Cases

06/03/2026 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 7, 2026 Session ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY V. TOM JAMES COMPANY ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Williamson County No. 20CV-50006 Deanna B. Johnson, Chancellor

FILED 14-0265 2/4/2015 11:52:10 PM tex-4028401 SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, CLERK

Matter of James v Fariña (2019 NY Slip Op 01729) Matter of James v Fariña 2019 NY Slip Op 01729 Decided on March 12, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Oing, J., J. Published

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 98-1982 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeals from the United States v. * District Court for the

WADDILL, Commissioner. The question presented for decision is whether legally “dry” county territory that is annexed to a legally “wet” city becomes “wet” territory following the annexation. The trial court was of the opinion that the annexed territory remained “dry” and, therefore, held that the Kentucky Alcoholic Beverage Control Board-acted in excess of its powers in issuing beer and drink licenses for appellant’s business

*881 OPINION WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: Richard Thomas Stitt was convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on numerous federal drug and firearms-related charges, including three counts of murder during a continuing criminal enterprise (CCE) re

ACCEPTED 03-15-00063-CR 4835037 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ACCEPTED 03-15-00063-CR 5240283 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUST

ACCEPTED 03-15-00063-CR 4682610 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN,

ALARCON, Circuit Judge: The question presented by this case is whether a state may take real property from a lessor and transfer title in fee simple absolute to a lessee because of a shortage of land for fee simple residential ownership.1 We hold that such a taking violates the federal constitution. *790I .

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2015 Term FILED June 9, 2015 _ released at 3:00 p.m. RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS No. 15-0094 OF WEST VIRGINIA STATE OF W

702 F.2d 788 13 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,534 Frank E. MIDKIFF, Richard Lyman, Jr., Hung Wo Ching, MatsuoTakabuki and Myron B. Thompson, Trustees of theKamehameha Schools/Bishop Estate,Plaintiffs- Appellants,v.Paul A. TOM, Tony Taniguchi, Wilbert K. Eguchi, Wayne T.Takahashi, Lawrence N.C. Ing, Nobuyoshi Tamura, Andrew I.T.Chang, and David C. Slipher, Commissioners of the HawaiiHousing Authority;

OPINION BY Judge RENÉE COHN JUBELIRER. Before this Court in our original jurisdiction are the Preliminary Objections (POs) of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) and Gladys M. Brown, in her official capacity as Chairperson of the PUC, (PUC Respondents) and the separately filed POs of Tom Wolf, in his official capacity as Governor of Pennsylvania, and various Executive Bran

346 P.2d 596 (1959) STATE of Idaho on relation of Roscoe C. RICH, Leonard K. Floan and David P. Jones, Idaho Board of Highway Directors, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. IDAHO POWER COMPANY, a corporation, and The Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company, a corporation, Defendants-Respondents. No. 8739. Supreme Court of Idaho. October 2, 1959. Rehearing Denied No

BEAM, Circuit Judge. Tom and Donovan Vig appeal their convictions, following a jury trial,1 for violation of section 2252(a)(4)(B) of the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977, as subsequently amended, which prohibits the knowing possession of three or more books, magazines, periodicals, films, video tapes, or other matter containing any visual depiction of a minor engagi

Opinion for the Court filed PER CURIAM. * Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION .1121 A. Background: Natural Gas Industry Structure.1122 B. Order No. 436: Open-Access Transportation.1123 C. Order No. 636: Mandatory Unbundling.1125

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-00-00347-CV Tom C. McCall and David B. McCall, Appellants v. <

Opinion filed December 8, 2005 <

PELL, Circuit Judge. This case arises on the petition of the National Labor Relations Board (Board or NLRB) for enforcement of its order finding the Respondent, Rich’s Precision Foundry, Inc. (Company), in violation of §§ 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(1) and (3) (1976). The Company has cross-petitioned this

TJOFLAT, Chief Judge: This case involves a steel producer’s payment of kickbacks, in the form of illegal pension payments, to union officials, in violation of the Labor Management Relations (“Taft-Hartley”) Act § 302, 29 U.S.C. § 186 (1988), and its failure to notify the employee pension plan’s participants that the plan had been amended to provide for such payments, as requir