 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ex parte Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 1030711,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A company's request for mandamus relief to prevent a lower court from compelling it to reveal its business plans was rendered moot where the opposing party agreed to a confidentiality agreement.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Keao, 1030674,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ex parte McCord, 1030429,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's mandamus petition was granted, and the trial court was ordered to set aside a transfer of venue; venue was proper, as an action against a nonresident individual could be brought in any county in which any claim was proper.
|
|||||
| Ex parte R.E.C., 1030022,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Intermediate court violated ore tenus rule in reversing trial court's finding that county human resources department did not prove sexual abuse by parents, which was supported by children's denials and recantations and mother's denials.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Williams, 1020034,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred when it found that an employer could not recover future medical and vocational expenses it would be required to pay the employee, from the proceeds of a settlement he reached with third-party tortfeasors who caused his injury.
|
|||||
| Finch v. State, CR-03-0569,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from an order to surrender his driver's license so that it could revoked by the Alabama Department of Public Safety was dismissed, as his only remedy in a mandatory revocation action was via a petition for writ of mandamus.
|
|||||
| Gore v. State, CR-03-1118,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because probation revocation proceedings were not initiated before the statutory maximum period of probation had expired, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to revoke appellant's probation.
|
|||||
| Grace v. State, CR-03-0565,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Payors of rewards given by a community "Crime Stoppers" program and the Alabama Governor's office were not victims under the Restitution Act. Thus, defendant could not be ordered to pay restitution to those payors.
|
|||||
| Holt v. State, CR-03-1010,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, August 27, 2004, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's petition for post-conviction relief was remanded based on defendant's claim that he was not properly informed by his counsel whether he was eligible to receive credit for incentive good time.
|
|||||
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. |
