| Gloria Coots Baldwin v. EMI Feist Catalog, Inc. |
|
19 This appeal involves a dispute over the copyright in the musical |
| JANICE A. BALDINELLI vs. KARL MAYER. |
|
The parties divorced on April 17, 2008, after approximately twenty-one years of marriage. The wife's complaint for modification, filed on March 25, 2013, sought an increase in the husband's alimony obligation on the grounds that the child support payments had ceased as a result of the children's emancipation and she was no longer able to maintain even a modest standard of living. A modification $0 (10-08-2015 - MA) |
| United States of America v. Adam Mack |
|
Portland, ME - Portland Man Sentenced to 13 Months for Immigration Fraud and False Statements |
| Joseph E. McClain III v. Dell, Inc., Seaton Corp. d/b/a Staff Management |
|
Joseph E. McClain III, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this appeal from the trial court’s order granting the motion of Dell, Inc., Seaton Corp. d/b/a Staff Management (hereafter Dell) for sanctions, a declaration that McClain is a vexatious litigant, dismissing McClain’s fourth suit against Dell, and ordering him to pay Dell $4,000 in attorney’s fees. The case was originally a $0 (09-24-2015 - TX) |
| IC v. DW |
|
In February of 2013, the parties had a sexual encounter in Portland, Oregon. Mother was attending college there, and Father was visiting from Washington, where he also attended college. Mother became pregnant as a result of the encounter. Thereafter, the parties attempted unsuccessfully to develop a romantic relationship while both were still living in the Pacific Northwest. However, that eff $0 (10-07-2015 - WY) |
| Lake Environmental, Inc. v. Arnold |
|
In 2008, the Department of Public Health issued an emergency stop work order to Lake Environmental based on alleged violations of the Department’s regulations committed during an asbestos cleanup job at Scott Air Force Base. The Department also removed Lake Environmental’s name from the list of state-approved asbestos abatement contractors. Several months later, the Department dismissed the st $0 (10-05-2015 - IL) |
| Robert J. Robillard v. Laneta C. Robillard |
|
¶1 The narrow issue presented for decision today is whether a divorce decree rendered before the adoption of 12 O.S.Supp. 1987 § 1289 (F)1 may be reopened for post-decree property division readjustment to be rested upon an after-enacted spousal right to reach military retirement pension income that was not legally divisible at the time of the parties' marriage dissolution. We answer in the negat $0 (05-04-1993 - OK) |
| Richard Traczyk v. Kathleen M. Traczyk |
|
¶0 Certiorari to review opinion of Court of Appeals affirming the trial court's order awarding alimony in lieu of property division to wife in this divorce action. The trial court held the goodwill of husband's medical practice could be included in determining the value of the medical practice for purposes of dividing the marital property. The trial court further ordered a fixed interest rate to $0 (03-21-1995 - OK) |
| Paul W. Hart v. Carol Lynn Hart |
|
¶1 The single dispositive issue is whether the divorce decree may be modified to divide military retirement benefits as marital property.1 We find that this cause is governed by our holding in Clifton v. Clifton, 801 P.2d 693, 698 (Okla. 1990) that 12 O.S.Supp. 1987 § 1289 (F)2 may not serve as a vehicle for modifying a divorce decree to divide military retirement benefits as spousal property if $0 (07-19-1994 - OK) |
| Orlan V. Wilson v. Lucretia G. Wilson |
|
¶ 1 Central to resolution of today's cause is what effect is to be accorded cohabitation in a trial court's deliberations concerning modification of earlier awarded support alimony. |
| Hartley v. Consolidated Glass Holdings, Inc |
|
To understand the arguments that have been raised in this case, it is easier |
| Garnet O'Marrow and Clarence Gardner v. Dean P. Roles, Jr., d/b/a D&M Training |
|
To understand the arguments that have been raised in this case, it is easier |
| Boston LLC v. Juarez |
|
