Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

plaintiffappealmotionrespondentappellant
plaintiffappealmotionrespondentappellant

Related Cases

Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. v. Porterfield, 16 Ohio St.2d 158, 243 N.E.2d 72, 45 O.O.2d 486
View Case »
Lanning v. Pilcher, 16 So.3d 294, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D1727
View Case »
Ouachita & M.R. Packet Co. v. Aiken, 121 U.S. 444, 7 S.Ct. 907, 30 L.Ed. 976
View Case »
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Town of Hyde Park, 47 F.3d 473, 31 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1471
View Case »
Standard Oil Co. v. Peck, 342 U.S. 382, 72 S.Ct. 309, 96 L.Ed. 427, 26 A.L.R.2d 1371, 1952 A.M.C. 442, 63 Ohio Law Abs. 559, 47 O.O. 81
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

In the Matter of T-Mobile Northeast, LLC, petitioner/plaintiff-appellant, v. Anthony V. DeBellis,, nan

Facts

The petitioner/plaintiff-appellant sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals regarding a decision and order made by this Court on October 26, 2016. This decision was in response to an appeal from an order and judgment entered by the Supreme Court, Westchester County, on November 18, 2013.

The petitioner/plaintiff-appellant sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals regarding a decision and order made by this Court on October 26, 2016.

Issue

Whether the petitioner/plaintiff-appellant should be granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Whether the petitioner/plaintiff-appellant should be granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Rule

The court reviews motions for leave to appeal based on the merits of the arguments presented in support and opposition.

The court reviews motions for leave to appeal based on the merits of the arguments presented in support and opposition.

Analysis

The court considered the arguments and evidence presented in both support of and opposition to the motion for leave to appeal. After careful review, the court found no sufficient grounds to grant the motion.

The court considered the arguments and evidence presented in both support of and opposition to the motion for leave to appeal.

Conclusion

The motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied.

The motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied.

Who won?

The respondent prevailed in the case as the court denied the petitioner's motion for leave to appeal.

The respondent prevailed in the case as the court denied the petitioner's motion for leave to appeal.

You must be