Cases

321 F.Supp.2d 1254 (2004) Roderick POMPEY, Plaintiff, v. James LUMPKIN, Defendant. Civil Action No. 2:01cv315-T. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division. June 18, 2004. *1255 Beverly Joan Rickels, Birmingham, AL, David A. Gespass, Gespass & Johnson, Birmingham, AL, Elizabeth A. Roland, Helena, AL, for Pl

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER WILLIAM H. BAUGHMAN, JR., United States Magistrate Judge. Introduction This is a diversity case1 arising out of defendant Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company’s refusal to pay death benefits to plaintiff Barbara Ramsey on the death of her husband John Ramsey, the insured. Before me2 are cros

EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge. Bethune Plaza, Inc., runs a nursing home in Illinois. On July 17, 1986, an inspector from the state’s Department of Public Health arrived to investigate complaints of excessive heat and humidity; Bethune’s security guard prevented her from entering. Bethune admitted John Lumpkin, the Associate Director of the Department’s Office of Health Regulation, the following day. On November 14 the Departmen

This record contains two appeals, from decrees of the Circuit Court No. 2, of Baltimore City, taken by Cora Lee Lumpkin, widow of William W. Lumpkin. The first appeal was by her, in her own right, from a decree dismissing her *Page 486 petition to reopen and modify a decree theretofore passed in the case of Hannah S. Lumpkin et al. v. Harriet V. Lumpkin et al. The second appeal was by her, as executrix of her husband's will, from a decre

Lumpkin, J. 1. There was no evidence of undue influence, or fraud inducing the making of the will which was propounded for probate; nor was there evidence of a mistake by the testatrix as to the existence or conduct of her heirs. A number of the grounds of the motion for a new trial, which were dependent upon the existence of such evidence, were without merit. 2. In this State the propounder of a will can not

Lumpkin, P. J. The judgment now under review is one overruling a certiorari. It appears from the record that M. C. Moore, who held against John Penn and Laura Penn an execution which had been issued from a justice’s court, caused the same to be levied on certain realty. Before having the levy made, the plaintiff had filed with the levying officer an affidavit reciting that this realty had been set apart as a homestead to the defe

By the Court. — Lumpkin, J, delivering the opinion. [1.] We are compelled to reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court, believing, as we do, that the plea of former recovery is not sustained by the record from Elbert County. It is conclusive as far as it goes; but there is a new element in this case, which was not involved in the issue there, to wit: t

Fish, J. The F. R. Penn Tobacco Co., a corporation, brought suit against W. W. Leman Jr. & Co., upon an alleged contract of guaranty. The petition contained the following allegations: “ 2nd. That on the 30th day of September, 1897, your petitioner received from Geo. D. Mashburn & Co., merchants of Hawkinsville, Ga., a written order for 20 boxes of tobacco to be sent to them. The price of said tobacco w'as $204.08. 3rd. Sa

Lumpkin, J. (After stating the foregoing facts.) After the evidence for the plaintiff had been introduced, and her counsel had announced her ease closed, a motion was made for a nonsuit, and the court stated that he would grant it. Before the order was signed, counsel for the plaintiff moved the court to allow him to introduce further evidence, stating what it was. The court held that the motion came too late,

Fish, J. In this case the sole question argued here' was ■whether, under the facts, the defendants in execution had any interest in the realty levied upon, which was subject to the lien *of the judgment against them. In McDaniel v. Edwards, 56 Ga. 444, it was held thát, “After a sale of land for distribution by an executor, under an order of the court of ordinary, it .stands discharged of prior judgment

Fish, J. In this case the sole question argued here' was ■whether, under the facts, the defendants in execution had any interest in the realty levied upon, which was subject to the lien *of the judgment against them. In McDaniel v. Edwards, 56 Ga. 444, it was held thát, “After a sale of land for distribution by an executor, under an order of the court of ordinary, it .stands discharged of prior judgment

BLAIR, Justice. Defendants in error, Mrs. Lona Penn, joined pro forma by her husband, J. C. Penn, herein called appellees, brought this suit to recover the amount due on a $525 note against T. A. Houston as maker, and Mrs. S. E. Norment, deceased, having during her lifetime signed the note as surety; Mike Houston was sued as the independent executor of her estate to subject the same to the payment of this surety obligation;

Hines, J. The questions propounded by the Court of Appeals involve the construction of certain provisions in a policy of life insurance. One of these provisions is as follows: “If . . the insured shall furnish to the Company due proof that . . he has become wholly disabled by. bodily disease, so that he is and thereby will be permanently and continuously unable to engage in any occupation whatever for remuneration or profit, and

OPINION LEWIS, VICE-PRESIDING JUDGE: ¶ 1 Bruce Esley Witherow, Appellant, was tried by jury and found guilty of Count 1, trafficking in illegal drugs, after two (2) or more prior felony drug convictions, in violation of 63 O.S.Supp.2014, § 2-415; Count 2, use of surveillance equipment to avoid detection, after former conviction of two (2) or more felonies, in violation of 21 O.S.2011, § 1993(C); and Count

ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Chief Judge | íAppellant Priscilla Ponder appeals the January 26, 20Í5 orders of the Union County Circuit Court, 1 arguing that there was insufficient evidence to support the circuit court’s grant of permanent custody of appellant’s three minor children, A.P., E.P., and J.P. to

HUDSON, JUDGE: ¶ 1 Appellant, Phillip Eric Winbush, III, appeals from the revocation of his five (5) year suspended sentence in Case No. CF-2012-478 in the District Court of Comanche County, by the Honorable Mark R. Smith, District Judge. On April 16, 2013, Appellant entered a plea of guilty to Count 1: Unlawful Possession of Controlled Drug With Intent to Distribute, felony; Count 2: Attempting to Elude Police Officer, misdemeanor;

OSCN Found Document:WITHEROW v. STATE OSCN navigation Home Courts Court Dockets

629 S.E.2d 79 (2006) 278 Ga. App. 376 ROBERTSON v. The STATE. No. A05A1809. Court of Appeals of Georgia. March 23, 2006. *81 Marcus C. Chamblee, Cambridge, for Appellant. Penny A. Penn, District Attorney, for Appellee. SMITH, Presiding Judge. Michael Robertson was charged by a Forsyth

614 S.E.2d 153 (2005) 273 Ga. App. 34 RUPNIK v. The STATE. No. A05A0530. Court of Appeals of Georgia. April 19, 2005. *154 Rafe Banks III, Banks, Stubbs, Neville & Cunat, Cumming, for appellant. Penny A. Penn, District Attorney, James A. Dunn, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. MI

2025 IL App (1st) 232174 No. 1-23-2174 Opinion filed March 24, 2025 FIRST DIVISION ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT