FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUN AT DALLAS YIGALBOSCH. Appellant, Vs.
|
|
- Angel Francis
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 L t t ' ' FILED IN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THECOURT OF APPEALS FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUN AT DALLAS YIGALBOSCH Appellant, Vs. LISA MATZ CLERK, 5th DISTRICT CIRRO GROUP, INC. D/B/A CIRRO ENERGY, a subsidiary ofdomlnion RET AIL, INC. Appellees, Case No v Appeal from the Distrit ourt #296 Collin County, Texas Case: APPELLANT'S REPLY TO APPELLEES' BRIEF YIGAL BOSCH-PRO SE 2646 South Loop west Suite #220 Houston, Texas Tel: (713) Fax: (713) t ~
2 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS YIGALBOSCH Appellant, Vs. CIRRO GROUP, INC. D/B/A CIRRO ENERGY, a subsidiary ofdominion RET AIL, INC. Appellees, Case No v Appeal from the Distrit ourt #296 Collin County, Texas Case: APPELLANT'S REPLY TO APPELLEES' BRIEF YIGAL BOSCH-PRO SE 2646 South Loop west Suite #220 Houston, Texas Tel: (713) Fax: (713)
3 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS YIGALBOSCH Appellant, Vs. CIRRO GROUP, INC. D/B/A CIRRO ENERGY, a subsidiary ofdominion RET AIL, INC. Appellee, Case No v Appeal from the Distrit ourt #296 Collin County, Texas Case: APP ALLENT'S REPLY TO APPELLEES' BRIEF TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: Appellant Yigal Bosh, ("Bosh"), is filing his Reply to Appellee Cirro Group, In. d/b/a Cirro Energy, a subsidiary of Dominion retail, In. ("Cirro") 's Brief and would respetfully show this Honorable Court as follows: -1-
4 REPLY TO STATEMENT OF FACTS. Appellee's statement that A YS Enterprises, In. is a Texas orporation that, upon information and belief, is owned and operated exlusively by Appellant Bosh ("Bosh") and served as property manager for the four properties identified above (the "properties") is inorret. AYS stands for: 1. A-Ashwin Pandia, 2. Y-Yigal Bosh and 3. S-Sadique Jaffer and was formed in 1990 to purhase and operate the Allen Arms apartments in South Houston, Texas. Eah one of the shareholders owned 33% of the property. During 2000 the omplex was sold and the orporation eased to exist. Appellee ontinues: "Beginning in Deember 2008, A YS entered into separate ontrats for the supply of eletriity ("Eletriity Servies') to eah property and exeuted subsequent renewal ontrats in (C.R )" Bosh or A YS never met any representative of "Cirro" and the different properties handled their eletriity aount through a broker. Cirro opied the name A YS Enterprises, In. on all four aounts from H.L. & P eletri. All payments to Cirro were made diretly by the 4 different orporations. No renewal was signed by A YS or Bosh as Cirro refused to renew the alleged agreements with the 4 entities. (Appellant's Appendix page #5) -2-
5 Appellee ontinues: "The Bankrupty Cases were jointly administered under 2646 South Loop West, Ltd. bankrupty." The fut is that the Bankrupty Cases were jointly administered by Trent Rosenthal, Trustee." Appellee ontinue: "A YS paid for some, but not for all, of the Eletriity Servies provided." AYS never paid any eletri bill to Cirro, ever. "A YS had a balane on the Aounts for Eletriity Servies provided, inlusive of late fees, of Fifty-Six Thousand One Hundred Forty-One and Dollars ($56,141.61)." As appellant have shown in his Brief, and in his Response In Opposition to Plainti:tr s Motion for Summary Judgment, the four properties did not owe this amount of money to Appellee. A genuine issue of material fat, point of disagreement that ould not be deided by summary judgment. "The Bankrupty Court entered an order allowing the laim and authorizing disbursement of funds to Atrium, of whih Fifty-Nine Thousand One Hundred Eighty Seven and Dollars ($59,187.48) onstituted payment for Cirro harges." This figure is insignifiant as appellant will show later in his reply. What Appellee intentionally negleted to state was that 2646 was sold on July 6, 2010, and all some of the above harges belong to the new owner. Midland was sold on July 2, 2010 and all harges belong to the new owner. Angleton was -3-
6 forelosed on August 3, 2010 and Harwin was sold on August 28, 2010 and all harges belong to the new owners, whih the Appelle inluded in its lawsuit against them as well. The Bankrupty Order overs in part reimbursements of payments 2646 already made but was not reimbursed, some of whih were reimbursement for payments to Cirro that were already made. After reeiving the payments 2646 paid Cirro the following: Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Fifty Eight and 57/100 Dollars on Midland, Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Eight and Dollars ($9,978.64) on Harwin and Ten Thousands Eight Hundred Sixty Two and 03/100 ($10,862.03) on Harwin.(C.R. 141) a total of $29, Appellant submitted opies of heks but the trial ourt ignored it. The alleged debt ontained a large numbers of errors. The lower ourt allowed $40, judgment against Atrium, while the requested amount on the Otober letters (C.R )differ drastially from this amount. Examining the figures Appellee showen the four properties owed $41, and $18, was paid as Appellee admitted in his brief to reeive (Pa. 4). Instead Appellee with unlean hands laimed that $59, paid to Atrium was debt owed to it. Another point of a genuine issue of material fat, the fat differene in the amounts, does not allow ourt to grant a summary judgment. Appellee ontinues under the deemed admissions:" Importantly, Atrium admitted -4-
