Cases

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Banks v. State, 801 So.2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), petition for rev. pending, case no. SC01-2733. KAHN, WEBSTER, and DAVIS, JJ„ concur.

908 P.2d 903 (1996) 80 Wash.App. 364 The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Donald F. BECKER, Appellant. The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Nelson GANTT, Appellant. Nos. 35342-0-I, 35574-1-I. Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1. January 16, 1996. *905 Nielsen and Acosta, Seattle, f

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2021-NCCOA-582 No. COA 20-802 Filed 2 November 2021 Mecklenburg County, No. 20-CVS-2194 DAVID BAYNE ALEXANDER, et al., Petitioners, v. DIANE K. BECKER and THOMAS H. BECKER, Co-Trustees of the Diane K. Becker Revocable Living Trust dated December 19, 2008, et al., Respondents.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2021-NCCOA-582 No. COA 20-802 Filed 2 November 2021 Mecklenburg County, No. 20-CVS-2194 DAVID BAYNE ALEXANDER, et al., Petitioners, v. DIANE K. BECKER and THOMAS H. BECKER, Co-Trustees of the Diane K. Becker Revocable Living Trust dated December 19, 2008, et al., Respondents.

PER CURIAM. The employer/carrier appeal a workers’ compensation order which we affirm except as to the authorization of a doctor for future medical care. Because the parties did not present any issue below for adjudication in this regard, the judge should not have addressed this matter. E.g., Sewell Plastics v. Jackson, 418 So.2d 442 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). And as the claimant concedes, payment for past medical care sh

140 Nev., Advance Opinion 5'g IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA GAVIN DE BECKER, AN INDIVIDUAL; No. 85968 AND BRIAN DE BECKER, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HAL DE BECKER, DECEASED, Appellants, F

John I. Purtle, Justice. The appellant was sentenced to life without parole and twelve years for capital murder and theft of property. The sole question presented on appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion to suppress evidence. We find no prejudicial error and affirm the judgment and sentence. On May 30, 1988, Robert Quinn was murdered at his r

MEMORANDUM LEWIS M. BLANTON, United States Magistrate Judge. This is an action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review of defendant’s final decision denying the application of Anna E. Becker for Disability Insurance *1086Benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act and Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Ac

WELBAUM, P.J. {¶ 1} In this case, Defendant-Appellant Direct Energy, L.P. ("DE") appeals from a judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen Becker, on claims for breach of an employment agreement and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. After a jury trial, the jury awarded Becker $655,733.44 in damages and rejected Becker's claim for defamation. {

[Cite as State ex rel. Becker v. Faris, 2021-Ohio-1127.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO CLERMONT COUNTY STATE OF OHIO ex rel. JOHN BECKER, : Relator, : CASE NO . CA2020-10-058 : OPINION - vs -

L. HAND, Chief Judge. This is an appeal from an order discharging a writ of habeas corpus granted to review the conviction of the relator by a general court-martial. The respondent, General Webster, filed a return to the writ, and the judge heard the case upon the record of the trial before the court-martial at Wiesbaden, Germany, in March, 1948. The conviction was upon three charges: (1) Selling whisky to soldiers; (2) caus

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

03/20/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE November 15, 2018 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ELLEN BECKER GOLDBERG Appeal from the Circuit Court for Williamson County No. II-CR160042 James G. Martin, III, Judge ___________________________________

Justice MARTINEZ, dissenting: I do not agree with the majority's conclusion that Becker, who was told he was being detained, moved to a secluded location, and escorted through the store, was not in custody. Instead, I agree with the trial court that a reasonable person in Becker's position would believe his freedom of action restricted to a degree associated with formal arrest. Therefore, I respectfully dissen

Cypher, J. The defendant, Alan Becker, appeals from his conviction by a District Court jury of failing to register as a sex offender. See G. L. c. 6, § 178H, as amended by St. 1999, c. 74, § 2. The underlying offense was a 1995 conviction in New York for sexual abuse in the third degree. The defendant argues that as he does not come within the definition of “sex offender” in the sex offender registration statute,1

197 P.3d 44 (2008) 224 Or. App. 56 STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Joshua Philip BECKER, Defendant-Appellant. 200304809, A124058. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Submitted March 31, 2008. Decided November 19, 2008. Ingrid Swenson, Executive Director, Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Stephanie Hortsch, Deputy Public De

749 S.W.2d 403 (1988) BECKER ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, State of Missouri, Respondent. No. 69485. Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc. April 19, 1988. *404 Rochelle Kaskowitz, St. Louis, for appellant. William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Richard L. Wieler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for re

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Mastec Incorporated and the defendants Verizon New York, Inc., and Verizon Communications, Inc., doing business as Verizon, separately appeal, as limited by their respective notices of appeal and briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schack, J.), dated August 9, 2010, as denied those branches of their respective cross motions which were for summary judgmen

*307 Opinion SCHALLER, J. In this action to foreclose three judgment liens, the defendant Judith Becker1 appeals from the trial court’s judgment of foreclosure by sale. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) denied her motions to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, (2)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Mastec Incorporated and the defendants Verizon New York, Inc., and Verizon Communications, Inc., doing business as Verizon, separately appeal, as limited by their respective notices of appeal and briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schack, J.), dated August 9, 2010, as denied those branches of their respective cross motions which were for summary judgmen