appellee

• Sealed Appellant v. Sealed Appellee, (5th Cir. 2011)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals ...

• Federal Circuits

• Ihenacho v. Ohio Inst. of Photography & Technology, (Ohio 2011)

Trial court did not err when it granted appellee’s motion for default judgment. Trial court did not err when it granted appellee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding appellant’s unsupported claims for conversion, fraud, discrimination, and emotional distress. Trial court did not err when it granted appellee’s motion for summary judgment with respect to appellant’s claims for breach of contract and negligence. Trial court did not err when it overruled appellant’s motion to strike the affidavit of appellee’s representative who provided a statement regarding the contents of the appellee’s financial aid file. Judgment affirmed.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Sealed Appellant v. Sealed Appellee, (5th Cir. 2012)

REVISED February 15, 2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT ...

• Federal Circuits

• Gary Bernard McCray, II, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee, (2011)

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC08-2434 ____________ GARY BERNARD MCCRAY, II, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORID...

• Florida Supreme Court

• Innovative Technologies Corp. v. Advanced Mgt. Technology, Inc., (Ohio 2011)

Trial court did not err when it overruled appellant/cross-appellee’s motion for summary judgment, motion for directed verdict, motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and motion for new trial. Sufficient evidence was adduced in the record which established that appellee/cross-appellant would have won a government contract in August of 2001 but for the tortious conduct of appellant/cross-appellee. Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it granted appellant’s motion for remittitur regarding compensatory and punitive damages awarded by the jury. Ratio of 2.96:1 for punitive and compensatory damages was appropriate and not unconstitutionally excessive. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorneys’ fees to appellee’s counsel. Nature, duration, and compl...

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Yacchari, (Ohio 2011)

The trial court erred by suppressing appellee's statements under Garrity v. New Jersey (1967), 385 U.S. 493, 87 S.Ct. 616, where appellee was never threatened that he would lose his job or face job-related sanctions if he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. Albert Louis Lipscomb, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee., 299 F.3d 303 (5th Cir. 2002)

Shirley L. Baccus-Lobel (argued), Law Offices of Shirley Baccus-Lobel, William M. Ravkind (argued), Ravkind & Ravkind, Dallas, TX, for Lipscomb. Appe...

• Federal Circuits

• Epitropoulos v. Epitropoulos, (Ohio 2011)

The trial court erred in not including the social security benefits from all of appellee's minor children in her gross income for the purpose of calculating child support.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• United States of America, Appellee v. Microsoft Corporation, Appellant, 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 98cv01232) (No. 98cv01233) Richard J. Urowsky and Steven L. Holley arg...

• Federal Circuits

• McNett v. Worthington, (Ohio 2011)

The trial court did not abuse its discretion by implicitly granting defendant-appellee leave to file his motion for summary judgment beyond the set deadline. The trial court did not err in granting defendant-appellee summary judgment where defendant-appellee's statements were privileged as a matter of law and plaintiff-appellant failed to demonstrate that defendant-appellee's statements were the proximate cause of his termination from employment.

• Ohio Supreme Court