7 that a signifiant portion of the money it reeived from the bankrupty trustee in payment of a final allowane for an administrative laim belonged to Cirro, that when it reeived suh payment its orporate privileges had been forfeited, and that when suh payments were reeived Bosh was an offier of Atrium." Even if we aept this deemed admission by Atrium, Cirro admitted of reeiving from the Atrium the amount of $18, whih is "a signifiant amount" and in addition the other parts were already paid previously. This admission does not serve as a basis for a Summary Judgment. BOSCH WAIVED HIS VENUE CHALLENGE The legislature amended the venue statute in The stated purpose of senate Bill32 (whih beame the new venue statue) was to "eliminate the many loopholes and legal strategies that promote forum shopping-allowing someone to hose the most favorable ounty despite its tenuous onnetion to the ase." House researh organization, Bill Analysis, Tex. S.B. 32, 74th Leg., R.S. (1995) In the ase at bar, all defendants were residents of Harris County, all the events took plae in Harris County, nothing happens in Collin ounty. The lower ourt judge jurisdition of the ase was questionable, but the judge left the ase in the wrong ounty. Under the urrent rules, the plaintiff had the burden to prove that venue is -5-
8 maintainable in Collin County. Tex. R. Ci.v. P.87(3)(a). it did not. Beause the defendant suffered from a severe brain injury, he was entitled to a plea of privilege, as he ould not ommute to Collin ounty. "A properly filed plea of privilege onstituted prima faie proof of the defendant's right to a hange of venue unless the plaintiff ontroverted the plea in a sworm pleading." Tex. R. Civ. P. 86(Vernon 1979, amended 1983). The primary purpose of our venue statutes is to give a person who has been sued the right to defend suh suit in the ounty of his residene exept under statutory exeptions. Artile 1995, V,A.C.S. A.H. Belo Corporation vs. Blanton, 133 Tex. 391,129 S.W. 2d 619. Rule 257, leaves open any other reason to hange venue. Severe brain injury is a proper reason. In addition, beause of the distane, Bosh ould not fmd a qualified attorney in Harris County to represent him and A YS. in responding in opposition to the motion for Summary Judgment. The trial ourt judge abused his disretion when he refuse to hear Bosh's motion to hange venue. BOSCH WAS PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEBT OF ATRIUM Atrium was not obligated to pay Cirro anything beyond what was due to it. -6-
9 Atrium made several payments with funds it borrowed from other soures to pay bills. The Trustee reimbursed Atrium only the amounts that the Trustee agreed to. Atrium paid Cirro before it was reimbursed, therefore the amount in the order by the Bankrupty ourt, is not the amount that was owed to Cirro. Atrium does not owe any money to Appellee, therefore Bosh does not owe any money to Appellee. Wrongfully, the trial ourt granted summary judgment against Atrium, without any proof that Atrium retained any money owed to Cirro. Cirro was paid prior to this date with Atrium borrowed money. Therefore the trial ourt without a trial and evidene to the ontrary erred in aepting Cirro' s laims as orret and based on fats that did not exist. Appellee wrote: "The summary judgment evidene also established as a matter of law that the funds paid to Atrium by the bankrupty trustee belonged to Cirro in equity and good onsiene beause the funds represented payment for harges inurred for eletriity servies Cirro provided to the Property." This onlusion of Appelle is unfounded as it did not prove that the amount paid to Atrium was for unpaid bills or partly unpaid bills. The fat is that after Atrium reeived the funds it paid Cirro its outstanding bills. As Appellant showed earlier, the amount release by the Bankrupty Court did not math Cirro's debt. -7-
10 ATRIUM FORFEITED ITS CORPORATE PRIVILEGES. Atrium served as the manager of 2646 South Loop West Limited Partnership, the owner of2646 South loop West, Houston Texas. Atrium never had any inome as a orporation, and in filing the no inome franhise taxes report it made an error in listing the date on the report.(c.r. 494). It never had any agreement with Cirro for any eletri servie and never benefited from Cirro' s servie to the four properties. Atrium denied and submitted anelled heks of payments to Cirro. Trustee for the bankrupt orporation appointed Atrium as the management ompany to supervise the operations of the four properties. Atrium had to pay bills and payroll and submitted its expenses to the Trustee for reimbursement. After the properties were sold/forelosed, the Trustee refused to reimburse Atrium and left the deision to the Bankrupty ourt. Atrium made a Motion to release the funds it already disbursed and more funds for outstanding bills. On Otober 21, 2010, the ourt ordered the release of funds to Atrium. TEX. CODE (A) With all respet to all authorities that dealt with Tex Code Appellant would like to express his opinion about this statue. This statues was written by the legislature for the purpose of olleting all -8-
