Cases

Affirm; Opinion Filed February 10, 2022 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00352-CV BRYAN TAYLOR AND MELISSA TAYLOR, Appellants V. BAYLOR SCOTT & WHITE MEDICAL CENTER-FRISCO, Appellee On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas

MEMORANDUM WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, Senior District Judge. This case involves claims of employment discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment as to all claims, filed by Defendant Peninsula Regional Medical Center (“PRMC”). ECF No. 19. In his Opposition, Plaintiff Brandon Taylor (

EDWIN A. LOMBARD, Judge. hThe plaintiff, Irene Taylor, appeals the district court judgment dismissing her medical malpractice action against the defendants LAMMICO a/k/a Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company, Elizabeth N. Blanton, M.D.,. and Newco Women’s Medical Center, LLC. After review of the record in light of the applicable law and arguments of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

CARLTON, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. James and Eva Taylor filed this Mississippi Torts Claim Act (MTCA) medical-malpractice suit pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-46-13(1) (Rev.2002) against Delta Regional Medical Center (DRMC), alleging negligence by DRMC’s physicians and staff after James suffered a stroke. ¶ 2. Specifically, the Taylors claimed that DRMC physicians and staff negl

Reverse and Render; Opinion Filed July 6, 2018. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-01221-CV THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER, Appellant V. CHARLES WAYNE TAYLOR AND ROSEMARY TAYLOR, Appellees On Appeal from the 14th Judicial Distri

Pfeifer, J. {¶ 1} This case began with a default on credit-card debt by an Ohio consumer. It reaches this court because that consumer alleged violations of the federal Fan-Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq., and the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act (“OCSPA”), R.C. 1345.01 et seq., by the entities that purchased her debt and were involved in suing her to collect on it. Today, we determine several

ACCEPTED 05-17-01221-CV FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 1/29/2018 2:46 PM

255 P.3d 526 (2011) 242 Or. App. 92 Dixie L. TAYLOR, Personal Representative for the Estate of Irma J. Taylor, Deceased, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PORTLAND ADVENTIST MEDICAL CENTER, an Oregon corporation, Defendant-Respondent, and Gregory Robinson, M.D., and Mark R. Anderson, M.D., Appellants. 070505420; A142219. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. Kiersten M. Taylor-Novotny brought this action against her former employer, Health Alliance Medical Plans, Inc. (“Health Alliance”), under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 26012654, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”),

LARRY D. VAUGHT, Judge | Appellant Baptist Health- Medical Center (BHMC) appeals the Pope County Circuit Court’s denial of its motion to vacate the court’s previously issued guardianship order appointing First Community Bank of Batesville (the Bank) as the guardian,of William Scott Mueller’s estate for the purpose of prosecuting a medical-negligence action on his behalf and managing any assets obtained the

985 A.2d 51 (2009) 189 Md. App. 439 Dorianne THOMAS, M.D., et al. v. CAPITAL MEDICAL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, LLC. No. 545, September Term, 2008. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. December 7, 2009. *55 Julie Glass Martin-Korb of Rockville, and Philip B. Zipin of silver Spring, for appellant. Cathe

OPINION OF THE COURT FISHER, Circuit Judge. In this appeal, we consider whether two prison administrators are entitled to qualified immunity from an Eighth Amendment claim that serious deficiencies in the provision of medical care by a private, third-party provider resulted in an inmate’s suicide. We agree with the District Court that they are not. For reasons

892 So.2d 581 (2004) Fletter C. TAYLOR, Plaintiff-Appellant v. LSU MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant-Appellee. No. 38,944-CA. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit. October 14, 2004. Opinion on Rehearing January 26, 2005. *582 The Singleton Law Firm, by W. James Singleton, Reshonda Leshay Bradford, for Appellant.<

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

679 F.Supp.2d 104 (2010) KBI TRANSPORT SERVICES, and Katheer B. Ibrahim, Plaintiffs, v. MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 09-01292 (HHK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. January 20, 2010. *105 Christopher Aldo Porco, Law Offices of Christopher Aldo Porco, PLLC, Washington, DC

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 606 U. S. Part 2 Pages 522–655 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 27, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are

OPINION OF THE COURT Carolyn E. Demarest, J. Defendant First United American Life Insurance Company (First United) moves, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7), to dismiss the second, fourth, sixth, eighth, tenth, twelfth, and thirteenth causes of action in plaintiff Maimonides Medical Center’s (Maimonides) complaint. Plaintiff alleges breach of contract and violation of Insurance Law § 3224-a (the Prompt

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE MELISSA TAYLOR, § § No. 298, 2023 Claimant Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § C.A. No.: N22A-09-00

OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum. Order, entered March 13, 2006, reversed, with $10 costs, defendants’ CPLR 4404 (a) motion granted, the verdict set aside, judgment in favor of plaintiff vacated, and judgment granted to defendants as a matter of law. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint. Defendants’ CPLR 4404 (a) motion to set aside the verdict shoul

139 Nev., Advance Opinion St9 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA KIMBERLY D. TAYLOR, AN No. 83847 INDIVIDUAL, Appellant, vs. FILED KEITH BRILL, M.D., FACOG, FACS, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND WOMEN'S DEC 2 1 2