Appellant, Robert O'Marra, brings this appeal from a ruling granting appellees' motion for summary judgment in Pulaski County Circuit Court. The circuit court denied his curtesy interest after his wife, Gail O'Marra, executed a quitclaim deed and an agreed court order in favor of her ex-husband, appellee Michael MacKool. We reverse and remand.

When Michael and Gail MacKool were divorced

Appellant, Ali Yazdchi, challenges the trial court's rendition of summary judgment in favor of appellee, the American Arbitration Association (AAA), on his claims for negligence, fraud, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). Footnote In five issues, Yazdchi contends that the trial court erred in granting the AAA's summary judgment motion because (1) he did not sue the

Defendant and appellant Fleming Gray (Gray) appeals the trial court's order granting the petition of plaintiff and respondent Robert Krell (Krell) for an injunction under Code of Civil Procedure section 527.61 prohibiting Gray from contacting or harassing Krell; ordering Gray to stay at least 100 yards away from Krell and Krell's residence and workplace; and ordering Gray to remove Krell'

Howard Wolf brought this action to recover a commission allegedly due him under a personal management contract with Paul Robi, one of the original members of

2 the legendary singing group The Platters.1 The trial court awarded judgment to Robi.

Wolf and Robi both filed timely appeals. The principal issues in Wolf's appeal are whether Wolf violated the Talent Agencies Act (Labor Cod

1 Tremco Legal Solutions, Inc. ("Tremco") appeals from a summary judgment rendering it liable for an earlier judgment obtained by Brigham Young University ("BYU") against SoftSolutions, Inc. ("SoftSolutions"). We hold that the district court erred in summarily extending liability for BYU's earlier judgment to Tremco. SoftSolutions and individual appellants Kenneth W. Duncan; Alvin S. Tedjamul

�1 The dispositive issues1 tendered for corrective relief on certiorari are (1) whether an earlier pronouncement by the Court of Civil Appeals in this case,2 which affirmed the trial court's denial of former husband's motion to vacate the parties' divorce decree, operates in a post-decree con-[57 P.3d 563]tempt proceeding to bar relitigation of alleged jurisdictional defects in that

Appellant brought a medical malpractice action in connection with injury incurred during post-operative care following tracheal resection surgery. The district court granted defendant's motion to dismiss on grounds that appellant had failed to comply with the expert witness disclosure requirements of Minn. Stat. § 145.682 (2004). The court of appeals affirmed, and we granted further review.

Defendant-Appellant Melvin Willard appeals a judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Administrative Committee of the Wal-Mart Associates Health and Welfare Plan ("Plan Administrators"). The district court held that the relief sought by the Plan Administrators constituted "appropriate equitable relief" under § 502(a)(3) of

Plaintiff Gregg Hjelle, an employee of Ayrcom Contracting, Inc., was seriously injured when a large chunk of frozen dirt struck him during the backfilling of the trench in which he was working. At the bench trial of this diversity suit, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332, he argued that Defendant Mid-State Consultants, a third-party independent contractor, is liable because it assumed control over the jobsit

In 1999, Arkansas tomato growers Phillip and Tommy Ferrell and Clay and Donny Lowry ("the tomato growers" or "growers") purchased from Hi-Tech Film, Inc. ("Hi-Tech") a plastic film meant to prevent soil from splashing onto their plants and causing blight. The tomato growers rolled the film over their fields, but after the tomato plants were planted, the film began to deteriorate, leaving

Robert Ellis appeals from the district court's1 judgment affirming the Commissioner's denial of Ellis's claim for disability benefits. We affirm.

2Ellis's application alleged a disability onset date of 1978. The ALJ construed the allegation of a 1978 onset date as a request to reopen prior applications which had been denied. The district court noted that the ALJ properly applied res ju

Plaintiff Traci & Marx Co. appeals the grant of the motion of defendants Legal Options, Inc. and Stuart Grant to vacate the sister state default judgment obtained by plaintiff in Ohio. We conclude that the trial court erred in granting the motion, and so reverse the judgment.

