Cases

OPINION PYLE, Judge. STATEMENT OF THE CASE SCI Propane, LLC (“SCI”); South Central Indiana Rural Electric Membership Corporation (“SCI REMC”); and Rush-Shelby Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. (“RushShelby Energy”) (collectively, “the SCI Defendants”) appeal the trial court’s order requiring them to pay the attorney fees and litigation expenses of Courtney Frederick (“

OPINION BAILEY, Judge. Frederick Holmes-Bey (“Holmes-Bey”), a prisoner in the Indiana Department of Correction (“DOC”) and participant in the Indiana Sex Offender Management and Monitoring (“SOMM”) Program, received a disciplinary sanction in February of 2014. He sought to file, in the United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, a petitio

OPINION LUMPKIN, PRESIDING JUDGE: ¶ 1 Appellant Darrell Wayne Frederick was tried by jury and convicted of First Degree Malice Murder (Count I) (21 O.S. 2001, § 701.7(A)), Assault and Battery with A Dangerous Weapon, After Former Conviction of Two or more Felonies (Count II) (21 O.S.2001, § 645), and Domestic Abuse Assault and Battery (Count III) (21 O.S.20

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

FILED Sep 17 2020, 8:37 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court

FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge. In this case, seven members of Local 1570 of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Ironship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers (respectively, “the Local” and “the International”) sued the Local, its President, Kevin Szczygiel, the International, and the International’s Representative, Benjamin Miller, alleging breaches of t

718 F.Supp.2d 626 (2010) Joette PAULONE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FREDERICK, et al., Defendants. Civil No. WDQ-09-2007. United States District Court, D. Maryland, Northern Division. February 17, 2010. *629 Elizabeth A. Conklyn, Conklyn and Associates, Frederick, MD, for Plaintiff. Daniel Karp, Karpinski Colaresi and Karp PA,

787 F.Supp.2d 360 (2011) Joette PAULONE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FREDERICK, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. ELH-09-2007. United States District Court, D. Maryland. May 3, 2011. *363 Elizabeth A. Conklyn, Conklyn and Associates, Frederick, MD, for Plaintiff. Daniel Karp, Karpinski Colaresi and Karp PA, H. Scott Curtis, O

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ___________________________________ : FREDERICK BANKS, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action No. 06-1950 (EGS) : DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., :

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. The sole issue in this appeal is whether the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Act is the exclusive remedy for the claims of Thomas Pyle and William Wallace, and the derivative claims of their wives, for injuries caused by contact with toxic chemicals. Pyle and Wallace, employees of Dow Chemical, came i

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 14, 2015 FREDERICK MICHAEL BORMAN v. LARRY KEVIN PYLES-BORMAN Appeal from the Circuit Court for Roane County No. 14CV36 Russell E. Simmons, Jr., Judge No. E2014-01794-COA-R3-CV-FILED-AUGUST 4, 2015 In this case a same-sex couple lawfully married in Iowa sought to obtain a divorce in Tennessee

FOR PUBLICATION Aug 13 2014, 9:59 am ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: KENT M. FRANDSEN DAVID K. HERZOG MICHAEL L. SCHULTZ JON LARAMORE Parr Richey Obremskey JANE DALL WILSON Frandsen & Patterson LLP KATRINA GOSSETT Lebanon, Indiana Faegre Baker Daniels LLP

OPINION Sharon G. Lee, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Cornelia A. Clark, Gary R. Wade, Jeffrey S. Bivins, and Holly M. Kirby, JJ., joined. The issue we address in this appeal is whether the Court of Appeals properly granted the defendant a Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 10 ex

206 F.Supp. 120 (1962) Frederick Z. GOOSMAN, to his own use and to the use of Royal Indemnity Company, a body corporate, v. A. DUIE PYLE, INC., a body corporate, Raymond A. Hill, Dennis R. Hill and Harry E. Anderson. Civ. No. 12590. United States District Court D. Maryland. June 12, 1962. *121 *122</

Montgomery, J., The pleadings consist of a bill of complaint seeking an injunction to restrain defendant from abandoning a water main and discontinuing water service to plaintiffs, an answer on the merits containing new matter, and an answer to the new matter. Findings of Fact 1. Defendant is a municipal authority incorporated May 3, 1943, under the Municipality Authorities Act of June

PER CURIAM. In this automobile collision ease on the first appeal we questioned only the trial court’s refusal to order production of certain accident reports made by the defendant-appellee’s driver. Goosman v. A. Duie Pyle, Inc., 320 F.2d 45, 53 (4 Cir. 1963). The ruling was innocuous if, as Judge Boreman patly put it in the opinio

BOREMAN, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant, Frederick Z. Goos-man, sustained personal injuries and property damage when his automobile collided with the rear of a 46-foot tractor-trailer rig leased by defendant-ap-pellee, A. Duie Pyle, Inc. (Pyle or defendant herein), and operated by its agent, Anderson, as the rear of the trailer ex

Harrington, Chancellor: Edward W. Pyle, late of Sussex County, Delaware, died November 26th, 1930, leaving a will bearing date March 7th, 1930, which was duly probated as such on December 2nd of that year. The bulk of his estate, consisting of both real and personal property, was disposed of by the general residuary clause of his will. By that clause, he gave all of the rest, residue and remainder of his estate to the complainants

BLEDSOE, District Judge (after stating the facts as above). Defendants Pyle and Conner were prosecuted under section 5209 of the Revised Statutes for a misapplication of the funds of the National Bank *292& Trust Company of Pasadena. Defendant Pyle was charged as an officer of the bank, and defendant Conner as an aider and abettor of Pyle. The statute, being intended

MILLER, Judge. This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“board”) dismissing appellant’s petitions1 to cancel two trademark registrations of appellee. The board dismissed the petitions to cancel, which were based upon allegations of fraud in obtaining the registrations, on the ground that the subject matter of the petitions sh