 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Aman v. Gilley, 2031166,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While it was within trial court's discretion to award easement by prescription even though such relief had not been requested in counterclaim, trial court erred in granting such relief because neighbors' use of disputed property for 26 years as driveway was presumed to be permissive, and they did not present any evidence to rebut this presumption.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Exxon Mobil Corp., 1040538,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Oil company was entitled to an exemption from a county use tax under Ala. Code §§ 40-20-2(c) and (d), as said tax could not be imposed on materials, equipment, and supplies the company used to construct the platform and templates in Louisiana for the company's offshore drilling facilities.
|
|||||
| Favorite Mkt. Store v. Waldrop, 2031137,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Damages award in a customer's malicious prosecution suit against a retailer was reversed, as the customer failed to present sufficient evidence that the retailer's clerk lacked probable cause to believe that someone had stolen gasoline from the retailer's establishment, and that a car eventually traced to the customer was involved.
|
|||||
| Gary v. Crouch, 2040237,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly entered for police chief on defamation claim brought by lieutenant as lieutenant was public official and she did not show that chief acted with constitutional malice. Chief's concerns set forth in challenged letter had been relayed to lieutenant and she had not attempted to make chief aware of their falsity.
|
|||||
| Goldome Credit Corp. v. Burke, 1021072,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A creditor's yield spread premium not charged to or collected from a debtor, under a contract, but paid by a creditor to the creditor's assignor, was not "points," subject to a five percent limit in former Ala. Code § 5-19-4(g), and that limit was not exceeded. A broker was not a creditor, under § 5-19-4(g), so her fee did not constitute "points."
|
|||||
| Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Merchs. & Farmers Bank, 1031883,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In view of the undisputed facts that an insured acted in a deliberate and purposeful manner in asserting a contested claim to certain property and monies in an underlying action with one of its customers in pursuit of a debt, no accident was presented. Hence, no "occurrence" triggering its insurer's duty to defend occurred.
|
|||||
| Hous. Auth. v. Pritchett, 2030826,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Tenant did not waive right to ruling on new trial motion under Ala. R. Civ. P. 50(c)(1) as she raised issue of circuit court's failure to rule on motion before appellate court returned jurisdiction to circuit court with instructions to vacate judgment as matter of law for tenant; instead, circuit court was instructed to rule on new trial motion.
|
|||||
| Queen v. Harden, 2040594,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an executrix complied with the statutory requirements for timely filing a will contest under Ala. Code § 43-8-199, by alleging within six months after the will had been admitted to probate that she was the decedent's heir at law, the circuit court erred in dismissed her complaint under Ala. R. Civ. P. 12(b) on jurisdictional grounds.
|
|||||
| Rosser v. AAMCO Transmissions, Inc., 1040056,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, September 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants' Ala. R. Civ. P. 56(f) motion as they wished to develop indicia of apparent agency and indicia of apparent agency were irrelevant as appellants did not have advance notice that dealer was taking car to franchisee and did not have dealings with franchisee as agent of franchisor.
|
|||||
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. |
