 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ex parte Crews, 1971253,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed regarding sentences, because trial court did not give reasonable time after giving notice of intended use of prior convictions; convictions were affirmed, because denial of Batson challenge was proper.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Dorough, 1980369,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court remanded condemnation case, because trial court did not address whether forfeiture of defendant's truck was grossly disproportional to the gravity of his alleged offense.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Employees' Retirement Sys. Bd. of Control, 1971724,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Respondents Employees' Retirement System Board of Control and Employees' Retirement System of Alabama were entitled to rely upon decedent's unambiguous benefits-election; the election could not be challenged posthumously.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Ledford, 1981374,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since record contained evidence defendant broker acted as a real-estate broker, and was not licensed, it was for the trier of fact to determine if he violated statute requiring licensing, and summary judgment was improper.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Smith, 1971580,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Given defendant's testimony that he had intended to murder victim, and other evidence, trial court was not required to instruct jury on intoxication defense, enabling jury to find that defendant lacked requisite intent.
|
|||||
| Ex parte State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 1981136,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In subrogation suit against alleged tortfeasors to collect reimbursement for coverage of home damaged by fire, insurer and insured could modify doctrine of subrogation by contract and bring suit before insured was made whole.
|
|||||
| Hill v. Chambless, 1980718,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment reversed; trial judge set the motion for hearing, but ruled without allowing the opposing party an opportunity to timely file a response to the motion as provided by rules of civil procedure.
|
|||||
| K.L.B. v. W.M.F., 2981221,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order of adoption was reversed when neither the probate court nor the juvenile court, to which the case was transferred to adjudicate the issue of abandonment, complied with the adoption statute.
|
|||||
| K.W. v. G.D., 2980905,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, January 21, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