11 state taxes, penalties and osts. When we read a statue we have to find the legislature' s intent. Texas Tax Codes were written in referene to their name, Texas Tax laws an not be interpreted any other way than the way it is written. If the intent was the olletion of other than the tax debt, penalty and osts, it would have written in a different setion of the laws, being part of Texas' orporate laws. When it is falling under Texas Tax laws, the intent was to enfore olletion of tax due and that is what meant. There is no mention in about all orporation's debt, if the legislature meant all orporate debts, it would have been written that way. The language of the status refers to "any tax or penalty imposed by this hapter". The sentene. " The liability inludes liability for any tax or penalty imposed by this hapter on the orporation that beomes due and payable after the date of the forfeiture." Strengthen the meaning of the legislature's intent as it is related to "tax or penalty imposed by this hapter". The logi behind this sentene is very lear, as some might say if the orporation lost its privileges than why should the orporation pays orporate's taxes. This sentene is to make it lear that a orporation's tax is ontinues to be due even after the orporate privileges were forfeited. "In onstruing statutes, 'our primary objetive is to asertain and give effet to the legislature's intent."' Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316, 318 (Tex. 2009) -9-
12 (quoting City of Marshall v. City of Unertain, 206 S.W.3d 97, 105 (Tex. 2006)). "However, it is ardinal law in Texas that a ourt onstrues a statute, 'first, by looking to the plain and ommon meaning of the statute's words.'" Fitzgerald v. Advaned Spine Fixation Sys., In., 996 S.W.2d 864, 865 (Tex. 1999) (quoting Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Garrison Contrators, 966 S.W.2d 482, 484 (Tex. 1998)). "Unambiguous statutory language is interpreted aording to its plain language unless suh an interpretation would lead to absurd results." Hernandez, 289 S.W.3d at 318 (iting Fleming Foods of Tex., In. v. Rylander, 6 S.W.3d 278, 284 (Tex. 1999)). When onstruing a statute aording to its plain language, we "may not add language that is not impliitly ontained in the language of the statute." Villarreal v. Wells Fargo Brokerage Servs., LLC, 315 S.W.3d 109, 122 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, no pet.). A Tax law has no intent or purpose to deal with any obligation other than a tax obligation. If a orporate's shield of the orporate offiers and stokholders ould be removed when a orporation defaulted in filing a no inome Franhise tax's report and its prinipals are liable to other debts of the orporation it takes the priniple idea of the orporate struture, to leave the prinipals out of personal liabilities. In the ase at bar, Atrium was disharge as a management ompany the day -10-
13 after the sale of the 2646, July 7, 2010, its funtions have ended on August 15, Beause of the Trustee's refusal to release funds, the only item that remained open was the payment of outstanding bills. Atrium filed a Motion to the bankrupty ourt to release the funds, it was not until until Otober 21, 2010, at whih time the ourt ordered the Trustee to release the funds. After reeiving the funds Atrium paid all justified bills. Atrium had no agreement with Cirro, nor reeived any servies from Cirro, it ated as a liaison between the Trustee and Cirro. On July 2, filed hapter 11 bankrupty, at that time 2646 owed Cirro $18, Cirro did not file a laim and the Bankrupty ourt did not allow any payment on any bill prior to filing of the hapter. On Otober 5, 2009, Midland, Angleton and Harwin filed hapter 11 bankrupty, at that time Midland owed Cirro $3,204.91(C.R. 364) Angleton owed $14, (C.R. 411) and Harwin $33, (C.R. 386) Cirro did not file laims and the Bankrupty Court did not allow any payments on bills prior to the filing. Sine Atrium had to maintain the operation of the buildings it paid the arrears from money it reeived against future bills of Cirro that were released by the trustee, the relationship of the amounts of the reimbursement and the amount owed was insignifiant. -11-
14 Atrium to this date did not reeive the amount it paid Cirro, as it never olleted on debt prior to the filing of the bankrupties. Even if Bosh as a prinipal of Atrium was liable, there aren't any funds designated for Cirro out of the Otober 21, 2010 Order. The trial ourt erred in granting a summary judgment against Atrium and Bosh. This Honorable Court respetfully asked to reverse the summary judgement against Atrium and Bosh. Cirro Request for Admissions were not Properly Deemed Admitted. Appellee wrote: "Cirro served requests for admissions on AYS and Atrium along with its original petition on April 11, 2011 (C.R. 10; ). AYS and Atrium failed to timely respond to suh requests. (C.R ;526). Although Bosh omplained in his response about the requests and argued it was his mistake that they were not timely answered, the response was filed on behalf of Bosh, individually, beause Bosh is not an attorney, and annot file pleading on behalf of AYS and Atrium. (C.R ). Thus A YS and Atrium did not sek to withdraw or strike the deemed admission." It is an interesting legal question, if Appellee laimed that beause of AYS and Atrium lost their Corporate's harter and privileges, than the -12-
