 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Off Campus College Bookstore, Inc. v. Univ. of Ala., 1071426,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a university was absolutely immune from suit under Ala. Const. art, I, ¿ 14, and because a bookstore's attempted amendment to add a non-immune defendant was a nullity, the bookstore's action under Ala. Code ¿ 36-12-40 for information from the university was properly dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Parham v. Am. Bankers Ins. Co., 1070717,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no indication in the record that a court clerk entered an arbitrator's order as the judgment of the court, as required by Ala. Code ¿ 6-6-15, the order was void; accordingly, there was no final judgment from which the buyer of an extended warranty could appeal.
|
|||||
| Pearson v. State, CR-06-1022,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's claim--that his due-process rights were violated when the circuit court revoked his probation without conducting a probation-revocation hearing--raised a jurisdictional claim with sufficient specificity to satisfy the requirements of Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.3 and 32.6(b), the claim was not procedurally barred.
|
|||||
| Ray v. State, 1061459,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In prosecution for sexual abuse of child, evidence of defendant's juvenile adjudication or underlying incident involving sexual contact with child was barred by Ala. R. Evid. 609(d) and former Ala. Code ¿ 12-15-72(b). Completeness doctrine did not apply, as such evidence did not relate to subject matter of his testimony on direct examination.
|
|||||
| Robinson v. Baptist Health Sys., 2071172,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a medical malpractice case, given the admission by plaintiff's nursing expert that she was not qualified to express an opinion regarding the cause of bedsores, the trial court did not exceed its discretion in granting a hospital's motion to strike the expert's opinion testimony regarding the cause of a decedent's bedsore and its worsening.
|
|||||
| Shamburger v. Lambert, 2080218,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an occupant's failure to file a timely appeal under Ala. Code ¿ 6-6-350 was a jurisdictional defect that prevented the circuit court from acquiring jurisdiction over the appeal, and because adequate remedies were available to the occupant, the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to consider her petition for a writ of mandamus.
|
|||||
| State v. Alexander, CR-08-0408,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an indictment alleged that defendant obtained or exerted unauthorized control over a debit card with the intent to deprive the owner of the property in violation of Ala. Code ¿ 13A-8-4(c), the inclusion of an incorrect statement that the amount exceeded $ 500 was mere surplusage; accordingly, the count should not have been dismissed.
|
|||||
| State v. Toole, CR-07-2189,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court was clearly aware of the grounds of the State's objections to the dismissal of an indictment, and because the indictment tracked the language of Ala. Code ¿ 13A-8-194, defendant was placed on notice of the nature and cause of the charge against her; therefore, the trial court erred in dismissing the indictment.
|
|||||
| Washington v. Washington, 2070718,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 29, 2009, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not err in awarding primary physical custody of a son to a wife because its only consideration was the son's best interests, and there was sufficient evidence from which the trial court could have determined that both the wife and the husband were guilty of abusive behavior.
|
|||||
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. |
