All Courts 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th DC Federal Supreme Court

1 2
Edit Column Delete Column   
Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


In re A.O. v. , Nov-11-2015

J. Codrington finds that the lower court improperly found the mother was provided with reasonable reunification services to get her 12-year-old daughter back in her custody after it was determined that she was paranoid and displayed erratic and strange behavior. The mother argues that it was erroneous not to allow her to work with a new therapist in order to get medication for her bi-polar disorder. The mother should have been provided a chance to enter a psychotropic medication program in order to try and undergo treatment that would help her with her mental issues. Reversed.

Edit Delete United States District Court


Deyo v. Tomball Independent School District, Nov-11-2015

J. Werlein Jr. finds that plaintiff's claims against the school district for Fourth Amendment violations against her son should be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff argues that the district wrongfully expelled her son after catching him carrying a set of metal "knuckles" and a dry-erase marker that had the felt tip replaced with a needle; she claims the school principal violated the Fourth Amendment when she stuck her hands into her young son's pockets while searching him for stink bombs. The record shows, however, that the principal had probable cause because several students had claimed plaintiff's son had stink bombs, and the discovery of the metal knuckles gave the principal cause to search further.

Edit Delete Wisconsin Court Of Appeals


First State Bank v. Town of Omro, Nov-11-2015

J. Reilly finds that the circuit court properly found in favor of the town. A developer had failed to sell most of the lots in a subdivision or pave the roads within when the bank took them over in lieu of foreclosure. The town properly authorized paving the roads and assessed the costs against lot owners, given that the developer was no longer involved and the units in the subdivision benefited from the roads. The court improperly approved assessment against three lots that abutted no roads. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete Wisconsin Supreme Court


Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Switalski, Nov-11-2015

Per curiam, the Wisconsin Supreme Court finds that attorney Michael Switalski's law license is revoked. The attorney is serving a 30-year prison term for 10 counts of possession of child pornography and petitioned for consensual license revocation.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


U.S. v. Fisher, Nov-10-2015

J. Matheson finds that a man's appeal of charges related to tax fraud should be dismissed as moot. Although the government admitted it was mistaken in its belief that appellant had breached his plea agreement, appellant has already received the relief he requested, which was to be released from a requirement that he cooperate with the government in identifying and recovering assets obtained through the fraudulent filing. Appellant has waived his vindictive prosecution claims by failing to raise them prior to this appeal. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


Wright v. Experian Information Solutions, Nov-10-2015

J. Matheson finds that the district court properly found in favor of credit reporting agencies in a fair credit reporting lawsuit. A tax lien against plaintiff does not need to be removed from his credit reports even though he paid it off, especially since the reports were updated to reflect the lien's resolved status. The agencies relied upon a third-party contractor for their information, and the contractor's employees checked information for accuracy. The agencies were not required to retain employees who were fully certified in the intricacies of the American tax system. The agencies conducted an investigation when the lien was disputed and updated their records accordingly to show the lien as released. The agencies were not required to connect with the IRS during their investigations because it is illegal for the IRS to release the details of a taxpayer's records. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


Carroll v. Lawton Independent School District, Nov-10-2015

J. McHugh finds that the district court properly dismissed a disability discrimination in education lawsuit. The family of an autistic girl who was disciplined too harshly at school have not yet exhausted the administrative remedies available to them. Because the family alleges that the daughter's educational opportunities were limited by the trauma that resulted from the discipline, the family and the school must first attempt to work together to address the child's educational needs as required by law. Although the family claimed amending their complaint would bring additional facts to light that would have made administrative remedies inappropriate, they failed to give any specific facts to be included, and the district court properly denied their request. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


Vladimirov v. Lynch, Nov-10-2015

J. O'Brien finds that the Bureau of Immigration Appeals properly dismissed a petition to review the deportation of an immigrant in a sham marriage. The immigrant received proper notice of the charges. Then he and his supposed wife gave conflicting answers to almost every question asked about their life together, and both admitted they had fraudulently represented the marriage. The fact that appellant applied for an adjustment to his immigration status based on a fraudulent marriage proves that his misrepresentation was willful. Because immigrants faced with removal are not afforded all the same due process protections in place within the criminal justice system, appellant was not entitled to cross-examine his accusers. He chose not to testify when given the opportunity to do so. The government informing his so-called "wife" of the legal consequences of her filing a fraudulent application was not coercive, nor did it elicit a false confession. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


