 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Progressive Specialty Ins. Co. v. Univ. of Ala. Hosp., 2041124,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 21, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in determining hospital lien statute, Ala. Code § 35-11-370, applied to moneys due to a patient as the result of a contractual undertaking such as an insurance policy; despite insurance company's claim, the language of that statute did not show statute was limited to recovering from proceeds of tort action or settlement.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 1041960,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, July 21, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Ala. Code § 32-7-23, underinsured-motorist coverage provided in Florida policy could be "stacked" with underinsured-motorist coverage provided in Alabama policies; Florida agent was aware mother primarily resided in Alabama and mother presented sufficient evidence indicating policy and premium notices were sent to Alabama address.
|
|||||
| State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Alexander, 1041809,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, July 21, 2006, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A motor vehicle insurer and its agent were entitled to judgment as a matter of law in an allegedly injured party's fraud action because there was no substantial evidence that they misrepresented the coverage status of an insured vehicle on the date of the injured party's accident to the injured party's attorney or the attorney's secretary.
|
|||||
| State v. Moore, CR-04-0805,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's retrial was not barred by Double Jeopardy Clause because first proceedings were terminated when circuit court granted motion for a new trial, not a motion for a mistrial; even if a mistrial and a new trial were functionally equivalent there was no error, as there was no indication prosecutor's actions were intended to provoke mistrial.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
