Datasets:

LawInformedAI

/

overruling

like 0

Follow

LawInformedAI 23

in day v. united states, supra, 390 a.2d at 970, which was decided more than 2 years before the pretrial appeal in this case, we disapproved such inaction.

davis v. davis, 360 n.c. 518, 523, 631 s.e.2d 114, 118 (2006) (citing sink v. easter, 288 n.c. 183, 198, 217 s.e.2d 532, 541 (1975)).

id.; see also state v. gabert, 152 vt. 83, 85, 564 a.2d 1356, 1358 (1989) (quoting kasper, 145 vt. at 120, 483 a.2d at 610 for proposition that ""the record must reveal that the elements of each offense were explained to the defendant"").

because the decision arguably departs from this circuit's prior decision in united states ex rel. starr v. mulligan, 59 f.2d 200 (2d cir. 1932), and explicitly overrules united states v. brothman, 191 f.2d 70 (2d cir. 1951), this opinion has been circulated among the active members of the court.

see maples v. state, 758 so. 2d 1, 25 (ala. crim. app. 1999) (holding that, although the police were armed with guns at the time of the search, there was no indication that they used the guns to coerce the appellant into consenting to the search).

we see no abuse of discretion, and we therefore affirm the admission of dr. parran's expert testimony.

""the supreme court has made 'clear that reckless conduct is not measured by whether a reasonably prudent [person] would have published [or spoken], or would have investigated before publishing [or speaking].'

mass transit admin. v. granite constr. co., 57 md. app. 766, 773-74 (1984).

at the january 29, 2014 wcj coholan hearing, claimant identified ""records from [university of pittsburgh medical center (]upmc[)] in june and july of 2012."" r.r. at 144a.

the error was quickly discovered, however, and the defendants' answer was thereafter filed, albeit eight days late.

(in-home supportive services, supra, 152 cal.app.3d at p. 733.)

section 1311(a) contains important exceptions to the prohibition on discharge of pollutants.

considering the totality of the voir dire record and moore's answers, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's challenge for cause.

to the extent that these decisions may support the proposition for which they are here cited, i.e., that a final rejection of claims in a parent application for lack of supporting disclosure therein is res judicata upon the question of whether different claims, rejected on a different basis in a continuation application, are entitled under the conditions specified in 35 u.s.c. 120 to the benefit of the earlier filing date of the parent application, they are expressly overruled.

any holding in minter v. state, 765 p.2d 803 (okla.

lyons, special justice (concurring specially in case no. 1130184).

under the circumstances, we conclude that it is appropriate to overrule casey, 6 harvey, and subsequent decisions holding that the venue guarantee of article i, section 11, requires the state to prove venue beyond a reasonable doubt as a material allegation of every criminalcase.

on appeal, mr. young asserts the district court erred by determining the minor victim, fh, was competent to testify.

crossroads also has offender rules consistent with the smoking policy.

we agree and overrule mukhtar to the extent that it required that daubert findings always be made by the district court.

father contends that there was substantial evidence presented regarding the parties' incomes that would have enabled the trial court to make a determination regarding child support.

accordingly, hance v. haun, supra, is overruled.

douglas also requests a 28 u.s.c. 2254(e) evidentiary hearing on the question of whether the state disclosed the cad report before trial.

however, in his briefing, hanson discusses his injuries on several occasions.

where hollins is contradictory to the "duty-to-read" and "imputed-knowledge" doctrines, it is hereby overruled.

the court must grant a directed verdict if, after construing the evidence most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, it finds that reasonable minds could come to but one conclusion on any determinative issue and that conclusion is adverse to the nonmoving party.

in recognizing yurgel and agreeing with the holding in lamon, we recede from the following three opinions of this court.

to date, appellant has neither filed a brief nor communicated with the court regarding the appeals.

given the supreme court's decision in gaudin, we conclude that beuttenmuller's holding that materiality under section 1006 is a question of law for the court has been overruled.

we overrule people v. montoya, 251 p.3d 35, 43 (colo.app.2010), to the extent that it suggests that the amended rule modified the requirements for a defendant's waiver of his right to a jury trial.

we now reexamine the issue as an en banc court, overruling any implications in hance inconsistent with this opinion.

the louisiana supreme court in cichirillo, clarified difference in considering evidence in support of a motion for summary judgment, as opposed to evidence in support of a peremptory exception of prescription.

we stated, ""employers owe certain nondelegable and continuous duties to employees acting in the course and scope of their duties, including the duties to warn about the hazards of employment, to supervise activities, to furnish a reasonably safe workplace, and to furnish reasonably safe instrumentalities with which to work.""

