 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| RLI Ins. Co. v. MLK Ave. Redevelopment Corp., 1031282,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 17, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly held that an insurer was liable to a developer to specifically perform on its performance bond issued on a development project, and hire a new contractor to complete the work, as a construction contractor failed to perform its work in a good and workmanlike manner based on the developer's lost revenues and sales.
|
|||||
| Radford v. Radford, 2030960,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 17, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court abused its discretion in dismissing an inmate husband's divorce action based on his failure to prosecute by not attending a call docket as no evidence was to be presented at such a hearing and there was no indication that the court expected him to introduce evidence or that he was aware of what the court expected him to address.
|
|||||
| Riscorp, Inc. v. Norman, 1031514, 1031946,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, June 17, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Argument put forward by trust and stockholder was improperly made for the first time on rehearing and, therefore, presented nothing that warranted further review.
|
|||||
| Scott v. Scott, 2030459,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, June 17, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court properly stayed payment of a father's child-support arrearage pending the outcome of a disability action, which did not affect his current obligations, the latter were not waived. Further, without a trial court record, the father's claim that the trial court failed to submit the required child support forms was not assessed.
|
|||||
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. |