15 orporations are a partnership or a sole ownership then why Bosh, an offier of both orporation, ould not represent himself on behalf ofth~ non existing A.Y.S. and Atrium? Appellee ontinued: "Furthermore, Bosh did not obtain a ruling from the trial ourt on his alleged hallenge to the deemed admissions" (Appellee's Brief pa. 15) This is an admission by the Appellee that the judge abused his disretion in defaulting to submit to Appellant's request for finding of fat and onlusions of Law. Even if Appellee's ontention that the Request for Admission was proper, Appellant showed in his brief that it was defetive. Findings of Fat and Conlusions of Law are Proper in this ase Appelle wrote: "Moreover, this Court made the same speifi finding, further stating that "If a summary judgment is proper, there are no fats to find, and the legal onlusions have already been stated in the motion to response" Willms v. Amerias Tire Co. In., 190 S.W. 3d 796, 810 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2006, pet. Denied) (emphasis added) The important part of this Honorable Court's finding in Willms, is "Proper" in the ase at bar it was not proper. -13-
16 Without repeating Appellant's laims in respet to this question, Appellant will quote Appellee's own Statement. At the end of its Motion, Cirro admitted that some issues in the ase will require trial. (C.R. p. 168 Par. 49) CONCLUSION Appellant showed to this Honorable Court several issues of material fats that would exlude granting summary judgment's order. Appellee admitted in his motion for summary judgment that some issues in the ase will require trial. PRAYER Appellant prays to this Honorable Court to Reverse the summary judgment Order and remand this ase to a ourt in Harris County. /1 Respetful7mi" ~ r!~ / ( 2 ia1 Bosh Pro-Se l 2646 South Loop west #220 Houston, Texas Tel: , Fax:
17 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby ertify that a true and orret opy of Appellant's Reply to Appellee's Brief, was mailed on June 7, 2012 by first lass mail to the last known address of attorney for Appellee. Eri G. Walraven Kelly E. Bryan /o Hiershe, Hayward, Drakeley & Urbah P.C Dallas Parkway Suite 700 Addison, Texas / -15-
i e AT 8 of 1938 THE PERSONAL INJURIES (EMERGENCY PROVISIONS) ACT 1939
i e AT 8 of 1938 THE PERSONAL INJURIES (EMERGENCY PROVISIONS) ACT 1939 The Personal Injuries (Emergeny Provisions) At 1939 Index i e THE PERSONAL INJURIES (EMERGENCY PROVISIONS) ACT 1939 Index Setion
More informationNo. 05-11-00700-CV IN THE FOR THE RAY ROBINSON,
No. 05-11-00700-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016616444 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 11 November 30 P8:40 Lisa Matz CLERK IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT DALLAS, TEXAS WELLS FARGO BANK,
More informationi e AT 1 of 2012 DEBT RECOVERY AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2012
i e AT 1 of 2012 DEBT RECOVERY AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2012 Debt Reovery and Enforement At 2012 Index i e DEBT RECOVERY AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2012 Index Setion Page PART 1 INTRODUCTORY 5 1 Short title... 5
More informationNo. 05-12-000B9-CV. In The Court Of Appeals COURT OF APPEALS For The Fifth District of Texas,-- JUN 1 4 2012 \,..4. GREG CUNNIGHAM, Appellant,
No. 05-12-000B9-CV FILED IN In The Court Of Appeals COURT OF APPEALS For The Fifth District of Texas,-- JUN 1 4 2012 \,..4 Dallas Cormty, Texas ~-- LISA MATZ CLERK, 5th DISTRICT GREG CUNNIGHAM, Appellant,
More informationi e AT 11 of 2006 INSURANCE COMPANIES (AMALGAMATIONS) ACT 2006
i e AT 11 of 2006 INSURANCE COMPANIES (AMALGAMATIONS) ACT 2006 Insurane Companies (Amalgamations) At 2006 Index i e INSURANCE COMPANIES (AMALGAMATIONS) ACT 2006 Index Setion Page 1 Orders in respet of
More informationBENEFICIARY CHANGE REQUEST
Poliy/Certifiate Number(s) BENEFICIARY CHANGE REQUEST *L2402* *L2402* Setion 1: Insured First Name Middle Name Last Name Permanent Address: City, State, Zip Code Please hek if you would like the address
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-13-00125-CV CHRISTOPHER EDOMWANDE APPELLANT V. JULIO GAZA & SANDRA F. GAZA APPELLEES ---------- FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY
More informationHow To Prove That A Woman Who Is A Medical Malpractice Patient Is A Patient Who Is Not A Patient
CASE NO. 05-11-01376-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016695906 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12 January 25 P9:06 Lisa Matz CLERK IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS TAMARA ROBISON,
More informationTable of Contents. Appendix II Application Checklist. Export Finance Program Working Capital Financing...7
Export Finane Program Guidelines Table of Contents Setion I General...........................................................1 A. Introdution............................................................1
More informationDisability Discrimination (Services and Premises) Regulations 2016 Index DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION (SERVICES AND PREMISES) REGULATIONS 2016
Disability Disrimination (Servies and Premises) Regulations 2016 Index DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION (SERVICES AND PREMISES) REGULATIONS 2016 Index Regulation Page 1 Title... 3 2 Commenement... 3 3 Interpretation...