we hereby modify garcia and hold that the first procedure wherein the jury is informed of the amount of settlement is not acceptable.

congress possesses only limited authority to prohibit and punish robbery.

accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment in both appellate causes.

the court of appeals holding to the contrary in state v. gray, 45 kan.app.2d 522, 524, 249 p.3d 465,rev.

we disagree and disapprove jones as being inconsistent with our decision today.

siewe v. gonzales, 480 f.3d 160, 170 (2d cir. 2007) (""[a] single false document or a single instance of false testimony may (if attributable to the petitioner) infect the balance of the alien's uncorroborated or unauthenticated evidence."").

and it would enable state courts to blame the unpopular death-sentence reprieve of the most horrible criminals upon the federal constitution when it is in fact their own doing.

to the extent that our opinion in goldstein v. navarro, 590 so.2d 20 (fla. 4th dca 1991), can be read to indicate that habeas corpus relief is not available in this court to remedy a civil contempt confinement in violation of due process, we recede from it.

all previous opinions of this court upholding immunity of the sovereign are hereby overruled.

320 s.w.3d at 838-40.

to the extent they hold otherwise, we disapprove of swift v. seidler, 988 s.w.2d 860, 861-62 (tex.app.-san antonio 1999, pet. denied), norman v. yzaguirre chapa, 988 s.w.2d 460, 462-63 (tex.app.-corpus christi 1999, no pet.), and dear v. scottsdale insurance co., 947 s.w.2d 908, 918 (tex.app.-dallas 1997, writ denied).

in re a.s., 7th dist. no. 11 je 29, 2012-ohio-5468, 10.

rather, the court would consider it an action for ""recovery"" of property under article 2934, which is exempt.

an agency's authority to adopt administrative rules is governed by the minnesota administrative procedures act (mapa), minn. stat. 14.001-.69

to the extent that it suggests the defense of alibi invariably and necessarily creates a material issue as to "identity" so as to dispense with further analysis as to the admissibility of extraneous offense evidence, cameron, supra, is overruled.

accordingly, the relevance of ossorio's testimony with respect to the prejudice prong of strickland is substantially less than is typically the case with credible alibi evidence.

to the extent that davis, whitehead, and lawson hold to the contrary, they are overruled.

we disapprove sarasota county, jenkins, and relyea to the extent they conflict with the decision here.

state v. brown (1988), 38 ohio st.3d 305, 308.' * * * state v. coley (2001), 93 ohio st.3d 253, 261."" state v. griffiths, 11th dist. trumbull no. 2000-t-0131, 2002 wl 5307, *2 (dec. 28, 2001).

we disapprove abdelaziz as well as henderson v. north, 545 so.2d 486 (fla. 1st dca 1989), which adopted the principle of abdelaziz, to the extent that they disapproved a cause of action for negligent stillbirth.

id. at 657 n. 6.

the court also specifically ordered defendant to ""be subject to all administrative or judicial enforcement remedies available to the plaintiff as prescribed by state and federal law in a title iv-d case[.]""

thus far, the resolution of the question before us seems simple.

the trial court denied both motions.

see ocga 5-6-48 (b) (""where the questions presented have become moot"" the appeal ""shall be dismissed."").

the record reflects that defendant asserted his innocence at the outset, ultimately rejecting an offer from the prosecution for him to plead guilty to second-degree murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (felony-firearm), mcl 750.227b(1).

to the extent this holding conflicts with the court of appeals' decision in farmers group, inc. v. trimble, 768 p.2d 1243 (colo.app. 1988) ("trimble iii"), we overrule that decision.

insofar as the smith, labatt, john shillito and gibson cases (supra) are in conflict herewith, they are expressly overruled.

id. at 143 n.612, j.a. 1192.

thus, to the degree that procon suggests that udot waives a contract's written notice provisions if the udot board of review resolves a claim against udot on other grounds, we disavow that interpretation.

insofar as dictum in landau v. fording (1966) 245 cal.app.2d 820, 824, 830 [ 54 cal.rptr. 177], affd. per curiam (1967) 387 u.s. 456 [ 18 l.ed.2d 1317, 87 s.ct. 2109], suggests a contrary reading of the california statutes, it is hereby disapproved.

rule 4007 further provides the time by which a complaint to determine dischargeability must be filed, which is ""no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under 341(a).""

