Cases

ATTORNEY FOR THE RESPONDENT ATTORNEYS FOR THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT Kevin P. McGoff DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION Patrick A. Ziepolt G. Michael Witte, Executive Secretary Indianapolis, Indiana Seth Pruden, Staff Attorney Indianapolis, Indiana ______________________________________________________________________________

BETTY B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellant Thomas Sales appeals several conditions of supervised release imposed as part of his sentence, following his conviction by guilty plea for counterfeiting United States federal reserve notes. I. Between late December 2002 and mid-January 2003, Sales used his scanner and printer to

733 N.E.2d 973 (2000) Dr. William D. CUTSHALL, and Nancy Cutshall, Appellants-Plaintiffs, v. Ted A. BARKER, Dean F. Cutshall, Jr., Arthur W. Garringer, Edward T. Rice, Amy Barker, Stacey Barker, and Wayne Distributing, Inc., Appellees-Defendants. No. 49A04-9908-CV-388. Court of Appeals of Indiana. August 21, 2000. *975 William C.

BRYAN, Judge. Daniel Lawrence Edwards and Earl Parker appeal from a judgment establishing the location of a boundary line. We dismiss the appeal with respect to Parker and affirm the judgment of the trial court. Edwards owns a parcel of land that is coterminous with parcels owned by Meles-ter Ford (“Melester”) and Melesian A. Ford Allen (“Melesian”). Edwards’s parcel, which is in Section 17 in Perry Count

MEMORANDUM ** Kelvin Alexandra Alas Melgar appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(viii), and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Melgar contends that the district court erred by failing to explain why it imposed a condition o

MEMORANDUM ** Kelvin Alexandra Alas Melgar appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(viii), and 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Melgar contends that the district court erred by failing to explain why it imposed a condition o

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Omni Manor, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-4422.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohi

Harold L. Kendrick and Dianne S. Kendrick appeal from a judgment entered by the Chambers Circuit Court in a boundary-line dispute. We reverse and remand. Harold Kendrick and Fred Kendrick are brothers who have been coterminous landowners for more than 30 years. Harold and his wife Dianne purchased a 25-acre tract of land in 1966. Approximately two *Page 1002 years later, Fred and his wife1

MOORE, Judge. William Samuel Cousins appeals from a judgment entered by the Autauga Circuit Court (“the trial court”) in favor of Patricia McNeel, declaring that McNeel is the owner of certain disputed property, awarding McNeel damages for Cousins’s cutting of timber from the disputed property, and establishing the boundary line between the property owned by McNeel and that owned by Cousins, and in favor of George Houston, f

993 So.2d 469 (2008) SPRINGFIELD MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH v. Robert J. WALL and S. Melissa Wall. 2060239. Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama. January 25, 2008. Certiorari Denied March 21, 2008 Alabama Supreme Court 1070689. *471 Jacqueline E. Austin and J. Pratt Austin-Trucks of Law Offices of Jacqueline E. Uasti

[Cite as State ex rel. Omni Manor, Inc. v. Indus. Comm., 2019-Ohio-2521.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT The State ex rel. Omni Manor, Inc., : Relator, : v. : No. 17AP-725 Industrial Commission of Ohio et al., : (REGULAR CALENDAR)

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District  AMIE WIELAND,   WD79414 Respondent,  OPINION FILED: v.  

705 F.Supp.2d 1012 (2010) Susan A. HENNEMAN, Plaintiff, v. AIRTRAN AIRWAYS, a wholly owned subsidiary of Airtran Holdings, Inc., Defendant. Case No. 06-C-0368. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. March 31, 2010. *1017 Janet L. Heins, Martin C. Kuhn, Heins Law Office LLC, Mequon, WI, for Plaintiff. Andrew A. Jones

The two actions entitled as above were brought to the May term, 1917, of the Lawrence County Circuit Court, by petition founded upon Section 2535, Revised Statutes 1909, to determine the title to about one hundred and twenty acres of land in that county. They were removed by change of venue to Greene County, where they were tried together as one *Page 469 case upon the same evidence, involving the same issues. The judgment of the trial court was for the d

939 So.2d 1052 (2006) IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIMINAL CASES (NO. 2005-5). No. SC05-1622. Supreme Court of Florida. September 28, 2006. The Honorable Terry David Terrell, Chair, Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, First Judicial Circuit, Pensacola, Florida, the Honorable Dedee S. Costello, Past Chair, Fourteenth Judicial Cir

OPINION ON REHEARING TERRIE LIVINGSTON, Justice. After reconsidering our prior opinion on appellees’ motion for rehearing, we deny the motion, but we withdraw our prior opinion and judgment dated December 11, 2008, and substitute the following, primarily to modify our discussion concerning subsection H of family code section 161.001(1). Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(H). On January 11

ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge. | [Appellant R.J. Chiodini sued his neighbor, appellee David Lock, claiming that Lock constructed a fence that breached a long-accepted boundary line and encroached on Chiodini’s land. Following several discovery disputes and the denial of Chiodini’s motion for summary judgment, the circuit court held a bench trial and ruled against Chiodini. In this pro se appeal, Chiodini a

Leonard T. Strand, Chief Judge I. INTRODUCTION This case is before me on a motion (Doc. No. 63) for summary judgment filed by defendants City of Cedar Rapids, Nathan Juilfs, Lucas Jones, Brandon Boesenberg and Bryson Garringer. Plaintiffs have filed a resistance (Doc. No. 90) and defendants have filed a reply (Doc. No. 101). Also pending is defendants' motion (Doc. No. 102) to strike portio

Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. This case arises out of a dispute between Montana and Wyoming over the Yellowstone River Compact (or Compact). Montana alleges that Wyoming has breached Article V(A) of the. Compact by allowing its pre-1950 water appropriators to increase their net water consumption by improving the efficiency of their irrigation systems. The new systems, Montana alleges, emplo

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  No. 06-50219 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v.  CR-03-00120- THOMAS SALES, SVW-1 Defendant-Appellant.  OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California