Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Taylor v. Palmer”
Taylor v. Palmerpublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE 01/30/2019 AT NASHVILLE August 8, 2018 Session SHERRY SMITH EX REL LAUREN TAYLOR AGEE v. HANNAH NICOLE PALMER Appeal from the Circuit Court for DeKalb County No. 2016-CV-59 Jonathan L. Young, Judge ___________________________________
Palmer v. Taylorpublic domain
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
01/30/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 8, 2018 Session SHERRY SMITH EX REL. LAUREN TAYLOR AGEE v. HANNAH NICOLE PALMER Appeal from the Circuit Court for DeKalb County No. 2016-CV-59 Jonathan L. Young, Judge ________________
Palmer v. Taylorpublic domain
Ruffin, Judge. This appeal arises out of a $20,000 jury verdict that appellee, Effie Taylor, received in an action for personal injuries against appellant Edward Palmer. Taylor alleged that Palmer caused her to have a heart attack by inflicting emotional distress when she attempted to deliver her grandchildren to her former daughter-in-law, Wendy Palmer, after a weekend visit and that he physically assaulted her during the i
Palmer v. Statepublic domain
MAY, C.J. The defendant appeals the revocation of his probation for resisting an officer without violence. The defendant argues the trial court erred in revoking his probation because the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to detain him, which led to the resisting without violence charge. We agree and reverse. The State filed a violation of probation, and alleged the defendant had committed a trespass an
State v. Palmerpublic domain
McGee Brown, J. {¶ 1} This appeal draws us to two procedural questions that linger after our decisions in State v. Bodyke, 126 Ohio St.3d 266, 2010-Ohio-2424, 933 N.E.2d 753, and State v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374, 952 N.E.2d 1108, each of which invalidated certain aspects o
Taylor v. Haugaardpublic domain
ROBERTO A. LANGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In a complaint and motion papers filed January 22, 2019, Plaintiffs Yvonne Taylor and the South Dakota Municipal League (the League) claim that Defendant Steven Haugaard, the speaker of the South Dakota House of Representatives, violated their constitutional rights by banning Taylor-a long time lobbyist and executive director of the League-from the floor of the South Dakota House of Rep
Palmer v. Statepublic domain
34 So.3d 1207 (2010) Cleveland C. PALMER a/k/a Cleveland Champion Palmer, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee. No. 2008-KA-02100-COA. Court of Appeals of Mississippi. May 4, 2010. *1208 Leslie S. Lee, Jackson, Justin Taylor Cook, attorneys for appellant. Office of the Attorney General by Ladonna C. Holland, attorne
Palmer v. Statepublic domain
37 So.3d 977 (2010) Willy PALMER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 4D09-3980. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. June 23, 2010. Willy Palmer, Okeechobee, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court's order summarily denying appellant's rule 3.850 motion for postconviction rel
Machado v. Taylorpublic domain
McDONALD, J. **397 The sole issue in this appeal is whether a party's delay in raising a challenge to the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction is a proper ground on **398 which to declin
Taylor v. Taylorpublic domain
PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Wade v. Hirschman, 903 So.2d 928 (Fla.2005). THOMPSON, PALMER and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Taylor v. Statepublic domain
PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. K.W. v. State, 983 So.2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). TORPY, C.J., PALMER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
959 F.Supp. 373 (1996) Margurett Gwen TAYLOR, Individually and as Legal Heir and Beneficiary of Steven Craig Palmer, Plaintiff, v. DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT d/b/a Parkland Memorial Hospital, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 3:95-CV-2854-G. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division. October 17, 1996. *374
Palmer v. HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLCpublic domain
677 F.Supp.2d 233 (2010) Shauna PALMER, Plaintiff, v. HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC, Defendant. Civil Action No. 08-1853 (CKK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. January 6, 2010. *235 Shauna Palmer, Manassas, VA, pro se. Jamison B. Taylor, Rism, LLC, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Thomas R. Lynch, Bra
Palmer v. GMAC Commercial Mortgagepublic domain
628 F.Supp.2d 186 (2009) Shauna PALMER, Plaintiff, v. GMAC COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE, Defendant. Civil Action No. 08-1853 (CKK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. June 25, 2009. *187 Shauna Palmer, Manassas, VA, pro se. Jamison B. Taylor, Rism, LLC, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Donna M. Crowe, Steven A
State v. Malcon L. Taylorpublic domain
PER CURIAM. The issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting the revised motion to suppress filed by Malcon Lee Taylor (“Defendant”) based on the failure of the police to comply with Florida’s knock-and-announce statute found in section 901.19(1), Florida Statutes (2015). 1
Taylor v. Commissioner of Correctionpublic domain
EVELEIGH, J. **633 In this certified appeal, the petitioner, Devon Taylor, appeals from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the denial of his amended writ of habeas corpus. See Taylor v. Commissioner of Correction ,
Taylor v. Denka Performance Elastomer LLCpublic domain
MARTIN L. C. FELDMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court are two Rule 12 motions: (1) Denka Performance Elastomer LLC's motion to dismiss; and (2) E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company's motion to dismiss. For the reasons that follow, DuPont's motion is GRANTED, and Denka's motion is GRANTED without prejudice to the plaintiffs' opportunity to amend their deficient nuisance allegations in their complaint. <
Chris Taylor v. John Chiangpublic domain
OPINION HUCK, Senior District Judge: I. INTRODUCTION This putative class action has a long and tortuous history in this Court. Presumably this opinion will be known as Taylor V. 1 Appellants challenge the constitutionality of Calif