James Lee Sweed, pro se, appeals a dismissal order declaring him a vexatious litigant and requiring that he post security as a precondition to any further litigation. Sweed brings four issues for review. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

Construing his pleadings broadly, Sweed filed suit for conversion on May 14, 2007, naming attorney Jay L. Nye and

[¶1] Donald and Mark Hagerott appeal from a district court order affirming a decision by the Morton County Board of Commissioners to issue Fred Berger a conditional use permit to operate a feedlot on Berger's property in Morton County. The Hagerotts argue they have standing to challenge the conditional use permit, the Morton County Commission's interpretation of a Morton County Animal Feeding Ope

This case involves a condemnation action. In Docket No. 285258, defendant Crown Enterprises Inc. appeals as of right a judgment, following a jury trial, awarding it $2 million as just compensation for 19.09 acres of property that plaintiff City of Detroit condemned for use in the Conner Creek Combined Sewerage Overflow Basin Project. In Docket No. 288429, defendant appeals by leave granted1 an ord

¶1 The petitioner, Jerry R. Fent, filed an application asking this Court to assume original jurisdiction and declare unconstitutional 28 O.S. Supp. 2008 § 152(D)(E) and (F) and 28 O. S. Supp. 2008 § 152.1(B), which require a portion of fees paid to the court clerks in civil actions to be credited to or deposited to non-judicial programs. Mr. Fent bases his standing to obtain relief upon his sta

“Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (b).) The litigation costs that the prevailing party may recover include attorney fees when recovery of such fees is authorized by statute. (Id., § 1033.5, subd. (a)(10)(B).) But when “the prevailing party rec

In 2001, the Grayson County Fiscal Court approved a proposal to hang a “Foundations of American Law and Government Display” in the county courthouse. The display consisted of nine historical documents, including a copy of the Ten Commandments, along with an “Explanation Document” purporting to describe the significance of these items as foundations of law and government in the United State

Anna Lee Cangelosi executed her final will in 2004 at age 82, naming her daughter, Dorothea Cangelosi, as executrix and sole beneficiary of her estate. With respect to Anna Lee’s two remaining children, the 2004 will declares: “For reasons that seem fair to me I have specifically made no provision for distribution to my son, John Charles Cangelosi, Jr., and my daughter, Lena Jo Barber, both

This case presents the court with a little utilized area of the law—private condemnation. The plaintiffs seek further review of a district court order granting the defendant’s action for private condemnation and selecting the defendant’s proposed route of condemnation. While not disputing the need for private condemnation, the plaintiffs challenge the selection of the route, asserting that t

Plaintiff Yaakov Abdelhak appeals from a Law Division order that dismissed his defamation complaint against defendants, The Jewish Press, Inc., Oleg Rivkin, Richard Scharlat and Gabrielle Tito, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(a). The judge concluded that plaintiff's claims could not be resolved without excessive entanglement by the court and jury in issues of religi

Lauxmont Holdings, LLC (Lauxmont) appeals the October 2, 2008 order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County (trial court) denying a request to compel payment of interest on delay compensation paid on estimated just compensation (EJC) by the County of York (County). The issues before this Court include: 1) whether delay compensation is due at the same time as the EJC payment or at the time of t

Barry J. Mesler (Mesler) appeals the May 13, 2009 order of the Court of Common Pleas of Potter County (trial court) ejecting him from a tract of real property (the tract) in favor of the Borough of Ulysses (Borough), formerly known as the Borough of Lewisville.1 The issue before us is whether the trial court erred in ejecting Mesler from the tract in favor of the Borough. Mesler argues on appeal t

¶1 This cause concerns an eminent domain proceeding brought by the Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural Colleges (appellee/Regents), against the McCloskey Brothers, Inc. (appellant/the landowner/McCloskey Brothers). The dispositive issues presented on certiorari1 are whether: 1) the Court is precluded from addressing a standing issue because the landowner did not appeal an interlocutory

Mountaineer Family Restaurant sued the West Virginia Department of Transportation on an inverse condemnation theory claiming that the construction of Corridor D, the U.S. 50 upgrade damaged it. Plaintiff claimed that its business suffered after it went from having direct access along U.S. 50 to being about a mile from the exit for the new highway. Plaintiff claimed that it lost 35% of its busines

