Cases

416 B.R. 264 (2009) Tom C. SMITH, Trustee for the Estate of Carr & Porter, LLC, Appellant, v. J. Ridgely PORTER, III, Appellee. Civil Action No. 2:09cv188. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. July 15, 2009. *266 Robert Vincent Roussos, Harbour Law PLC, Norfolk, VA, for Appellant. Conrad Moss

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* After examining the appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has *200determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). The case is, therefore, ordered submitted without oral argument. Dennis Leon Smith, a C

416 B.R. 239 (2009) In re CARR & PORTER, LLC, Debtor. Tom C. Smith, Jr., Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff, v. J. Ridgely Porter, III, Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 07-70238-SCS. Adversary No. 08-07051-SCS. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. March 17, 2009. *242 Robert V. Roussos, Roussos, Lassiter, G

Clyde Porter, Doing Business as Clyde Porter, Jr. Consulting Engineers, Appellant, againstGloria Smith, Respondent. Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Carmen R. Velasquez, J.), entered August 28, 2014. The judgment, insofar as appealed from, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff's cause of action. ORDERED that the ju

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0317p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ PORTER SMITH, │ Plaintiff-Appellant

141 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 244 (1991) 595 A.2d 693 Steven F. SMITH and Roberta L. Smith, his wife, Appellants, v. PORTER TOWNSHIP, CLINTON COUNTY, Pennsylvania, and Sweetland Engineering and Associates, Inc., Appellees. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued April 4, 1991. Decided July 12, 1991. *245 R.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

197 F.Supp.2d 827 (2002) Larry PORTER, Petitioner, v. David SMITH, Respondent. No. 00-40248. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. March 18, 2002. *828 Larry Porter, Jackson, MI, pro se. Janet Van Cleve, Mich. Dept. of Atty. Gen. Lansing, MI, for respondent OPINION AND ORDER DEN

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan December 23, 2013 Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice 147550

126 F.Supp.2d 1073 (2001) Larry PORTER, Petitioner, v. David SMITH, Respondent. No. 00-40248. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. January 4, 2001. Debra M. Gagliardi, Janet Van Cleve, Michigan Department of Attorney General, Habeas Corpus Division, Lansing, MI, for respondent. Larry Porter, Detroit, MI, pro se. OPINION AN

By the Court. -Judgment and order affirmed. This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(1)(b)5.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County (Michael M. Mohun, A.J.), entered October 27, 2015 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition. It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition seeking to annul the Parole Board’s determination denying him parole re

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County (Michael M. Mohun, A.J.), entered October 27, 2015 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment dismissed the petition. It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his petition seeking to annul the Parole Board’s determination denying him parole re

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERNARD MARKOVITZ, Bankruptcy Judge. Plaintiff Lenny R. Porter seeks a determination that a debt owed to him by debtor Homer G. Smith is excepted from discharge by § 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code. The debt arises from debt- or’s refusal to allow plaintiff to harvest timber pursuant to an agreement between them and debtor’s subsequent sale of the right to harves

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Daniel J. Doyle, J.), rendered January 31, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, that part of

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Daniel J. Doyle, J.), rendered January 31, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, that part of

Siddoway, C. J. ¶1 A creditor of a decedent’s estate who is notified by the personal representative of rejection of his claim is required by Washington’s nonclaim statute to bring suit within 30 days, failing which his claim is forever barred. RCW 11.40.100. The statute provides that the personal representative’s notification of rejection “must advise the claimant that the claimant must bring suit in the proper court aga

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Z. Lee, United States District Judge Plaintiff Justin Porter (“Porter”) designed a sports logo for a lacrosse club, Team One, with the understanding that he would be compensated by the club at a future date. Since that time, the club has used the logo on team merchandise, but Porter claims that he never received payment for creating the team logo and brings cop

PER CURIAM: Ricky Lamar Turner appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Turner v. Porter, No. 1:12-cv-00431-TSE-TCB (E.D.Va. filed Mar. 31 & entered Apr. 1, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions ar

MAIN, Justice. Donald Porter, Marc Porter, Porter Capital Corporation, Porter Bridge Loan Company, Inc., Lowerline Corporation, CapitalPartners Leasing, Inc., and Capital-Partners Leasing, LLC (hereinafter referred to collectively as “the Porter defendants”), appeal from the denial of their motion to compel arbitration of the claims asserted against them by Byron Porter Williamson. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and rem