 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Lackey v. Lackey, 2070603,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ala. Code § 30-3-169.4 of the Alabama Parent-Child Relationship Protection Act, Ala. Code § 30-3-160 et seq., was inapplicable to the issue of relocation on an initial custody determination; factors under Ala. Code §§ 30-3-169.2 and 30-3-169.3 were properly considered and the evidence supported a wife's relocation request.
|
|||||
| M.B. v. S. B., 2071105,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As there was no indication in the language of a custody modification judgment that a juvenile court had employed the McLendon standard in making its decision to transfer custody from children's maternal grandparents to their mother, the custody modification decision could not stand.
|
|||||
| Ryland v. Ryland, 2070146,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As a trial court failed to place academic restrictions on a husband's obligation to pay postminority educational support for the divorcing parties' son, who was attending college, that award could not stand; an equal division of marital property and an award of periodic alimony to the wife was proper in the circumstances.
|
|||||
| State v. King, 1071540,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it was clear that the State lacked authority under Ala. Code §§ 12-12-70(c), 12-22-91, and Ala. R. Crim. P. 15.7 to appeal from an adverse ruling in a criminal case, it was not entitled to seek mandamus review of a pretrial denial of its motion in limine; accordingly, defendant was entitled to mandamus relief.
|
|||||
| Stephens v. Huie, 2071144,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Injured vehicle passengers who filed a personal injury action against estates of decedents who owned and operated a vehicle involved in an accident had no right to file notices of lis pendens under Ala. Code § 35-4-131(a) against the decedents' real property, as their personal injury action sought monetary damages.
|
|||||
| Williamson v. Fourth Ave. Supermarket, Inc., 1070771,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 9, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed because post-judgment motions were denied by operation of law, pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 59.1, on Monday, January 14, 2008. Pursuant to Ala. R. App. P. 4(a)-(b), appellant had until February 25, 2008--42 days after January 14, 2008--to timely file a notice of appeal. The February 26, 2008, notice of appeal was not timely.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