On June 6, 2006, an old hotel located in the Village of Rouses Point, New York, was
20 badly damaged in a fire. The next morning, a team of contractors, acting under the direction
21 of the Village’s Board of Trustees, demolished most of what remained of the damaged
22 building. Plaintiffs-appellants WWBITV, Inc.,which owned the building, Susan Clarke, who
23 owned WWBITV, and Su

A group of homeowners residing in the Town of Williston filed a complaint in Chittenden Superior Court, alleging that the Town’s agreement with Chittenden Solid Waste District for the siting, construction, and operation of a solid waste disposal facility in the Town was an ultra vires delegation of municipal authority. Homeowners appeal the superior court’s decision upholding the agreement.

A municipality sought land through eminent domain to expand its water treatment plant. The property owner objected to the taking because: it would close off an access route to her remaining property; the municipality had not dedicated replacement access in a binding way; and the municipality sought a fee simple interest, rather than an easement, in the portion of the land to be used as an undevelo

Bill Butts ("Bill") and his wife, Debra Butts ("Debra") (collectively "Plaintiffs"), brought claims for personal injury and loss of consortium, respectively, against the Missouri Department of Conservation ("Defendant"), alleging Bill suffered physical injuries when he tripped in the dark over a chain Defendant had negligently placed between two poles. After a jury trial, the trial court accepted

¶1 In this condemnation action, the State of Oklahoma ex rel. Department of Transportation (ODOT) appeals the trial court's May 29, 2008, Journal Entry of Judgment, granting attorney fees, appraisal fees, engineering fees, and costs to the appellee landowner, Gary Minor (Minor).1 Minor requests attorney fees for this appeal. After reviewing the facts and applicable law, we affirm and remand for f

Crosstex North Texas Gathering, L.P. appeals the trial court’s dismissal of Crosstex’s condemnation proceeding after granting Fort Worth & Western Railroad Company’s and Cen-Tex Rural Rail Transportation District’s plea to the jurisdiction. We reverse and remand.

Crosstex sought to place a natural gas pipeline under a railroad right-of-way of tracks owned by Cen-Tex and

Plaintiffs Roy Evans and Arthea LaFrades (together plaintiffs) each owned homes in which shower pans manufactured by defendant Lasco Bathware, Inc. (Lasco) were installed. Plaintiffs' action against Lasco alleged the shower pans suffered from design defects that resulted in water leakage, and the leakage caused damage to adjacent building components. Plaintiffs' fourth amended complaint (FAC), sty

As to the issue of whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing evidence of the effect of the creation of a traffic median, which is an exercise of police power, we believe after reviewing the evidence presented at trial that the references were de minimis and thus not prejudicial. We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals except that, in accordance with Barnes v. North Carolina

Plaintiff-Appellant Robert Norse was ejected from two meetings of the Santa Cruz City Council, one in 2002 and one in 2004. He filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the City and its Mayor and Council members alleging violation of his First Amendment rights. In a 2004 unpublished, nonprecedential disposition, we unanimously upheld the validity of the Council rules that were being enforced at

¶1 Plaintiffs (“the Farmers”) appeal the trial court’s denial of their motions for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) relating to their unsuccessful inverse eminent domain claim against the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (“the District”). On cross-appeal, the District challenges the negligence claim the Farmers successfully asserted against it. The District argues the F

The Three Rivers Levee Improvement Authority sued Dana Investment on an eminent domain theory to acquire by condemnation certain rights, title and interest in property owned by Dana in Olivehurst, California near Ella Avenue and Murphy Road to use for flood control improvements.

Three Rivers' witnesses testified that the property was worth $725,900 and Dana's witnesses countered at $1.6 mil

Howard Wells, Edward Hill and Don Morrison sued San Bernardino County on an inverse condemnation theory claiming that property that they owned on the northwest corner of Pepper Avenue and Valley Boulevard in Colton, directly west of the county-run Arrowhead Regional Medical Center, was damaged as a result of it was landlocked by the County. They claimed that they lost the ability of develop or sel