 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| ArvinMeritor, Inc. v. Johnson, 2061104,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was improper to find that an employee was disabled due to an occupational disease and to award him workers' compensation benefits because he failed to present substantial evidence of legal causation under Workers' Compensation Act, Ala. Code ¿ 25-5-110. An expert's opinions did not contribute toward his burden with respect to causation.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Green, 1070388,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court's ruling affirming denial of Ala. R. Crim. P. 32 postconviction relief motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel was error; affidavit supporting search warrant was glaringly defective for not including method to assess search warrant's timeliness and, thus, reasonably effective counsel would have challenged search warrant.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Lawson, 1060206,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed as subcontractor's materialman's lien took priority over subsequently created mortgages under Ala. Code ¿ 35-11-211 as elements for equitable subrogation were not met since mortgages were not made to developer, or to extinguish prior encumbrance. Lenders had constructive notice of lien under ¿ 35-11-211.
|
|||||
| Franklin v. Etheridge, 2060962,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Case was remanded for determination with certainty of outstanding balance of indebtedness owed by mortgagor on mortgage as judgment providing that mortgagor owed "at least" $ 32,433.99 was not final as it did not make clear whether $ 32,433.99 was extent of mortgage balance owed by mortgagor to mortgagee.
|
|||||
| Greener v. Killough, 2061199,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because under Ala. R. Civ. P. 43(a), the trial court was not within its discretion to allow a doctor to testify by telephone, the entire testimony of the doctor was inadmissible. Thus, the trial court committed reversible error in the guardianship proceeding and the matter had to be remanded.
|
|||||
| M.B.L. v. G.G.L., 2070271,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed with instructions to trial court to vacate void judgment awarding custody of child to father as trial court lacked jurisdiction under Alabama Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act since Florida court had not relinquished its continuing jurisdiction over divorce case involving custody of child.
|
|||||
| Marshall v. Cook, 2070184,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed as parent lacked standing to challenge approval of final consent settlement of conservatorship estate under Ala. Code ¿ 26-5-12 as he did not have individual interest in outcome of accounting of or reimbursement to estate, and did not have injury to any legally protected rights.
|
|||||
| Morrison v. Morrison, 2070136,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court failed to adjudicate a husband's claim for permanent support and maintenance, pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b), the judgment was nonfinal; accordingly, the wife's appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Stanfield v. Stanfield, 2061090,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed as default judgment should have been set aside under Ala. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) even though husband failed to fully abide by pendente lite orders, as doctor averred that husband missed scheduled divorce trial because he was suicidal and had been hospitalized; husband's conduct was not willful, or in bad faith.
|
|||||
| State Dep't of Revenue v. Wells Fargo Fin. Acceptance Ala., Inc., 2061148,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, July 18, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court should not have granted partial summary judgment to credit companies asserting they could seek refund of sales tax paid to retailers, which retailers paid to department, and which was later found to be uncollectible; under Ala. Admin. Code r. 810-6-4-.01, only retailers could seek refunds and credit companies were not retailers.
|
|||||
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. |
