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 - May 26, 2000

  
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Manning, 1981621, SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, May 26, 2000, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Where appellee failed to show that store had either actual or constructive notice that boxes that fell on appellee were stacked in a dangerous manner, store was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

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

  
Walker v. State, CR-97-0719, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 26, 2000, Released
View this case - free  

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

  
Wheeles v. Wheeles, 2990217, COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 26, 2000, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: A husband should not have been ordered to pay alimony which was unreasonable and would financially cripple him; dependency exemption award to the wife was not an abuse of discretion; and discretion was given to award attorney fees.

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

  
Williams v. State, CR-99-0661, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, May 26, 2000, Released
View this case - free  

Overview: Because jury instructions expanded the method of proving offense of eluding an officer to include appellant when he was not a driver, jury instructions were in error. Because error was not harmless, conviction was reversed.

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  |  Contact Us
  Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.