Cases

587 S.E.2d 505 (2003) STATE of North Carolina v. John Fred GAITHER. No. COA02-1477. Court of Appeals of North Carolina. November 4, 2003. *506 Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Tina A. Krasner, for the State. McCotter, Ashton & Smith, P.A., by Rudolph A. Ashton, III and Terri W. Sharp, New Bern

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs August 2, 2016 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ALEX GOODWIN AND JOEY LEE aka JOEY CURRIE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 1102877 W. Mark Ward, Judge No. W2015-00813-CCA-R3-CD (C) - Filed June 7, 2017 In this consolidated appeal as of right, Defendants Alex Goodwin a

562 A.2d 1202 (1989) Charles S. LEE, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 88-219. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued June 13, 1989. Decided August 18, 1989. Bill D. Burlison, Washington, D.C., appointed by this court, for appellant. Jock A. Banks, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty., Michael W. Farrell, As

Opinion PER CURIAM. PER CURIAM: Police officers using binoculars observed appellant Hawkins participating in a series of what appeared to be drug transactions. Maintaining their surveillance, they radioed details of his activities to their supervisor, who was stationed some blocks away. The supervisor later arrived on the scene and arrested appellant. He

RENDERED: OCTOBER 24, 2024 TO BE PUBLISHED Supreme Court of Kentucky 2023-SC-0062-DG WOOSTER MOTOR WAYS, INC.; JAMES APPELLANTS BAUMHOWER; EC DELIVERY, LLC; KENTUCKY FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; AND TEDDY SEERY ON REVIEW FROM COURT OF APPEALS V.

703 A.2d 1239 (1997) Walter J. MUNN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 95-CF-1686. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Submitted May 13, 1997. Decided December 18, 1997. Arthur H. Fawcett, Jr., Washington, DC, appointed by this court, was on the brief for appellant. Eric H. Holder, Jr., United States Attorney at the time the brief

HALL, Judge, concurring in the result. ¶ 34 I agree with the lead opinion that Appellant cannot show that he was prejudiced by the amendment to the indictment on the first day of tidal. However, regardless of prejudice, Rule 13.5(b) is violated when an amendment changes the nature of the offense. State v. Bruce, 125 Ariz. 421, 423, 610 P.2d 55, 57 (1980) (explaining that the type of formal or techn

641 A.2d 479 (1994) Frederick WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Josef RATCLIFF, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Nos. 93-CF-405, 93-CF-516. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued March 24, 1994. Decided May 9, 1994. *481 Leslie B. Holt, Washington, DC, for appellant William

684 A.2d 1258 (1996) Perry L. WOODALL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 95-CF-84. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued September 21, 1995. Decided October 24, 1996. *1259 Giannina Lynn, Washington, DC, for appellant. Thomas A. DiBiase, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Eric H.

944 A.2d 1055 (2008) FORT LINCOLN CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., Appellants, v. FORT LINCOLN NEW TOWN CORPORATION, et al., Appellees. No. 05-CV-1410. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued January 24, 2007. Decided March 20, 2008. *1059 Bruce J. Terris, Washington, DC, with whom Lara A. Cartwrighi-Smith,

555 A.2d 1010 (1989) Vernon T. FRANKLIN, a/k/a Yusuf A. Malik, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 86-1366. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued January 5, 1989. Decided March 17, 1989. Stephen D. Scavuzzo, Alexandria, Va., appointed by this court, for appellant. Edith S. Marshall, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay B. Stephens,

738 A.2d 240 (1999) Angelo M. DANIELS and James N. Campbell, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. Nos. 96-CF-998, 96-CF-1036. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued September 9, 1998. Decided August 26, 1999. *242 Courtney E. Ingraffia, appointed by the court, with whom Jeffrey T. Green, Washington, DC,

991 F.2d 746 127 Lab.Cas. P 33,061, 1 Wage & Hour Cas.2d(BNA) 637 George C. ARMITAGE, Alan P. King, Ronnie A. Lewis, Kerry B.Swiggum, Michael D. Sword, Eric Aikin, Brian C. Cornett,Charles August Franco, William J. Greaves, John E.Griffiths, Jr., Scott W. Haygood, William J. Hull, RichardC. Kohr, Jesse R. Lewis, Jr., Lisa K. Lyons, Terry F. Lyons,Mark D. Marr, D.J. Moore, Dale Wayne Polley,

OPALA, J. ¶ 1 Two issues are presented on certiorari: (1) Did COCA err when it reversed the nisi prius judge’s new-trial order? and (2) Did COCA identify and apply on appeal the correct standard of review? Because both questions are answered in the negative, we reverse the nisi prius new-trial grant by applying an analysis that differs from that used by COCA. I. ANATOMY OF THE LITIGATIO

597 A.2d 14 (1991) John E. JOSEPH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 88-1139. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued October 18, 1989. Decided September 13, 1991. Calvin Steinmetz, appointed by this court, with whom Anita Isicson, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant. Joyce J. Bang, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to the Illinois Official Reports accuracy and integrity of this

TERRY, Associate Judge: Appellant appeals from his conviction of burglary in the first degree1 and destruction of property2 and from the denial of a motion to vacate his sentence. He argues that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of burglary; that he was erroneously barred from presenting the testimony of certain witnesses; that the court should have given

256 F.Supp.2d 1227 (2003) In re CFS-RELATED SECURITIES FRAUD LITIGATION. 99-CV-825-K(J), 00-CV-111-K(J), 99-CV-828-K(J), 00-CV-839-K(J), 99-CV-829-K(J), 99-CV-862-K(J), 99-CV-863-K(J), 99-CV-864-K(J), 99-CV-873-K(J), 00-CV-104-K(J), 00-CV-205-K(J), 99-CV-874-K(J), 00-CV-110-K(J), 99-CV-889-K(J), 99-CV-919-K(J), 00-CV-837-K(J), 00-CV-847-K(J), 02-CV-531-K(J), 02-CV-591-K(J), 02-CV-961-K(J), 00-CV-73-P(J). Unite

111 F.Supp.2d 1224 (2000) Robert BUTLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The ALABAMA JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION, et al., Defendants. No. Civ.A. 00-D-976-N. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division. July 28, 2000. *1225 James C. Barton, Jr., Johnston, Barton, Proctor & Powell, LLP, Birmingham, AL, Robert Marc Givh

CARDAMONE, Circuit Judge. We review on this appeal an employer’s severance pay policy to decide whether it is an ERISA plan that preempts a state from ordering an employer to pay benefits to departing employees. By the terms of the employer’s manual, eligibility to receive severance pay was limited to those employees “involuntarily terminated” from the company, i.e., separated from the employer’s payroll and not later