and operated by her husband when the vehicle was struck i

TAMILIA, Judge: Appellant, administrator of the estate of Mark E. Lewis, appeals judgment entered on September 3, 1987 based on the grant of compulsory non-suit against appellants. This unfortunate action exemplifies the tragic and fully foreseeable consequences of racing on our public highways. Just before midnight on October 28, 1983, Mark Lewis agreed to pit his 1982 Pontiac Firebird TransAm against Ch

ORDER Tracy Hertel, a former Indiana prisoner, sued the warden and property manag*959er at St. Joseph County Jail after legal materials he had brought there were confiscated and then either lost or destroyed. The district court concluded that no jury could find that Hertel suffered an actual injury from the loss of his documents, and granted summary judgment sua sponte for the

OPINION OF THE COURT Leon Ruchelsman, J. The plaintiff has moved seeking to preclude the introduction of any evidence, in any manner, of Shirley Miller’s cell phone records. The defendants have opposed the motion. Papers were submitted by the parties and arguments held. After reviewing all the arguments this court now makes the following determination. On December 19, 2008 the plaintif

*500OPINION OF THE COURT Leon Ruchelsman, J. The defendants have moved seeking to prevent the plaintiff from introducing evidence of the postaccident conduct of Henry Lewis. The plaintiff opposes the motion arguing such introduction is proper as admissions by conduct and as evidence of fabrications. Papers were submitted by the parties and arguments h

OPINION OF THE COURT William H. Bristol, J. By notice of motion dated September 10,1981, the plaintiff seeks an order striking the defendant’s note of issue, statement of readiness and demand for trial de novo. Additionally, plaintiff seeks an order directing entry of judgment in his favor based on a July 28, 1981 arbitration award. Understandably, defendant opposes this motion.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2018-CA-00112-COA LEWIS MILLER, JR. APPELLANT v. VICKSBURG MASONIC TEMPLE APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/07/2017 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. M. JAMES CHANEY JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: WARREN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY

391 B.R. 380 (2008) Norman Michael MILLER and Sheri Prater Miller, Defendants/Appellants, v. Neil LEWIS and Sharon Lewis d/b/a S.D.I.C., Plaintiffs/Appellees. No. 4:07-cv-193. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Sherman Division. March 24, 2008. *381 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING THE BANKRUPTCY COURT'S

238 P.3d 838 (2008) MILLER (JOHN) v. LEWIS. No. 50231. Supreme Court of Nevada. February 29, 2008. Decision Without Published Opinion Affirmed.

George Rose Smith, Justice. On October 20, 1976, Jimmie R. Miller and his wife filed this suit asking for a decree declaring that Miller’s former sister-in-law, the appellant Tna Lea (Miller) Lewis, no longer has her original one-fourth lessee interest in a 10-year lease upon certain business property in Fort Smith. The controversy arose because the lease granted to the lessees what has proved to be a valu

[Cite as Lewis v. Lewis, 2022-Ohio-2090.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT HANCOCK COUNTY KATHRYN A. LEWIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE NO. 5-21-32 v. MICHAEL E. LEWIS, JR., OPINION DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Appeal from Hancock County Common Pleas Court Dome

381 F.Supp.2d 773 (2005) Ronald MILLER, Plaintiff, v. Special Agent Chris LEWIS, Individually, and Harrah's Illinois Corporation, Defendants. No. 03 C 0297. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. August 9, 2005. *774 *775 *776 Gregor

710 N.W.2d 565 (2006) Gail LEWIS-MILLER, Respondent, v. Christopher ROSS, Appellant. No. A04-2224. Supreme Court of Minnesota. March 9, 2006. *566 Paul A. Banker, Christine M. Middleton, Meghan M. Elliott, Lindquist and Vennum, PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, for Appellant. Kay Nord Hunt, Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg PA, Me

SYLLABUS A party who files a valid petition commencing third-party child custody proceedings under Chapter 257C is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to prove an interested-third-party status. OPINION Appellant Gail Lewis-Miller argues the district court misinterpreted Minn.Stat. § 257C.03 (2004) in dismissing her petition for custody of her nephews without an evidentiary hearing. We reverse

L.T. No.: 2000789653 Dismissed.

[Cite as State v. Lewis, 2025-Ohio-2486.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT MARION COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, CASE NO. 9-24-52 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. LARRY C. LEWIS, JR., OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TERNUS, Chief Justice. We have taken this breach-of-contract matter on further review to consider the contention of appellee, Lewis Electric Co., that the court of appeals’ instructions on remand require further clarification. See Anderson v. State, 692 N.W.2d 360, 363 (Iowa 2005) (“On further review, we can review any or all of the issues raised on appeal or

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals (1), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Connolly, J.), entered October 4, 2011, as denied those branches of his motion which were, in effect, pursuant to CFLR 4404 (b) to set aside a decision of the same court dated May 18, 2011, made after a nonjury trial, and for judgment as a matter of law voluntarily discontinuing the action,