FACTS1

Plaintiffs sued defendants in the Court of Common Pleas for Cuyahoga County, Ohio for fraudulent in

Claimant Patricia Bolinger appeals, and employer Coastal Mart, Inc. (Coastal Mart)[1] cross-appeals, from a district court decision on Bolinger's petition for judicial review. The district court affirmed the workers' compensation commissioner's denial of two claims based on specific injury dates, but reversed the agency's denial of Bolinger's cumulative injury claim. Upon review we c

The University of Louisiana at Monroe1 and the Board of Trustees, University of Louisiana System (hereinafter co llectively "ULM") appeal the district court's denial of their motion for permanent injunction under the "relitigation exception" to the Anti-Injunction Act claiming that the 2 doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel preclude Dwight Vines' and Van McGraw's age discrimi

This appeal raises two issues: First, whether the district court erred in finding that Rachael Lundquist was not disabled within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and granting Rice Memorial Hospital's (RMH) summary judgment motion on that basis; second, whether the district court erred in denying Lundquist's motion to amend an order setting a filing deadline for amend

Appellant, the City of Sugarland ("the City"), appeals from an order denying its plea to the jurisdiction on grounds of governmental immunity from suit in a wrongful-death suit brought by appellee, James L. Ballard ("Ballard"), individually and as representative of the estate of Mark Russell Ballard ("Mark"), deceased. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2004-2005)

1 The issues before this Court are: (1) whether the district court erred in refusing grandparent's request to enforce a consent visitation order, (2) whether the district erred in treating mother's motion to terminate visitation as an objection to request for enforcement of grandparental visitation, (3) what are the standards for terminating or modifying a consent decree granting grandparental

This appeal presents several issues concerning qualification for Medicaid benefits for a spouse who requires care in a nursing facility while the other spouse remains in the community. We consider a regulation adopted by the State Medicaid agency to control allegedly abusive use of annuities to shelter marital assets. Petitioner challenges the regulation that allows the purchase of an annuity b

2 1 Appellant DaimlerChrysler Corporation appeals from a judgment entered after a jury verdict in favor of appellees Travis and Shelly Hull in the Hulls' "Lemon Law" action. DaimlerChrysler contends the trial court erred in several respects, including denying DaimlerChrysler's motion to dismiss the action because the Hulls had sold the vehicle before trial and were no longer entitled to th

In these consolidated appeals, West Bend Mutual Insurance Company ("West Bend") appeals an adverse decision of the district court1 following a bench trial, and also challenges the court's imposition of attorney's fees and prejudgment interest. We affirm.

2

I.

In 1999, Arkansas tomato growers Phillip and Tommy Ferrell and Clay and Donny Lowry ("the tomato growers" or "growers")

This suit has dragged on despite being settled. A magistrate judge (presiding by consent under 28 U.S.C. §636) brokered the settlement in July 2003. Defendant (which we call 37Point9, its name at the time) was to pay $45,000 in two installments, after which the suit was to be dismissed; it was free to tender stock in

2 No. 04-1952

lieu of cash, and plaintiff (which we call "the Tru

Appellants and cross-respondents W. Randall Mainor and Richard A. Harris, individually, as professional corporations and as a partnership, appeal from the district court's entry of final judgment pursuant to a jury verdict against Mainor and Harris. Respondents and cross-appellants Philip Nault and Wendy Nault, as co-guardians of the person and estate of Jason Nault, cross-appeal from a distr

1. The jury award in this breach of contract case from Copiah County exceeded $82 Million,1 $80 Million of which was punitive damages. The contract in question contains a provision which vests the courts of Bexar County, Texas, with exclusive personal jurisdiction and venue of the issues litigated by the parties. Accordingly, we reverse and render.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The Mississ

1 The issue for us in this case is the present and the future of products liability litigation in Oklahoma. Much we do in this case may set the pattern of such litigation in Oklahoma and may determine whether this young, vigorous and progressive State shall now meet the challenge of the mass advertising of today, its hypnosis, and the pace and flow of the economics of the late twentieth century

In 1987, plaintiff, Tri-G, Inc. (Tri-G), retained defendant, Burke, Bosselman & Weaver (BBW), to prosecute a complaint against Elgin Federal Bank (Elgin Federal) that Tri-G had filed in 1981. On the day of trial on the 1981 complaint, the BBW attorney who was handling Tri-G's case claimed that he was not prepared to proceed. Accordingly, the trial court dismissed Tri-G's case with prejudice. I