 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Sherman Indus. v. Dark, 2060369,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As officers failed to revoke their agreement to guaranty their corporation's debts according to the guaranty agreement's terms, and there was genuine issue of material fact as to whether a creditor acquired the guaranty agreement from its predecessor, the officers were not entitled to summary judgment in the creditor's suit against them.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, CR-06-0957,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was improperly sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment for second-degree assault under Ala. Code § 13A-6-21 as second-degree assault was a Class C, not a Class B, felony and the sentencing range for a Class C felony was not more than 10 years or less than 1 year and 1 day under Ala. Code § 13A-5-6(a)(3).
|
|||||
| Springfield Missionary Baptist Church v. Wall, 2060239,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was reversed as affidavit stated that when neighbor cleared his property, he tore down a fence that church claimed had been used as boundary-line marker, and there were fact issues as to existence and location of the fence, and whether church had adversely possessed under Ala. Code § 6-5-200 portion of neighbors' property.
|
|||||
| Staples v. State, CR-05-1923,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeals court declined to address defendant's various ineffective assistance of counsel claims, as the trial court failed to render specific findings of fact on each of the grounds that were argued in the hearing on the motion. Thus, the matter was remanded for the trial court to make such findings and conduct any additional proceedings necessary.
|
|||||
| State Dep't of Revenue v. Hoover, Inc., 2060142,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where Alabama's high court had held that Ala. Code § 40-23-4(a)(11) violated the Commerce Clause, collateral estoppel barred Alabama Department of Revenue from assessing sales taxes against same taxpayer in subsequent tax years under § 40-23-4(a)(11), as the controlling facts and applicable legal rules remained the same as in the prior litigation.
|
|||||
| Upshaw v. State, CR-06-0134,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court was not required to conduct Faretta inquiry before allowing defendant to participate in hybrid form of self-representation in which counsel continued to assist defendant because defendant's role was limited; counsel presented opening and closing arguments, cross-examined all State witnesses and conducted defendant's direct examination.
|
|||||
| Waldrop v. State, CR-05-1370,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Woods v. State, CR-05-0448,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The evidence was insufficient to sustain defendant's conviction as an accomplice pursuant to Ala. Code § 13A-2-23, and his capital murder convictions were affirmed. The State established that defendant and a co-defendant had engaged in a hostile, profanity-laced argument with officers on the morning of the subject shootings.
|
|||||
| Woody v. State, CR-06-0621,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 31, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