More informationNO. 05-10-01162-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, TEXAS. MELVIN J. KLEIN and OSNAT KLEIN, Appellants,
NO. 05-10-01162-CV ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, TEXAS MELVIN J. KLEIN and OSNAT KLEIN, Appellants, v. DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT
More informationCourt of Appeals. First District of Texas
Opinion issued June 11, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00636-CV SINHUE TEMPLOS, Appellant V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 333rd District Court
More informationHow To Defend Yourself In A Court Case Against A Trust
U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET The following constitutes the order of the Court. Signed January 20, 2005.
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-12-01365-CV
REVERSE and REMAND; and Opinion Filed April 3, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-01365-CV UNITED MEDICAL SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., Appellant V. ANSELL HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS,
More informationCAUSE NO. 0542-00092-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS
CAUSE NO. 0542-00092-CV ACCEPTED 225EFJ016968408 FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12 July 10 P4:08 Lisa Matz CLERK IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS MICHAEL ARNOLD, JANET ARNOLD,
More informationIN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No. 10-09-00403-CV. From the 414th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2009-2364-5 MEMORANDUM OPINION
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-09-00403-CV BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY, v. BRAZOS ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC., Appellant Appellee From the 414th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court
More informationi e AT 28 of 1976 EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (COMPULSORY INSURANCE) ACT 1976
i e AT 28 of 1976 EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (COMPULSORY INSURANCE) ACT 1976 Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurane) At 1976 Index i e EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (COMPULSORY INSURANCE) ACT 1976 Index Setion Page
More informationRetirement Option Election Form with Partial Lump Sum Payment
Offie of the New York State Comptroller New York State and Loal Retirement System Employees Retirement System Polie and Fire Retirement System 110 State Street, Albany, New York 12244-0001 Retirement Option
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-14-00894-CV
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion Filed July 28, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00894-CV TEXAS HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION, Appellant V. JOSEPH MCRAE,
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00815-CV IN THE ESTATE OF Alvilda Mae AGUILAR From the Probate Court No. 2, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012-PC-2802 Honorable
More informationto add a number of affirmative defenses, including an allegation that Henry s claim was barred
REVERSE and REMAND; and Opinion Filed May 11, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00616-CV DOROTHY HENRY, Appellant V. BASSAM ZAHRA, Appellee On Appeal from the
More informationNO. 05-11-00657-CR. GLEN FRAZIER, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW
NO. 05-11-00657-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 03/23/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk GLEN FRAZIER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
More informationHow To Get A Suspended Sentence In Texas
NO. 05-10-01117-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS, TEXAS COREY TERRELL GARDNER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County,
More information1999, the decree ordered Molly to pay, as a part of the division of the marital estate, the $14,477
Reverse and Remand; Opinion Filed May 4, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01422-CV TEXANS CREDIT UNION, Appellant V. RICHARD C. BRIZENDINE, Appellee On Appeal
More informationi e AT 6 of 2001 REHABILITATION OF OFFENDERS ACT 2001
i e AT 6 of 2001 REHABILITATION OF OFFENDERS ACT 2001 Rehabilitation of Offenders At 2001 Index i e REHABILITATION OF OFFENDERS ACT 2001 Index Setion Page 1 Rehabilitated persons and spent onvitions...
