Articles

All Content


9,713 Posts found
Previous • Page 325 of 972 • Next
Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 6, 2019

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Allanah Benton alleges that her defense attorney’s bad advice made her pass up a favorable plea deal. But she did not timely raise her claim and has not offered a good excuse for not raising it. Thus, she cannot obtain federal habeas relief. We affirm.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 6, 2019

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, your employer can’t fire you because they think you are disabled, even if, in fact, you are not disabled. But Paula Babb contends that her former employer—Maryville Anesthesiologists, P.C.—did just that, i.e., it fired her because it thought she was visually disabled, even though, in reality, she is not visually disabled.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 6, 2019

In this interlocutory appeal, the defendants appeal the trial court’s denial of their motion to dismiss a medical malpractice lawsuit on the ground that the plaintiffs failed to comply with Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 25.01. We reverse the decision of the trial court and remand the case for further proceedings.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 6, 2019

This appeal arises from the Chattanooga Police Department’s decision to terminate Appellant’s employment as a police officer. The administrative law judge affirmed the decision to terminate Appellant’s employment. On appeal, the Hamilton County Chancery Court affirmed the ALJ’s ruling. Finding no error, we affirm the decision of the Chancery Court.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 6, 2019

In 2009, Ronald Brantley (“Employee”) settled a workers’ compensation claim with Brantley Excavating (“Employer”) regarding a hand injury he sustained during the course and scope of his employment. Employee returned to his authorized treating physician in 2017, seeking medication for pain he was experiencing in his injured hand. The diagnostic test results were normal. The treating physician declined to prescribe pain medication and offered no further treatment.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 5, 2019

A Lawrence County Circuit Court Jury convicted the Appellant, Larry Sexton, of aggravated statutory rape, a Class D felony, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range III, career offender to twelve years in confinement. On appeal, the Appellant contends that the trial court erred by allowing the State to reopen its proof after he moved for a judgment of acquittal and by sentencing him as a career offender. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 5, 2019

Aggrieved of his Davidson County Criminal Court jury convictions of one count of felony murder in the perpetration of aggravated child neglect, one count of the facilitation of felony murder in the perpetration of aggravated child abuse, three counts of aggravated child abuse, one count of aggravated child neglect, and one count of the facilitation of aggravated child abuse, the defendant, Donald Lee Harris, appeals.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 5, 2019

In this divorce action, the trial court equitably divided the marital estate, adopted a permanent parenting plan for the parties’ minor child, and set child support. On appeal, the husband challenges the allocation of marital debt, the denial of his request for equal parenting time, and the calculation of child support. We affirm.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 5, 2019

This appeal arises from an action commenced by two insured parties against their insurance agent and the insurance agency where he was employed after the insureds’ insurance carrier refused to provide excess uninsured motorist coverage because it was not included in the insureds’ policy. The insureds alleged that their insurance agent failed to procure the requested insurance on their behalf and that they consequently had suffered monetary losses.

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 4, 2019

GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge: In Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk (“Busk I"), 574 U.S. 27 (2014), the Supreme Court held that post-shift security screening is a noncompensable postliminary activity under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., as amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act (“Portal Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 251 et seq. See id. at 34-37. At issue in this appeal is whether Busk I resolves a similar claim under the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act (“PMWA”), 43 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 333.101 et seq.


Previous • Page 325 of 972 • Next