U.S. v. Krueger, Nov-10-2015

J. Ebel finds that the district court properly suppressed evidence in a child pornography investigation. Although homeland security agents had a warrant to search a man's home in Kansas for pornography, when they arrived they learned that he was visiting a friend in Oklahoma. The warrant they obtained to search his friend's residence in Oklahoma was invalid because it was issued by a Kansas judge who did not have jurisdiction in Oklahoma. If the rules had been properly followed, the search that turned up pornography on appellant's hard drive as well as his statements made during a concurrent interview may not have occurred. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


Jackson v. Warrior, Nov-10-2015

J. Kelly finds that the lower court properly sentenced a man to the death penalty for killing his girlfriend so she could not report child abuse. A "great risk of death" to another person as a result of the murder was appropriately submitted to the jury as a potential aggravating factor because appellant hid the child he had abused, then murdered the child's mother, who was the only one likely to look for him before he died from his injuries. Testimony from a doctor about the child's injuries was admissible because it showed that the injuries were so severe that it was unlikely appellant did not understand the full extent of what he had perpetrated. In addition, counsel was not ineffective for calling a witness who made one statement that favored the death penalty while the rest of his testimony reminded the court of mitigating factors, especially since the absence of that one statement would not have changed the outcome of the trial. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 10th Circuit


Jones v. Warrior, Nov-10-2015

J. Moritz finds that the district court properly sentenced a man to the death penalty for murder. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to present testimony from the cellmate of appellant's co-defendant, who allegedly told him he had framed appellant for the murder. Counsel investigated the claims and determined that the cellmate was a pathological liar, so he did not pursue that avenue. Another prisoner telling a similar story was also found not to be credible, especially as the two stories differed in their details. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 11th Circuit


Pottinger v. City of Miami, Nov-10-2015

J. Jordan finds that the district court properly refused to award plaintiff attorney fees accrued during plaintiff's opposition to modifications proposed by the city of Miami to the parties' agreement, which had settled plaintiff's class action claims that police officers harassed the city's homeless. The agreement specifically only allows attorney fees in enforcement proceedings. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 11th Circuit


U.S. v. Azmat, Nov-10-2015

J. Hull holds that the defendant doctor must serve his 133-month sentence for helping to run a pill mill in Garden City, Ga. Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to dispense controlled substances and 49 counts of unlawful dispensation of drugs based, in part, on proof that he unlawfully doled out 49 prescriptions for oxycodone, hydrocodone and alprazolam to 25 people. Witnesses testified that the East Health Center did not look legitimate, had minimal supplies and the patients looked like "zombies." "Simply put, there was overwhelming evidence that Dr. Azmat knowingly and voluntarily joined an agreement to unlawfully dispense controlled substances." Affirmed.

Edit Delete 2nd Circuit


Martinez v. Superintendent of Eastern Correctional Facility, Nov-10-2015

J. Walker finds that the district court improperly denied appellant's writ of habeas corpus. Appellant, who pleaded guilty to attempted murder and robbery in state court, sought to vacate the conviction but his attorney failed to file a timely petition for federal review. Appellant then cited ineffective assistance in trying to extend the filing deadline, but his own efforts to secure the review were found to lack "reasonable diligence." However, the record showed that appellant kept up a steady stream of letters to counsel before and after the deadline, then pursued both professional sanctions against the attorney and pro se attempts to secure the federal review. Vacated.