More informationINSURANCE INTERMEDIARIES (GENERAL BUSINESS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2012
Insurane Intermediaries (General Business) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 Regulation 1 Statutory Doument No. 0735/2012 Insurane At 2008 INSURANCE INTERMEDIARIES (GENERAL BUSINESS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS
More informationNUMBER 13-12-00325-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
NUMBER 13-12-00325-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG PERRY E. SHOEMAKER AND DEBRA SHOEMAKER RITCHIE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF JUANITA
More informationCivil Suits: The Process
Jurisdictional Limits The justice courts have exclusive jurisdiction or the authority to hear all civil actions when the amount involved, exclusive of interest, costs and awarded attorney fees when authorized
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS MICHAELA WARD, v. Appellant, LINDA THERET, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PRINCIPAL OF MCKINNEY NORTH HIGH SCHOOL, Appellee. No. 08-08-00143-CV Appeal from
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-15-00398-CV Caroline BUSWELL, Appellant v. THE GWSPI COMPANY LLC as Successor in Interest to Wilmington Trust, NA, Trustee of the Jeffrey
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: AUGUST 14, 2015; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION OF APRIL 10, 2015, WITHDRAWN Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2013-CA-001214-MR & NO. 2013-CA-001253-MR JILL LEANN STANLEY,
More informationNO. STATE OF TEXAS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY COUNTY, TEXAS. CVS PHARMACY, INC. Defendant. JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. STATE OF TEXAS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY COUNTY, TEXAS CVS PHARMACY, INC. Defendant. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTION TO THE HONORABLE
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-14-01390-CR. LUIS ANTONIO RIQUIAC QUEUNAY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed June 23, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01390-CR LUIS ANTONIO RIQUIAC QUEUNAY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal
More informationNOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Filed 8/27/14 Tesser Ruttenberg etc. v. Forever Entertainment CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-12-00543-CV
REVERSE and REMAND; and Opinion Filed May 28, 2013. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00543-CV BROWN CONSULTING AND ASSOCIATES, INC. AND A LEARNING CENTER JUST FOR ME,
More informationMARK PEREZ, APPELLANT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE STATE S BRIEF
Nos. 05-11-01575-CR and 05-11-01576-CR The State Waives Oral Argument 5th Court of Appeals FILED: 06/04/2012 14:00 Lisa Matz, Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS MARK
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : : : : : : : : : : : : FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT J. BIRCH, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION
More informationFourteenth Court of Appeals
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 26, 2009. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-07-00390-CV LEO BORRELL, Appellant V. VITAL WEIGHT CONTROL, INC., D/B/A NEWEIGH, Appellee On Appeal from
More informationEleventh Court of Appeals
Opinion filed June 14, 2012 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals No. 11-10-00281-CV RSL FUNDING, LLC, Appellant V. AEGON STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS, INC. AND MONUMENTAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellees On Appeal
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 13-0776 444444444444 CHAPMAN CUSTOM HOMES, INC., AND MICHAEL B. DUNCAN, TRUSTEE OF THE M. B. DUNCAN SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST, PETITIONERS, v. DALLAS PLUMBING
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 13-20512 Document: 00512673150 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/23/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED June 23, 2014 Lyle W.
More informationFourteenth Court of Appeals
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed August 16, 2001. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-00-00177-CV HENRY P. MASSEY AND ANN A. MASSEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF COURTNEY
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-10426 Document: 00513359912 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/28/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT CYNTHIA TREVINO GARZA, Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth
More informationSTATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2012-KA-1429 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL JACOLVY NELLON FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JACOLVY NELLON * * * * * * * * * * * NO. 2012-KA-1429 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA APPEAL FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT ORLEANS PARISH NO. 481-574, SECTION
More informationSTATE'S RESPONSE BRIEF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT RANDY ERIC WORSHAM, APPELLANT NO. 05-10-01017-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE APPEALED FROM CAUSE NUMBER F07-55075 IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: JOEL F. BORNKAMP Reisenfeld & Associates Cincinnati, Ohio ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: SHAUN T. OLSEN Law Office of Weiss & Schmidgall, P.C. Merrillville, Indiana IN THE
More informationNo. 05-12-00111-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, TEXAS. JANET MARIE VICKERS, Appellant
The State Requests Oral Argument Only If Appellant Argues No. 05-12-00111-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, TEXAS JANET MARIE VICKERS, Appellant I (J) )> 7 _L> --i N
More informationINCOME TAX WITHHOLDING GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS
Virginia Department of Taxation INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS www.tax.virginia.gov 2614086 Rev. 07/14 * Table of Contents Introdution... 1 Important... 1 Where to Get Assistane... 1 Online
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-09-356-CV CINDY PENA APPELLANT V. MICHAEL A. SMITH APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 271ST DISTRICT COURT OF WISE COUNTY ------------ OPINION ------------
More information2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION TWO FRANCIS GRAHAM, ) No. ED97421 ) Respondent, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of St. Louis County vs. ) ) Honorable Steven H. Goldman STATE
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-12-00647-CV ACCELERATED WEALTH, LLC and Accelerated Wealth Group, LLC, Appellants v. LEAD GENERATION AND MARKETING, LLC, Appellee From
More informationNO. 12-12-00183-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
NO. 12-12-00183-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS IN RE: TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE, ORIGINAL PROCEEDING RELATOR MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Truck Insurance Exchange
More informationIncome Protection CLAIM FORM
Inome Protetion CLAIM FORM PLEASE COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION IN BLACK PEN ONLY USING BLOCK LETTERS 1 PERSONAL DETAILS Poliy numer Important notes: a This form must e ompleted in full and returned to PO
More informationreverse the trial court s November 21, 2012 judgment awarding Frost $159,385.98 and render
Reverse and Render in part; Affirm in part and Opinion Filed August 11, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-01491-CV GARY C. EVANS, Appellant V. THE FROST NATIONAL
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-09-020-CV RONALD L. BRENNAN APPELLANT V. KIM CEDENO APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 231ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM
More information4:15-cv-00432-RBH Date Filed 01/29/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10
4:15-cv-00432-RBH Date Filed 01/29/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Ryan Michael Stinnett, on behalf of himself CASE
More informationINCOME TAX WITHHOLDING GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS
Virginia Department of Taxation INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS www.tax.virginia.gov 2614086 Rev. 01/16 Table of Contents Introdution... 1 Important... 1 Where to Get Assistane... 1 Online File
More informationi e AT 1 of 1892 THE BANKRUPTCY CODE 1892
i e AT 1 of 1892 THE BANKRUPTCY CODE 1892 The Bankrupty Code 1892 Index i e THE BANKRUPTCY CODE 1892 Index Setion Page PREAMBLE 9 Preliminary 10 1 Short title... 10 2 Commenement of At... 10 3 [Repealed]...
More informationINFORMATION FOR FILING AND DEFENDING A CIVIL CASE IN JUSTICE COURT
PINAL COUNTY Apache Junction Justice Court Eloy Justice Court Superior/Kearny Justice Court Maricopa/Stanfield Justice Court JUSTICE COURTS Casa Grande Justice Court Florence/Coolidge Justice Court Mammoth/San
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT CRISTOBAL COLON, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. Case No.
More informationCase 5:14-cv-00590-OLG Document 9 Filed 07/31/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:14-cv-00590-OLG Document 9 Filed 07/31/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION DESTINY ANNMARIE RIOS Plaintiff VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-00590
More informationCIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE GARNISHMENT CHAPTER 77
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE GARNISHMENT CHAPTER 77 77.01 Right to writ of garnishment.--every person or entity who has sued to recover a debt or has recovered judgment in any court against any person
More informationNo. 05-10-01016-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. FRED ANDERSON, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
No. 05-10-01016-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS FRED ANDERSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 5 of Dallas County,
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 93A Article 2 1
Article 2. Real Estate Education and Recovery Fund. 93A-16. Real Estate Education and Recovery Fund created; payment to fund; management. (a) There is hereby created a special fund to be known as the "Real
More informationEleventh Court of Appeals
Opinion filed March 14, 2014 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals No. 11-13-00119-CV BRENT BATES BUILDERS, INC. AND BRENT BATES, INDIVIDUALLY, Appellants V. RAHUL MALHOTRA, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A THE MALHOTRA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-10510 Document: 00513424063 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 15, 2016 Lyle W.
More informationReverse and Render; Dismiss and Opinion Filed June 19, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No.
Reverse and Render; Dismiss and Opinion Filed June 19, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-00103-CV DHM DESIGN, Appellant V. CATHERINE MORZAK, Appellee On Appeal
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-14-01515-CV
AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed August 25, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01515-CV TXU ENERGY RETAIL COMPANY L.L.C., Appellant V. FORT BEND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,
More informationCourt of Appeals. First District of Texas
Opinion issued January 13, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-13-00806-CV RODRICK DOW D/B/A RODRICK DOW P.C., Appellant V. RUBY D. STEWARD, Appellee On Appeal from the
More information2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U. No. 1-12-0546 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U Third Division March 13, 2013 No. 1-12-0546 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
More informationAffirm in part; Reverse in part; and Remand. Opinion Filed June 9, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No.
