appellee

• Appellant v. Appellee, (7th Cir. 2012)

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 11-3799 IN RE: S PECIAL F EBR...

• Federal Circuits

• Harrel Franklin Braddy, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee, (2012)

Supreme Court of Florida _____________ No. SC07-2174 _____________ HARREL FRANKLIN BRADDY, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FL...

• Florida Supreme Court

• 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. 2011)

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

• Federal Circuits

• Ayersville Water & Sewer Dist. v. Geiger, (Ohio 2012)

The trial court did not err in determining that the appellant’s property was within the appellee’s water and sewer district and subject to its authority. The trial court did not err by deciding the appellant’s property was accessible to the public sewer system when it was within the water and sewer district and abutted a sewer main. The trial court did not err when it determined the appellee had a valid easement, and, consequently, did not trespass on the appellant’s property when it installed the sewer line that was the subject of the easement. The trial court did not err by deciding the appellee’s regulations did not violate the Due Process Clause and that the appellee had a public purpose sufficient to appropriate the appellant’s land. The trial court did not commit reversible er...

• 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

• 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

• David James Martin, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee, (2012)

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC10-539 ____________ DAVID JAMES MARTIN, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, ...

• Florida Supreme Court

• Friel v. Swartz, (Ohio 2012)

Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee where appellee's action did not constitute a sham lawsuit, and therefore appellee's litigation was protected by the First Amendment right to petition.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Wadada Delhall, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee, (2012)

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC09-87 ____________ WADADA DELHALL, Appellant, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appe...

• Florida Supreme Court