Edit Delete 2nd Circuit


Schaeffler v. U.S., Nov-10-2015

J. Winter finds that the district court improperly denied appellants' petition to quash a summons for internal tax-strategy documents. After the 2008 financial crisis left appellants scrambling for money to complete a deal for a minority stake in a German company, they anticipated an Internal Revenue Service inquiry into the resulting refinancing/restructuring, and so worked with lawyers, accountants and banks on likely responses. When the IRS sought documents shared with the banks, appellants objected, citing attorney-client privilege and the work-product doctrine. Those defenses should have quashed the IRS summons because the banks, which had been involved in the German deal, had a common legal interest with appellants. Vacated.

Edit Delete 3rd Circuit


In re Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation v. , Nov-10-2015

J. Fuentes finds that the lower court properly dismissed plaintiff's federal claims related to defendants' exploitation of loophole in certain cookie-blocking software to permit its advertisements to appear even when a user opted to block them. Because defendants were parties to the electronic transmissions, their actions did not violate the Wiretap Act, nor did they intrude onto plaintiffs' computers. However, it improperly dismissed plaintiffs' freestanding privacy claims against Google under California law. A reasonable jury could find that the deceitful override of plaintiffs' cookie blockers was a serious invasion of privacy. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit


Brumfield v. Louisiana State Board of Education, Nov-10-2015

J. Jones finds that the lower court improperly issued an order requested by the Department of Justice mandating annual reporting requirements for Louisiana's school voucher program. Appellant parents of African-American students moved to vacate the order under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but that motion was denied. However, since the order is beyond the scope of the court's jurisdiction, it is therefore void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Reversed.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit


Mason v. Layfayette City-Parish Consolidated Government, Nov-10-2015

J. Owen finds that the lower court improperly granted defendant qualified immunity in dismissing plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment and state law claims after their son was shot dead by police. Because material fact issues remain that preclude summary judgment in favor of the police officer, he is not entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourth Amendment and state law claims. Reversed in part.

Edit Delete 5th Circuit


D.G. v. New Caney Independent School District, Nov-10-2015

J. Higginson finds that the lower court improperly determined that a prevailing party in an administrative hearing under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act must seek attorneys' fees no later than 90 days after the hearing officer's decision. After the mother proved in an administrative hearing that the school district had violated her child's right to a free appropriate public education by repeatedly placing him in isolation during school hours, she requested attorneys' fees 120 days after the decision. Since the statute contains no limitations period, and the district court should not have borrowed one from state law, the mother's request was improperly time-barred. Reversed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit


Matthews v. White, Nov-10-2015

J. Moore finds that the lower court improperly denied defendant's request to petition the Governor of Kentucky for clemency from his death sentence based on his neuropsychological health. To file his petition, he seeks funding so that he may secure a neuropsychological evaluation. The lower court denied defendant funding, without explaining why funding is available only for federal proceedings. It may have believed that defendant sought duplicative evidence, but without explaining its legal standard, its decision was an abuse of discretion. Reversed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit


Pfeil v. State Street Bank and Trust Company, Nov-10-2015

J. Boggs finds that the lower court properly found for defendant and found that the fiduciary of General Motors pension plans satisfied its duty of prudence when it decided not to stop buying GM stock even when the company was facing severe business problems in 2008 that ultimately resulted in its bankruptcy. The class of General Motors employees failed to show that defendant's method of investigating the merits of investing in General Motors was inappropriate. Defendant's decision to remain invested in General Motors stock even when its financial distress was made public was not imprudent simply because a different decision would have resulted in less loss. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 6th Circuit


Board v. Bradshaw, Nov-10-2015

J. White finds that the lower court improperly denied defendant's habeas petition as untimely. Defendant's unsuccessful motion for leave to file a delayed appeal tolled the statute of limitations for filing a habeas petition. Reversed.

Edit Delete 7th Circuit


U.S. v. Martin, Nov-10-2015

J. Kanne finds that the lower court properly refused to suppress evidence in a drug-trafficking case where police officers attached a GPS device to defendant's car without first seeking a warrant or legal counsel. The GPS device helped officers monitor defendant's movements used during his trafficking, which enabled them to get a search warrant. Binding judicial precedent must be applied here, as the GPS device was installed in 2010, three years before such an installation was deemed a "search" under the Fourth Amendment by the Supreme Court. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 8th Circuit


Spectra Communications Group v. City of Cameron, Missouri, Nov-10-2015

J. Murphy finds that the district court properly dismissed Spectra Communications' action concerning a Missouri city's ordinance that requires communications companies within the city's rights of way to get permits and pay user fees. Spectra cannot pursue its claim under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 because section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not allow a private right of action. Affirmed.

