 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Advance Tank & Constr. Co. v. Gulf Coast Asphalt Co., L.L.C., 1031875,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a contract attachment expressly incorporated by reference a manufacturer's standard terms and conditions, which contained an arbitration provision, the arbitration provision was part of the contract; therefore, the trial court erred in denying the manufacturer's motion to compel arbitration.
|
|||||
| Blackwood v. City of Hanceville, 1041261,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although Ala. Code § 32-5A-7 gave a police officer the discretion to exceed the maximum speed limit so long as life or property were not endangered, until a jury decided if the officer's speed was reasonable or not, neither the officer nor the city was entitled to immunity under Ala. Code § 6-5-338(a) or summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Boyd v. State, CR-04-0936,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Ala. Code § 13A-2-6(b) codified the principal that ignorance or mistake of law was no defense and because defendant did not show that he was married to a victim of his prior sexual assault or owned the residence where they lived, defendant lacked standing to challenge Ala. Code § 15-20-26(a), (b) of the Alabama Community Notification Act.
|
|||||
| Bradford v. State, CR-04-1462,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant was properly convicted of violating Ala. Code §§ 13A-7-21(a)(1), 13A-12-231(1)(b), 32-5A-190(a) by repeatedly ramming a police car so that his brother could escape with approximately 154 pounds of marijuana, because the jury was instructed on reckless driving instead of reckless endangerment, his one-year sentence was illegal.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Atchley, CR-05-0234,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a trial judge did not dispute defendant's account of a confrontation or that she had represented him, pursuant to Ala. Canons Jud. Ethics 1, 3.C.(1)(a), E.(1), there was an appearance of impropriety and the judge was directed to recuse herself from presiding over defendant's murder trial.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Courtney, 1041897,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A new trial was properly granted to a passenger in her suit to recover damages for injuries she sustained in a car accident because the passenger's uncontradicted damages of $ 1,295 exceeded the jury's award of $ 1,113. Additionally, the jury's award gave no consideration to general damages for the passenger's pain and suffering.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Mitchell, CR-05-0374,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Ala. Code § 13A-6-2(a)(3), when finding whether a felony underlying felony murder was "clearly dangerous to human life," a fact-based approach was preferable as it was more consistent with the evolution of felony murder in Alabama, so a trier of fact would decide if unlawful distribution of a controlled substance could support felony murder.
|
|||||
| Fullenwilder v. State, CR-04-1211,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's car was illegally parked in front of a house known for drug activity and a police officer's background knowledge was legitimately included in determining whether there was a particularized suspicion that warranted further investigation, the Fourth Amendment was not violated; defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Gartman v. Limestone County Bd. of Educ., 2041018,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, February 3, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ala. Code § 16-24B-3(c), requiring a board of education terminating a contract principal's contract to vote to do so no later than 90 days before the school year's end, did not apply to probationary principals because, by reading all sections of Ala. Code § 16-24B-3 in harmony, the statute distinguished between contract and probationary principals.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
