LexisNexis
  

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.


   State Courts - Alabama - June 9, 2006

  
Munnerlyn v. Ala. Dep't of Corr., 1041492, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 9, 2006, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Driver's individual and class action claims filed against the Department of Corrections were properly dismissed, as it did not violate Ala. Code § 32-7A-4, part of the Mandatory Liability Insurance Act, by allowing an uninsured prison inmate to operate a state-owned vehicle and Ala. Code § 32-7A-5(2) exempted state-owned vehicles from the Act.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Robbins v. Robbins, 2050316, COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 9, 2006, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Because a husband failed to file his notice of appeal within 42 days of the date his Ala. R. Civ. P. 59 motion for postjudgment relief was denied by operation of law, it was untimely, forcing a dismissal of said appeal for a failure to invoke the jurisdiction of the appellate court.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Weeks v. Herlong, 1041506, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 9, 2006, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Appellants had preserved for review the question of whether the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of a prescriptive easement. Although the trial court had made no written findings of fact in its order, it had stated its reasoning in an exchange between it and appellants, which constituted findings of fact under Ala. R. Civ. P. 52(b).

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

  www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us
  CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.