Cases

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-4340 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TRAVIS AARON BALL, a/k/a Wiz, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judg

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-17-00748-CR Travis Marpoe, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE 450TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-DC-17-203375, THE HONORABLE BRAD URRUTIA, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury co

440 S.E.2d 370 (1994) The STATE, Respondent, v. James E. GOODSON, Appellant. No. 23996. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Heard October 6, 1993. Decided January 17, 1994. *371 Deputy Chief Atty. Joseph L. Savitz, of South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia, for appellant. Atty. Gen., T. Travis M

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 22a0261p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ IN RE: E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY C-8 │ PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATI

The issue presented in this case is whether a judgment ruling on all substantive issues of a claim under section 75-1.1 is final and certifiable for appeal notwithstanding an unresolved claim for attorney fees under section 75-16.1. We hold that such a judgment is immediately appealable. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the merits of the issues raised on appeal.

958 S.W.2d 944 (1998) Victor WALLS, Appellant, v. TRAVIS COUNTY and Travis County Sheriff's Department, Appellees. No. 03-96-00647-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. January 8, 1998. Rehearing Overruled February 12, 1998. *945 Gregory T. Bourgeois, James "Beau" Eccles, Austin, for Appellant. Ken Oden,

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-96-00647-CV Victor Walls, Appellant v. Travis County and Travis County Sheriff's Department, A

ACCEPTED 15-25-00085-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 7/3/2025 3:42 PM NO. 15-25-00085-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

COURTNEY HUDSON GOODSON, Associate Justice. |, This court granted appellant Donnie R. Robinson’s petition for review from a court of appeals’ decision affirming the circuit court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. For reversal, Robinson argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion to suppress because a cracked lens on a taillight, causing a vehicle to display both white light and

ACCEPTED 15-25-00085-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 6

WYNN, Judge, concurring in part, dissenting in part. I agree with majority’s well-reasoned opinion; however, I am compelled to dissent and allow the State an opportunity to appeal to our Supreme Court the issue of whether the ultimate disposition of awarding a new trial in this matter overrules our earlier case of State *624

NAKFOOR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AT AUSTIN NO. 3-92-233-CV BRUCE E. NAKFOOR, APPELLANT

This is a bill in equity filed by M. A. Travis and others, each over the age of 21 years, resident citizens and taxpayers of Conecuh county, against the First National Bank of Evergreen, a corporation, and the duly designated depository for the county funds of Conecuh county, S. P. Dunn, the judge of probate, and I. F. Goodson, and the other members of the court of county commissioners of Conecuh county. The bill as amended seeks to restrain and enjoin the defendants from paying certain bonds

ACCEPTED 15-25-00085-CV Appellate Docket Number: 15-25-00085-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS Appellate Case Style: The Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas AUSTIN, TEXAS Vs. James Blake Brickman, David Maxwell, J. Mar

ROBIN F. WYNNE, Associate Justice hRandeep S. Mann appeals following entry of an order by the Crittenden County Circuit Court granting partial summary judgment in favor of Dr, Trent Pierce and Melissa Pierce as to liability for tort claims the Pierces brought against Mann. A. jury subsequently determined that the Pierces had sustained damages in the amount of $122,600,000, and the circuit court entere

229 Ga. 761 (1972) 194 S.E.2d 452 JORDAN v. ROBINSON. 27436. Supreme Court of Georgia. Argued September 12, 1972. Decided November 9, 1972. Rehearing Denied November 30, 1972. George L. Howell, Elizabeth R. Rindskopf, for appellant. Sanders, Mottola, Haugen, Wood & Goodson. Charles Van S.

Karen R. Baker, Justice, dissenting. I wholeheartedly agree with the majority that we require strict compliance with Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Therefore, I must dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the summons at issue in the present case was 1pdefective because the majority has failed to adhere to the language of Rule 4. Neithe

Paul E. Danielson, Justice, concurring in part, dissenting in part. While I too would affirm on the Rule 60 issue, I would reverse and remand for entirely different reasons with respect to the disallowance of expenditures. I therefore respectfully concur in part and dissent in part. First, I agree that the

Previously, our courts discussed the facts of this case in Creech v.Melnik, 347 N.C. 520, 495 S.E.2d 907, (1998) (Creech II); Creech v.Melnik, 124 N.C. App. 502, 477 S.E.2d 680 (1996) (Creech I). In brief, Sharon and Travis Creech, in their capacities as guardians ad litem, brought a m

DAVID T. PROSSER, J. ¶ 1. These cases are before the court on certification by the court of appeals, *116pursuant to Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 809.61 (2011-12).1 The court of appeals certified both State v. Pinno and State v. Seaton because these unrelated cases present the question whether the closure2