 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Deakle v. Childs, 2040595,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A complaint amendment alleging that a decedent was not of sound mind when she signed a deed in an action to set aside the deed for fraud did not prejudice defendants; the issue was the decedent's capacity when she signed the deed. Whether the deed was void as to one defendant for lack of delivery was a factual question of the decedent's intent.
|
|||||
| Ernst & Young, LLP v. Tucker ex rel. HealthSouth Corp., 1040643, 1040689, 1041367,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's order referring cases to arbitration did not improperly reserve jurisdiction over matters that were, under applicable arbitration agreement, specifically within authority of arbitrators; litigation of arbitrability questions in trial court meant parties were collaterally estopped to relitigate same issues before arbitration panel.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Jones, Morrison, Womack & Dearing, P.C., 1040961 and 1041197,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyers had no right to certiorari to review decision reversing a judgment for them on client's third-party indemnification claim against them; filing third-party complaint was sufficient notice to lawyers as potential indemnitors, and fact that client settled malicious prosecution case against it did not moot its appeal from judgment for lawyers.
|
|||||
| G.W. v. Dale County Dep't of Human Res., 2050075,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a mother brought a common-law petition for certiorari against State Department of Human Resources (DHR), the circuit court had no subject matter jurisdiction. Under Ala. Code § 38-2-1 et seq., the State DHR was a department of statewide jurisdiction subject to review only from a circuit court in the county of its principal place of business.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. City of Auburn, 2031010,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment as to a utility and a cable company on property owners' claims of conspiracy and trespass as the utility's prescriptive easement only extended to installation of electric cables, so the utility could not grant the cable company to right to install fiber optic cables on poles by apportionment.
|
|||||
| Peoples Cmty. Bank v. Helms, 2040631,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 7, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in ruling that a bank did not have a security interest in vehicles, as bank "gave value" under former Ala. Code § 7-9-203(1) when it agreed to extend credit to an auto dealer and when it made advances to the dealer under that agreement, and agreement unambiguously provided that all of dealer's inventory was subject to agreement.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Scrushy, 1050574,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 12, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court improperly stayed employee's arbitration, which was provided for by arbitration clause in parties' agreement for employer to indemnify employee, and it improperly ordered employee to dismiss requests for arbitration; order was contrary to Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C.S. § 2, and was void, so mandamus relief was warranted.
|
|||||
| Scrushy v. Tucker, 1050564,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 12, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In shareholder derivative suit, as officer's alleged breach of duty in accepting improper bonuses from corporation was a separate breach that was not alleged elsewhere in the complaint, shareholder's unjust enrichment claim, on which he was granted partial summary judgment, was a separate claim that supported Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b) certification.
|
|||||
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. |
