⚖ 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.

7 opinions for “McCullough v. Looper”

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2020-11-05 · Published · cited 0×
11/05/2020 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON August 11, 2020 Session KERRY DAVIS v. GARRETTSON ELLIS, M.D. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-002190-12 Rhynette N. Hurd, Judge ___________________________________
Huffman v. Fisherpublic domain
Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1999-03-18 · Published · cited 30× · 987 S.W.2d 269; 337 Ark. 58; 1999 Ark. LEXIS 135
Tom Glaze, Justice, dissenting. The significance of this case is that the majority opinion changes the standard of review in equity cases where parents seek to have their surnames assigned to their child. In Clinton v. Morrow, 220 Ark. 377, 247 S.W.2d 1015 (1952), the court held chancellors have broad discretion when assigning surnames, and the court has adhered to that standard as recently as 1992. See Reave
Watson v. Suggspublic domain
Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993-10-04 · Published · cited 0× · 313 S.C. 291; 437 S.E.2d 172; 1993 S.C. App. LEXIS 166
Per Curiam: This case involves the disputed ownership of a tract of land. Respondent, Watson, sought to prove that he owned the disputed tract of land and the Suggses, through their agent, trespassed and removed timber from this land. The Suggses claimed they owned the land. After the evidence was presented, the Suggses moved for a directed verdict which was denied. The jury found in favor of Watson, and the Suggse
Supreme Court of the United States · 2006-06-28 · Published · cited 454× · 165 L. Ed. 2d 557; 126 S. Ct. 2669; 548 U.S. 331; 2006 U.S. LEXIS 5177
Justice Ginsburg, concurring in the judgment. I agree that Article 36 of the Vienna Convention grants rights that may be invoked by an individual in a judicial proceeding, and therefore join Part II of Justice Breyer’s dissenting opinion. As to the suppression and procedural default issues, I join the Court’s judgment. The dissenting opinion veers aWay from t
Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1997-01-27 · Published · cited 5× · 325 S.C. 174; 480 S.E.2d 728; 1997 S.C. LEXIS 19
TOAL, Justice: Appellants City of Beaufort and Town of Port Royal (collectively “Municipalities”) appeal the order of the trial court finding invalid certain provisions in contracts between Municipalities and Respondent Beaufort-Jasper County Water and Sewer Authority (“Authority”). We affirm. Factual/Procedural Background Authority is a special purpose district created by Act No. 784
Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2008-02-27 · Published · cited 89× · 271 S.W.3d 178; 2008 Tenn. App. LEXIS 127; 2008 WL 425942
271 S.W.3d 178 (2008) Nickie DURAN v. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, INC. et al. No. M2006-00282-COA-R3-CV Court of Appeals of Tennessee, at Nashville. October 13, 2006 Session. February 13, 2008. Order Denying the Petition for Rehearing February 27, 2008. Permission to Appeal Denied by Supreme Court August 25, 2008.
Supreme Court of Kansas · 1957-10-05 · Published · cited 15× · 317 P.2d 371; 181 Kan. 799; 41 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2207; 1957 Kan. LEXIS 417
181 Kan. 799 (1957) 317 P.2d 371 ALBERT BINDER, LAWRENCE CALDWELL, JIM DAVENPORT, LAWRENCE EINHAUS, IRL EPPLER, JUAN ESPARZA, ROGER A. MYERS, DAVID HASKER, ANDREW HERRMAN, ELMER HERRMAN, GILBERT HERRMAN, ROY D. LANGLEY, LAWRENCE NIGHTINGALE, I.V. NORWOOD, JOE SANDOVAL, DON RIDER, BRUCE JOHNSON, ERNEST W. SHANNON, LLOYD E. STEERMAN, ROBERT STREIT, LELAND SUTTON, RONALD G. SUTTON, EMERY WAYNE TURNER, GERALD B. WEBB, FRANK JACOBS, DO