Edit Delete 9th Circuit


Public Integrity Alliance v. City of Tucson, Nov-10-2015

J. Kozinski finds that the district court improperly found for defendant in a case challenging the constitutionality of the city's hybrid system for electing members of its city council. In determining the system's constitutionality, the primary and general elections must be considered in tandem as two parts of a single election cycle, rather than two separate contests judged independently of one another. Additionally, when two groups of citizens share identical interests in an election, defendant may not use a residency requirement to exclude one group while including the other. Excluding out-of-ward voters from the primary election discriminates among residents of the same governmental unit in violation of their equal protection rights. Reversed.

Edit Delete Arizona Court Of Appeals Division One


Marsh v. Coles, Nov-10-2015

J. Norris finds that the lower court properly found that investors may not "obtain a constructive trust on life insurance proceeds received by the policy beneficiaries after the death of the insured when the insured allegedly acquired the insurance policies with funds wrongfully obtained through an illegal enterprise and a pattern of unlawful activity under state racketeering statutes." The investors' request for a constructive trust was a racketeering claim, and finding for investors "would lead to the anomalous result of allowing prevailing defendants alleged to have actually participated in racketeering to recover their fees and costs while forcing prevailing defendants who were not involved in the alleged wrongdoing to bear their own fees and costs." Affirmed.

Edit Delete Arizona Court Of Appeals Division One


Great Western Bank v. LJC Development, Nov-10-2015

J. Jones finds that the trial court properly found for defendants following the bank's lawsuit for payment on a loan. The bank agreed to be available and was required under the terms of the agreement to at least consider the borrower's requests on a case-by-case basis, which it failed to do. There was sufficient evidence to support the claim that the borrower reasonably expected the bank to provide construction financing. Affirmed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


California v. Optimal Global Healing, Nov-10-2015

J. Kumar finds that the trial court properly convicted defendants for illegally operating a medical marijuana business. Defendants argue that it was erroneous to find their business was illegal based on Proposition D---which allows the city to regulate where a business is located---since it was enacted after they began operations. However, the ordinance was passed in order to prevent medical marijuana businesses from operating near schools, public parks, public libraries, and other restricted areas. Furthermore, the proposition was retroactively applied in order to insure uniformity. Affirmed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


Roos v. Honeywell International, Nov-10-2015

J. Humes finds that the trial court properly approved an $8.15 million class action settlement against respondents regarding their use of thermostats to overcharge customers and awarded $3.0 million in attorneys' fees. Appellants argue that it was erroneous to find that three objectors had not provided evidence that they had standing as members of the class. The objectors stated they had purchased the thermostats in order to prove they were members of the class. Additionally, appellants argue that it was erroneous to approve attorneys' fees that equated to 37.5 percent of the settlement funds. However, the attorneys' use of the lodestar method to calculate their fees was determined to be reasonable before it was accepted. Furthermore, the total hours and hourly rates were reviewed and found to be accurate and reasonable. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


Jumaane v. City of Los Angeles, Nov-10-2015

J. Grimes finds that the trial court improperly denied the city's request for judgment notwithstanding the verdict regarding an employee's racial discrimination and retaliation claims against it. The city argues that it was erroneous not to find the employee's claims were untimely. The employee's assertions for his treatment up until a 1999 suspension are time barred. Additionally, the city argues that it was erroneous to find for the employee without statistical evidence showing he was treated different than non-African American employees. The employee did not provided the necessary statistical evidence to support his claim. Reversed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


Bonvino v. Bonvino, Nov-10-2015

J. Kriegler finds that the lower court improperly found that the husband's pre-marriage property was community property since proceeds from the sale of a home were invested in a new home during the marriage. The husband argues that there was not any evidence to support finding he had converted his separate property into community property. The pre-marriage portion of the proceeds that were invested in the new marital property should have been separated when determining the proportions of marital property each party was to receive since the husband alone paid off the loan in an attempt to keep the property separate. Reversed.

