 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Eagerton v. Second Econ. Dev. Coop. Dist., 1030667,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contract between a county and a development district regarding the financing of industrial park violated Ala. Const. art. XII, § 224, as amended by Ala. Const. amend. 342, because it created an absolute debt at once, which was payable over many years out of future collections of existing tax revenues otherwise destined for county's general fund.
|
|||||
| Ex parte R.D.N., 1030864,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's ex parte communications with a child's guardian ad litem, and reliance upon her ex parte recommendation, that a mother retain custody violated the father's fundamental right to procedural due process under Ala. Const. art. I, § 13 and U.S. Const. amend. XIV.
|
|||||
| Lary v. Flasch Bus. Consulting, 2040125,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's ruling, essentially granting judgment on the pleadings against a doctor upon his allegations that businesses violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, specifically 47 U.S.C.S. § 227(b)(1)(A)(i) and 227(b)(1)(C), was reversed, as the doctor's amended complaint presented actionable violations.
|
|||||
| Lary v. Gardener, 2030761,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Injured party's admission that car had no market value did not negate essential element of negligence or wantonness claims or demonstrate that evidence was insufficient to establish essential element of his claims even though car was damaged when it was struck by driver and injured party's insurer had declared car total loss due to prior flooding.
|
|||||
| Lary v. Genelex Corp., 2040128,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McKissack v. State, 1031511,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As grand jury proceedings were secret under Ala. Code § 12-16-214, assuming court could order preservation of grand-jury testimony in some cases, it did not reversibly err in refusing to preserve investigator's grand-jury testimony, as defendant failed to show likelihood of inconsistencies between investigator's grand-jury and trial testimony.
|
|||||
| United States Steel Corp. v. McBrayer, 2030368,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 4, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred by awarding a former employee TTD benefits under Ala. Code § 25-5-57 for: (1) the period when he worked full time; (2) the period when he was disabled by non-work-related conditions; and (3) the period after he was released by his doctor to return to work, even though he had not yet reached maximum medical improvement.
|
|||||
| Ex parte McConathy, 1031542,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, March 5, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the State failed to establish a link between $ 8,000 in a property owner's possession and the drugs he had recently purchased, and it was undisputed by the State that said amount represented proceeds from a real estate closing the owner recently participated in, the State failed in its burden to obtain said funds via a forfeiture.
|
|||||
| Rudolph v. Philyaw, 2040098,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, March 5, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a motion to set aside a default judgment entered against three landowners made no allegations of a meritorious defense or that their neighbor would not be unfairly prejudiced if the judgment were set aside, and they failed to assert that entry of said judgment was not the result of their own culpable conduct, said motion was properly denied.
|
|||||
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. |
