Cases

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. LaROSE, C.J., and VILLANTI and SLEET, JJ., Concur.

Proceedings: Order: (1) GRANTING Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue (Doc. No. 46); (2) TRANSFERRING the Case to United States District Court, District of Arizona (Phoenix); and (3) VACATING the July 1, 2015 Hearing (IN CHAMBERS) JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is a Motion to Transfer Venue Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) filed by Defendants. (Doc. No. 46.) The Court finds thi

MEMORANDUM & ORDER GORTON, United States District Judge Defendants Holland & Knight, LLP (“H&K”) and Richard J. Hindlian (“Hindli-an”) (collectively, “defendants”) move for summary judgment on plaintiffs claim of legal malpractice brought in his capacity as Bankruptcy Trustee, of the Estate of Inofin, Incorporated. Defendants also move to strike the deposition testimony of Michael Cuomo. For t

797 F.Supp.2d 1107 (2011) Carl KNIGHT, Plaintiff, v. Kathy BROWN, et al., Defendants. Case No. C10-0753JLR. United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle. June 27, 2011. *1114 Keith P. Scully, Newman & Newman, Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff. Mark G. Stockdale, Seattle, WA, Richard J. Glein, Sun Lakes, AZ, Timot

Associate Chief Justice Lee, opinion of the Court: ¶ 1 Utah Code section 78B-4-513(1) provides that "an action for defective design or construction is limited to" an action for "breach of ... contract, whether written or otherwise, including both express and implied warranties." The statute also states that such a claim may be brought only by a person who is "in privity of contract wi

Sanders, J. Although “[pjunctuation is a most fallible standard by which to interpret a writing,” Lessee of Ewing v. Burnet, 36 U.S. (11 Pet.) 41, 54, 9 L. Ed. 624 (1837), the sole issue we must determine is the legal significance of a hyphen separating multiple payees on a negotiable instrument. Three checks made payable to the order of “Rick KnightSimplot Soil Builders” were endorsed and deposited by

Kato, J. J.R. Simplot, Inc., d/b/a Simplot Soilbuilders, appeals the trial court’s summary judgment dismissal of its conversion claim against Yakima Federal Savings and Loan Association for paying on a forged endorsement. Simplot contends a hyphen between two payees’ names on a check means that it is payable jointly and the court erred by determining the check was payable in the alternative. We agree and reverse.

OPINION GOULD, Circuit Judge: With this appeal pending, we decided Ibarra v. Manheim Investments, Inc., 775F.3d 1193, No. 14-56779 (9th Cir. Jan. 8, 2015), filed simultaneously with this opinion, and addressed what proof a defendant seeking removal must produce to prove the amount in controversy requirement under the Class Action Fai

J.M. Johnson, J. ¶40 (dissenting) — JZ Knight does not have standing in this case under the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC) or the land use petition act (LUPA), chapter 36.70C RCW. All holders of water rights within the same water basin do not automatically have standing to oppose proposed economic development in their area. Here, it is proposed that Knight be allowed to bring suit to block remote residential development with no impact

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC16-2182 ____________ RICHARD DELISLE, Petitioner, vs. CRANE CO., et al., Respondents. October 15, 2018 QUINCE, J. Richar

ORDER PER CURIAM. White Knight Limousine, Inc. appeals from the dismissal of its petition against Breeze Coach Leasing, Inc. for lack of personal jurisdiction. No error of law appears. We affirm. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING, REHEARING EN BANC, CLARIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION EVANDER, J. We grant in part the motion for rehearing filed by Appellant Knight News, Inc., and withdraw this Court’s previous opinion dated February 5, 2016, and substitute in its place the following opinion. In light of the instant opinion, the motions for rehearing en banc, cl

469 F.Supp.2d 1016 (2006) John F. KNIGHT, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors, United States of America, Plaintiff, v. The State of ALABAMA, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. CV-83-M-1676-S. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division. December 12, 2006. *1017

NUMBER 13-22-00217-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG RICHARD SHANE KNIGHT, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. On appeal from the 36th District Court

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC2026-0718 ____________ RICHARD KNIGHT, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. May 15, 2026 PER CURIAM. Richard Knight is a prisoner under two sentences of death, for whom a deat

458 F.Supp.2d 1273 (2006) John F. KNIGHT, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs and Plaintiff Intervenors, United States of America Plaintiff, v. The State of ALABAMA, et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. CV-83-M-1676-. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama. October 5, 2004. *1275 Alice H. Martin, U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Birm

753 N.E.2d 408 (2001) 323 Ill. App.3d 1117 257 Ill.Dec. 213 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Otis KNIGHT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1-99-3478. Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fifth Division. June 29, 2001. *410 Michael J. Pelletier, Deputy Defe

Case: 18-13390 Date Filed: 08/30/2019 Page: 1 of 28 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-13390 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 0:17-cv-61921-RNS RICHARD KNIGHT,

QUINCE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur with my colleagues that Knight is not entitled to relief on the majority of his claims, however, I cannot agree with the majority’s conclusion that the Hurst error in this case is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Because I would find that the Hurst error in this case requires a new penalty phase, I dissent.

DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY {¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court of Common Pleas which granted a motion for a directed verdict against appellants, Donna Dalferro et al., and held that reasonable minds could only conclude that Dalferro was not acting within the course and scope of her employment with Citizens Banking Company at the time she suffered injuries in a motorcycle acciden