On February 26, 2014, plaintiff filed an unlawful detainer action based on defendant’s failure to perform covenants in the rental agreement, as described in an attached three-day notice. The notice listed three covenants that were violated, but plaintiff elected to proceed at trial on only one: defendant’s failure to obtain and pay for renter’s insurance, as required by paragraph 11 of the $0 (10-03-2015 - CA) |
| United States of America v. Joseph W. Nagle |
|
Joseph Nagle and Ernest Fink were co-owners and executives of concrete manufacturing and construction businesses. The businesses entered into a relationship with a company owned by a person of Filipino descent. His company would bid for subcontracts on Pennsylvania transportation projects as a disadvantaged business enterprise. If his company won the bid for the subcontract, Nagle and Fink’s bus $0 (09-30-2015 - PA) |
| In the Interest of N.E., a minor |
|
These appeals are from final decrees terminating the parental rights of TGW (Mother) to children N, K, M, and Ma, and JW (Father) to children K, M, and Ma. The parental rights of N’s father, JE, were not terminated and JE is not a party to this appeal; consequently, we refer to JW as Father. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. |
| Cardenas v. M. Fanaian, D.D.S., Inc |
|
In August 2009, Cardenas began working as a dental hygienist for Dr. Fanaian’s dental office. Dr. Fanaian’s practice was incorporated under the name of M. Fanaian, D.D.S., Inc., and said corporate entity was technically Cardenas’s employer. |
| United States of America v. Tiffany Saunders Carraway |
|
Baltimore, MD - Baltimore Woman Pleads Guilty to Food Stamp and Medicaid Fraud |
| Hamlin v. PERB |
|
Petitioner Karen Hamlin is a public employee with a retirement account in the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS). When petitioner and her ex-husband divorced, the dissolution court ordered petitioner’s PERS account divided between petitioner and her husband. However, neither petitioner nor her ex-husband ever gave PERS the paperwork it required in order to divide the account, so PERS did $0 (09-29-2015 - OR) |
| In re Emma B. |
|
Michael and J.B. (Mother) married in 2011 and continuously lived together until Michael's military deployment to the Persian Gulf in August 2013. Michael returned home in April 2014 and found Mother was seven months pregnant, as she "had relations" with another man while Michael was gone. Michael lived with Mother throughout the remainder of her pregnancy. He was at the hospital when Emma was b $0 (09-29-2015 - CA) |
| Extendicare Homes, Inc. v. Belind Whisman and Kimdred Nursing Extendicare Homes, Inc. |
|
This decision consolidates three cases accepted by this Court for |
| Jason Bradley McGill v. The State of Wyoming |
|
Mr. McGill spent Thanksgiving Day 2013 with his three children from his second marriage; his live-in girlfriend, Jennifer Neumeyer; and her three children from previous relationships. Mr. McGill and Ms. Neumeyer began arguing early in the day. The argument escalated when Mr. McGill’s ex-wife, Cristi McGill, called during Thanksgiving dinner and Mr. McGill allowed his children to speak with the $0 (09-28-2015 - WY) |
| Joseph E. McClain III v. Dell, Inc., Seaton Corp. d/b/a Staff Management |
|
Joseph E. McClain III, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this appeal from the trial court’s order granting the motion of Dell, Inc., Seaton Corp. d/b/a Staff Management (hereafter Dell) for sanctions, a declaration that McClain is a vexatious litigant, dismissing McClain’s fourth suit against Dell, and ordering him to pay Dell $4,000 in attorney’s fees. The case was originally a $0 (09-24-2015 - TX) |
| In the Estate of Martin Van Curtis Jr. |
|
The trial court signed a final order denying a bill of review on January 10, 2014. The appellant, Jewel Agness Curtis (Jewel), filed an appeal. We affirm. |
| In the Interest of T.J.H., W.D.H., and L.B.H., children |
|
C.H. appeals the trial court’s modification order in a suit affecting the parent child relationship to his children T.H., W.H., and L.H. He raises three issues on appeal. We reverse and remand. |
| In the Estate of Rodney Joe Knight, Deceased |
|
Natosha Moore appeals the trial court’s admission of the will of Rodney Joe Knight to probate. She presents four issues for our consideration. We affirm. |
|
Next Page |