{31} murder is an unclassified felony generally subject to an indefinite sentence of 15 years to life.

id. a first-party bad-faith claim involves ""an insured's attempt to recover for his or her own losses allegedly covered under the insurance policy.""

the question in katzenbach had nothing to do with stand-alone judicial power under the fourteenth amendment.

saint peter's healthcare system runs a teaching hospital and several other medical facilities in new jersey, and is both owned and controlled by a roman catholic diocese there.

the federation argued that ""a change to an 84-hour bi-weekly base pay calculation was never raised by the county until after the [mos] was signed and only then, in the form of a proposed legislative change,"" and therefore, ""the county's actions were unilateral and, as applied, adversely change[d] the pay practices for the 911 call center 40-hour classified employees.""

because we agree with the defendant's alternative claim that smith must be overruled to the extent that it applies to cases in which the state has conducted a first time in-court identification, we need not address this claim.

defense counsel objected on the ground that the second-degree depraved heart murder instruction was more appropriate in cases in which the state had charged multiple levels of homicide, e.g., murder and manslaughter.

to the extent that state v. martin, 285 kan. 994, 179 p.3d 457,cert.

8 u.s.c. 1357(a)(4); cf. sessions v. dimaya, 138 s. ct. 1204, 1212-13 (2018) (plurality opinion) (explaining that removal proceedings in some ways resemble criminal actions); mateo v. att'y gen., 870 f.3d 228, 232 (3d cir. 2017) (same).

insofar as any language in clarke v. united states, d.c.mun.app., 160 a.2d 97 (1960) or in yankovitz v. united states, d.c.mun.app., 182 a.2d 889 (1962), could be construed to establish a local community standard or to relieve the government of its duty to prove prevailing community standards, it is overruled.

to the extent that it conflicts with this opinion, we disapprove alexander ranch v. central appraisal dist.

##note: brock was reversed not overruled.

b.a. appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed.

miranda admitted to the dhs's factual allegations and conceded removability.

apart from its articulation that the crime was serious in nature and that the society must be protected from dangerous offenders, the trial court did not consider some of the nonexhaustive factors that are relevant in determining whether a sentence is proportionate.

to the extent of conflict roy v. state, supra, is overruled.

fletcher v. univ. hosps. of cleveland, 120 ohio st.3d 167, 2008-ohio-5379, paragraph one of the syllabus.

accordingly, we overrule united states v. steele, 413 f.2d 967 (1969) to the extent that it holds that the plea must be vacated rather than remanding the case for a hearing where it appears that the necessary finding might be made by the district court.

we disapprove any language of dillingham or campbell that may be interpreted to support or compel a requirement that the pre-existing disability be manifest at the time of hiring.

to the extent the southern district of new york's decision in internet law library, 223 f.supp.2d 474, is to the contrary, we reject it.

""a defendant is entitled to a jury trial . . . only if he can demonstrate"" that those penalties - which consist of ""the maximum authorized period of incarceration"" together with ""any additional statutory penalties"" - ""are so severe that they clearly reflect a legislative determination that the offense in question is a 'serious' one.""

we disapprove of johnson v. mt. sinai medical center, inc., 615 so.2d 257 (fla. 3d dca 1993), and castillo-plaza v. green.

the absence of textual support is fatal for the fobian rule.

an appellate court may affirm a district court's ruling on any ground urged below, whether or not it formed the basis for the court's original ruling.

now that the issue is presented, we reject the hall/sherren dicta suggesting that the prior conviction requirement of section 666 is an "element" of a section 666 "offense.

like morning fresh farms, to the extent any of the del mesa farms cases can be read to stand for the proposition that a building, without more, provides sufficient connection to meet the requirement that the product "originate from the land's productivity," we decline to follow them.

22 edwards plainly held that perfecting an appeal following a guilty plea includes filing a postplea motion.

to the extent that it may be found inconsistent with this opinion, box stands overruled.

to the extent the court of appeals decision in blossom chevrolet holds otherwise, it is disapproved.

we find no relevant distinction between a spouse and a nonrelated third party, so long as the evidence supports compensability under the three-part test set out in currier v. roman l. hruska u.s. meat animal res. ctr. for compensability of in-home care, our focus is on the nature of the service provided, not the status or devotion of the provider of the service.

applying the holdings in brown and green in light of caudillo, the facts of this case do not satisfy the simple kidnapping asportation standard.

we hold that the above statement in hardin v. sellers was dicta and that it does not accurately state the law.

in any event, to the extent lee suggested that the statute authorizes the state to conduct ex parte interrogations after charges have been brought, that case is disapproved.

for these reasons, we conclude that the constructions of the conduct rules in harrington and cicchetti are unsustainable, and we accordingly overrule those decisions.

therefore, for the reasons discussed above, we approve the fifth district's decision in this case and disapprove the second district's decision in estrada to the extent it is inconsistent with this opinion.