 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ala. State Bar v. Hallett, 1071419, 1071486,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The finding of a panel of the Board of Disciplinary Appeals of the Alabama State Bar that a lawyer charged a clearly excessive fee, contrary to Ala. R. Prof. Conduct 1.5(a), did not clearly err because his position that his fee was due upon signing a fee agreement was tantamount to charging a nonrefundable retainer, which was forbidden in Alabama.
|
|||||
| Bon Harbor, LLC v. United Bank, 1070902, 1070994,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court's grant of partial summary judgment did not dispose of all the claims, and because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant an amended motion for summary judgment while its first order was on appeal, the appellate court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over either appeal.
|
|||||
| Cotten v. St. Bernard Preparatory Sch., 2080291,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a personal injury action a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether an injured craft vendor was an invitee of a school. A genuine issue of material fact also necessarily existed regarding whether the duty owed by the school to her was the duty owed to an invitee or a licensee. Summary judgment in favor of the school was reversed.
|
|||||
| Dulaney v. Dulaney, 2080052,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ex parte Lankford, CR-08-0376,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was an abuse of discretion to grant the State's motion to quash subpoenas issued to the alleged victim and her mother for defendant's preliminary hearing because under Ala. Code §§ 15-11-6 and 15-11-8 and Ala. R. Crim. P. 5.2 and 5.3, defendant had the right to subpoena witnesses for his preliminary hearing if their testimony was relevant.
|
|||||
| Haynes v. Coleman, 2070959,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, April 10, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Teacher's malicious prosecution action against an employee failed because the employee did not initiate the underlying administrative termination proceeding against the teacher. That proceeding was, instead, initiated by the superintendent pursuant to Ala. Code § 16-24-9. Malicious prosecution required that the defendant initiated a proceeding.
|
|||||
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. |