Affirm in part; Reverse in part; and Remand. Opinion Filed June 9, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00481-CV DAVID FUSARO, Appellant V. TRINITY UNIVERSAL INSURANCE
More informationIn The NO. 14-99-00657-CV. HARRIS COUNTY, Appellant. JOHNNY NASH, Appellee
Reversed and Rendered Opinion filed May 18, 2000. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-99-00657-CV HARRIS COUNTY, Appellant V. JOHNNY NASH, Appellee On Appeal from the 189 th District Court Harris
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 1, 2003 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 1, 2003 Session FARMERS MUTUAL OF TENNESSEE v. ATHENS INSURANCE AGENCY, CHARLES W. SPURLING and wife, CAROLYN SPURLING Direct Appeal from the
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: MARCH 13, 2015; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2014-CA-000056-MR RAMONA SPINKS, EXECUTRIX OF THE WILL OF BENJAMIN SPINKS, DECEASED APPELLANT APPEAL
More informationNO.05-09-00055-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS. JAMES PAUL DOWNEY, Appellant. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
NO.05-09-00055-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS JAMES PAUL DOWNEY, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO.9 OF DALLAS
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-13-00792-CV Richard LARES, Appellant v. Martha FLORES, Appellee From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00107-CV Paul Mattox, Appellant v. Geraldine Timmerman, Individually and as Representative of Timmerman Properties, Inc.; and Timmerman Properties,
More informationFourteenth Court of Appeals
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 2, 2013. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-13-00017-CV GREEN DIESEL, LLC AND FUEL STREAMERS, INC, Appellants V. VICNRG, LLC, Appellee On Appeal from the
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More information(b) no moneys forming a part of any such fund shall be invested in any investments other than such as are expressly authorized herein.
at any time held in the Debt Servie Fund may be invested only in Federal Obligations having stated maturities, or being redeemable at the option of the holder thereof at a stated prie and time, not later
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: THOMAS B. O FARRELL McClure & O Farrell, P.C. Westfield, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA ALFRED McCLURE, Appellant-Defendant, vs. No. 86A03-0801-CV-38
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No. 05-12-00658-CV
Reverse and Remand; Opinion Filed November 19, 2013. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00658-CV INNOVATE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, L.P., Appellant V. YOUNGSOFT, INC., Appellee
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2011
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2011 JON AGEE and SUSAN AGEE, Appellants, v. ROGER L. BROWN, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF HERBERT G. BIRCK and
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 09-60402 Document: 00511062860 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D March 25, 2010 Charles
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-07-159-CV JACK WHITE APPELLANT V. GAIL WHITE APPELLEE ------------ FROM THE 90TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF YOUNG COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM
More informationHow To Get A Summary Judgment In A Well Service Case In Texas
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION JASON LONG, Plaintiff, v. NO. 0:00-CV-000 ABC THE CHABON GROUP, INC., Defendant. DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00055-CV Paula Villanueva, Appellant v. McCash Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Comet Cleaners and Comet Cleaners, Appellees FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT
More informationCourt of Appeals. First District of Texas
Opinion issued December 19, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00515-CV MICHAEL SKINNER, Appellant V. PAMELA SKINNER, Appellee On Appeal from the 257th District Court
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: LOUIS T. PERRY HARMONY A. MAPPES Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ALICE BARTANEN BLEVINS Salem, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA GREEN TREE
More informationCase 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BARBARA S. QUINN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-00191
More informationCase 1:12-cv-01164-LY Document 38 Filed 02/21/14 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:12-cv-01164-LY Document 38 Filed 02/21/14 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION CARONARDA FERNANDA BENBOW V. A-12-CV-1164 LY LIBERTY MUTUAL
More informationReversed and Remanded and Opinion Filed February 19, 2015. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No.
Reversed and Remanded and Opinion Filed February 19, 2015 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00268-CV THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE
More informationPROCEEDS OF CRIME (BUSINESS IN THE REGULATED SECTOR) ORDER 2015
Proeeds of Crime (Business in the Regulated Setor) Order 2015 Artile 1 Statutory Doument No. 2015/0073 Proeeds of Crime At 2008 PROCEEDS OF CRIME (BUSINESS IN THE REGULATED SECTOR) ORDER 2015 Approved
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Bernardini v. Fedor, 2013-Ohio-4633.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) ROBERT BERNARDINI Appellant C.A. No. 12CA0063 v. ROBERT FEDOR, ESQ.
More informationMEMORANDUM OPINION. No. 04-09-00730-CV. AML MOTORS, INC., Appellant. Da mon THOMAS, Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-09-00730-CV AML MOTORS, INC., Appellant v. Da mon THOMAS, Appellee From the County Court at Law No 2, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 347193 Honorable Linda F. Penn, Judge
More informationState of Maryland Participation Agreement for Pre-Tax and Roth Retirement Savings Accounts
State of Maryland Partiipation Agreement for Pre-Tax and Roth Retirement Savings Aounts DC-4531 (08/2015) For help, please all 1-800-966-6355 www.marylandd.om 1 Things to Remember Complete all of the setions
More informationJUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961
JUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961 SMALL CLAIMS INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING ***EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,
More information2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U No. 1-14-1985 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
More informationFourteenth Court of Appeals
Affirmed and Opinion filed July 24, 2012. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-11-00736-CV JONATHAN WASSERBERG AND JASON FELT, Appellants V. FLOORING SERVICES OF TEXAS, LLC AND STEWART TITLE GUARANTY
More information