Edit Delete California Courts Of Appeal


In re C. v. , Nov-10-2015

J. Kriegler finds that the lower court properly found the minor was competent after determining that he had "exaggerated his inability to understand" the court proceedings against him for threatening an officer during the 294 days he was in juvenile hall. The juvenile argues that it was erroneous to go against the opinion of an expert who found him to be incompetent. However, the expert entered a new opinion after observing the progress the minor made over several months. Additionally, the juvenile argues that his lengthy detention violated his constitutional rights. However, substantial evidence was provided to show the juvenile's manipulation of the system was the reason for the lengthy delay. Furthermore, the juvenile has not provided any evidence to show he suffered a prejudice as a result of the delay. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Pasiak, Nov-10-2015

J. Prescott finds that the trial court improperly found that plaintiffs had a duty to defend defendant and indemnify him for damages awarded against him in a tort action brought by a former employee. The business pursuits exclusion provision in the umbrella policy did not apply because the employee's injury would not have happened were she not working for defendant's business at the time that defendant's friend held a gun to her head and threatened to kill her family. Reversed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


State v. Faust, Nov-10-2015

J. Gruendel finds that the trial court properly found that there was sufficient evidence to convict defendant of conspiracy to commit robbery with a firearm, kidnapping with a firearm, robbery with a firearm and larceny. The jury heard evidence that defendant was driving a stolen car that was parked in a lot near the jewelry store where the robbery took place. The court also properly consolidated trial charges from two incidents. The facts of the two cases were "factually and temporally distinct." Affirmed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


Otto v. Commissioner of Correction, Nov-10-2015

J. Gruendel finds that the habeas court properly denied defendant's claim that he suffered ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. Defendant at the habeas trial produced no expert testimony critical of the attorney's strategic decision not to challenge the denial of a motion to suppress evidence found in a warrantless search. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Simoulidis, Nov-10-2015

J. Lavine finds that the trial judge properly found a judgment of strict foreclosure in favor of plaintiff. Defendant failed to rebut the presumption that plaintiff, as the holder of the note, was the owner of the debt, and Washington Mutual Bank — a now-failed bank — is not a trade name and is "capable of negotiating a negotiable instrument payable to bearer." Affirmed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


Sowell v. Dicara, Nov-10-2015

J. Lavine finds that a claim that the trial judge improperly found plaintiff's attorney violated the Rules of Professional Conduct and violated his rights to due process should be dismissed. The attorney sent letters to the board of directors of defendant Southbury-Middlebury Youth and Family Services, who were represented by the defendants' attorney. Also, the court accepted plaintiff's attorney's "understanding of the facts and the law, and his belief that the members of the board of directors were not" clients of the agency's attorney.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


Oliphant v. Commissioner of Correction, Nov-10-2015

J. Lavine finds that defendant's appeal of a judgment dismissing his petition for habeas corpus should be dismissed. Defendant's claims were barred by res judicator because he did not suffer ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a judge reviewed the record to grant the withdrawal.

Edit Delete Connecticut Court Of Appeals


Hilton v. Commissioner of Correction, Nov-10-2015

J. Mullins finds that the habeas court improperly reinstated defendant's right to apply for sentence review. Defendant's appellate brief was devoid of specifics regarding whether his counsel was ineffective when seeking out witnesses to the murder petitioner was charged with. Defendant also failed to show that his counsel did not properly cross-examine the pathologist who performed the autopsy on the victim. Reversed.

Edit Delete Connecticut Supreme Court


State v. Apt, Nov-10-2015

J. Palmer finds that the appellate court improperly found that the trial court improperly allowed the state to introduce erased records into evidence for the purpose of enhancing defendant's larceny sentence, precluding the state from pursuing the sentence enhancement. While the state cannot use the erased records, the state is not precluded from seeking to establish the basis for defendant's sentence by the use of other evidence. Reversed.

