 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hokes Bluff Welding & Fabrication v. Cox, 2070253,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court could not have found more recent accident caused new injury to employee, as medical evidence showed it caused recurrence of prior injury; since it did not produce injury to body's physical structure, as required by Ala. Code ¿ 25-5-1(7), his workers' compensation claim was barred by Ala. Code ¿ 25-5-80's two-year limitations period.
|
|||||
| J.L.P. v. L.A.M., 2070578,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's consent to adoption of his child by stepfather was required under Ala. Code ¿ 26-10A-7(a)(3)(d), even though he had not registered as a putative father because a court had previously declared him to be the father of the child, he had exercised visitation rights in his home, and he had paid child support to the child's mother.
|
|||||
| Jones v. State, CR-06-1596,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree, under Ala. Code ¿¿ 13A-4-3 and 13A-8-41, was affirmed because the evidence in the case was sufficient to support the conviction. However, the case was remanded for sentencing because the sentence imposed upon defendant fell outside the range prescribed in Ala. Code ¿ 13A-5-9.
|
|||||
| King v. Mills, CR-07-0171,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's order which ordered that a "sex offender" classification be stricken from an inmate's record, but which did not dispose of the inmate's claims for compensatory damages and punitive damages was not a final order and did not support an appeal because trial court did not certify the judgment as final pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
|
|||||
| Krawczyk v. State Dep't of Pub. Safety, 2070116,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's judgment reversing ALJ's decision was void and did not support an appeal because department's motion for rehearing was denied by operation of law 30 days after that motion was filed, and, as department's notice of appeal to trial court was filed more than 30 days after that date, it was untimely under Ala. Code ¿ 41-22-20(d).
|
|||||
| Laakkonen v. State, CR-06-0981,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State's application for rehearing was granted as, although defendant made a passing reference to the prosecutor's closing argument and quoted a jury instruction, he did not argue that they were reversible error in his original brief. The claim should not have been addressed under the Ala. R. App. P. 45B scope of review.
|
|||||
| Lewis v. State, CR-07-0072,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Case was remanded to trial court for hearing on defendant's motion to suppress statements to police as motion made during trial was timely. Ala. R. Evid. 104 made mandatory hearing on motion to suppress outside presence of jury.
|
|||||
| McConico v. State, 2070554,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment of the trial court was affirmed as an inmate failed to show how the postponement of a ruling on a prison health provider's summary judgment motion under Ala. R. Civ. P. 56(f) would enable him to rebut the provider's showing of the absence of a fact issue as to whether it employed two nurses.
|
|||||
| Price v. Clayton, 2070728 and 2070755,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, October 31, 2008, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was affirmed as defendant two did not file Ala. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) motion within reasonable time. Motion was filed six years after defendant two came into possession of trial judge's affidavit in support of law student; defendant did not claim affidavit could not have been discovered earlier, or explain delay in seeking judge's recusal.
|
|||||
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. |