Edit Delete Court Of Federal Claims


Exxon Mobil v. U.S., Nov-10-2015

J. Braden finds that the government cannot pursue discovery of the oil company's insurance policies regarding the clean-up of contaminated sites near the company's refineries in Baytown, Tx, because it has already begun that discovery in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The record shows the company sued claiming that the government owed it clean-up costs after the company provided the government with aviation fuel from those refineries for World War II; the company argues the production of that fuel led to the contamination. Though the government argues it seeks to prevent the company from obtaining a "double recovery" from it and the company's insurance company, the record shows that the government first began discovery for its insurance claims in the district court, and should thus continue its discovery pursuit there.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit


Prometheus Laboratories v. Roxane Laboratories, Nov-10-2015

J. Dyk finds that the lower court properly found for defendant in a patent dispute over a method for treating irritable bowel syndrome in women using alosetron. However, the patent's claims are invalid as obvious due to a prior patent, which plaintiff also owns, dealing with the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome regardless of gender. A person skilled in the art would have found it obvious that the prior patent indicated that the method could be used to treat the disease in women, as well as men. Affirmed.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit


ClearCorrect Operating v. International Trade Commission, Nov-10-2015

J. Prost finds that the International Trade Commission improperly claimed jurisdiction over a patent dispute involving the electronic transmission of digital data. Appellant makes its allegedly infringing teeth aligners by sending a digital scan of patients' teeth to its Pakistani sister company, which then sends back a digital model which can be used to 3D print a physical model. "Common sense dictates that there is a fundamental difference between electronic transmissions and 'material things,'" the panel said. The Commission is not entitled to deference in this decision because it repeatedly erred in its analysis of the term "article," which requires a material thing. Reversed.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit


Momenta Pharmaceuticals v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Nov-10-2015

J. Wallach finds that the lower court properly found for defendant Teva, but improperly as to defendant Amphastar in a patent dispute over generic versions of the anticoagulant drug, Enoxaparin. Amphastar, unlike Teva, manufactures its product within the United States, and its use of the patented method in the U.S. as part of its manufacturing process may not be protected by the safe harbor statute. Affirmed in part.

Edit Delete Federal Circuit


Imaginal Systematic v. Leggett & Platt, Nov-10-2015

J. O'Malley finds that the lower court properly found for defendant in a patent dispute over a process for building box springs. The accused device does not satisfy one of the patents claimed elements, and plaintiff cannot restrict the construction of the term "vision guidance system." Affirmed.

Edit Delete Georgia Court Of Appeals


Sheffield v. Sheffield, Nov-10-2015

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that appellant's application for discretionary appeal in a child custody case must be granted.

Edit Delete Georgia Court Of Appeals


Jackson Jr. v. State, Nov-10-2015

J. Ray finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of aggravated stalking, kidnapping and other offenses. On appeal, defendant argued the sufficiency of the evidence for aggravated stalking, in that it didn't establish that he'd contacted the victim without her consent. However, she'd had him arrested "the evening prior" and had the locks changed on the house. Affirmed

Edit Delete Georgia Court Of Appeals


Founders Kitchen & Bath v. Alexander, Nov-10-2015

J. McFadden finds that the lower court improperly granted summary judgment to defendant in a materialman's lien case. There were questions of fact concerning whether the parties were in privity of contract and the deadline for filing. Reversed.

Edit Delete Georgia Court Of Appeals


Lasenyik v. Wellstar Health System, Nov-10-2015

Per curiam, the court of appeals finds that appellant's appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellants sought to appeal the dismissal of a direct appeal, but the initial appeal was not properly filed.

Edit Delete Georgia Court Of Appeals


Goulding v. State, Nov-10-2015

J. Barnes finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of two counts of cruelty to children, aggravated assault and aggravated battery. On appeal, defendant argued one of the jurors should have been excused for cause, when she expressed her doubts about being impartial. However, excusal was not required. Affirmed.

1 2