 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dabbs v. Four Tees, Inc., 2060493, 2060494, and 2060495,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property owners' consolidated appeal from a judgment requiring them to pay a worker $ 30,000 was dismissed because the judgment was not a final judgment; the circuit court's judgment did not address the property owners' counterclaim against the worker, or the worker's and mortgage company's claims against each other.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Essary, 1060458,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs' wantonness claim failed, as their allegation that defendant made a "rolling stop" at an intersection and then accelerated in front of plaintiffs' vehicle did not elevate defendant's conduct from a negligent failure to exercise good judgment to a wanton act constituting reckless indifference to a known danger likely to inflict injury.
|
|||||
| Ex parte Wilson, 1051697,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Furth, Fahrner & Mason, P.C. v. Etherton, 1060628,
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where trial court had approved settlement agreement and attorney fee award in class action case, while reserving jurisdiction over those matters, it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over a subsequent suit filed by law firms aggrieved by the disposition of the attorney fees; therefore, writ of mandamus issued ordering it to dismiss second suit.
|
|||||
| Gordon v. State, CR-06-1258,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because appellant's claim that he did not appeal his convictions (for assault, rape, sodomy, and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle) through no fault of his own could be meritorious, the circuit court erred in not addressing it. The case was remanded to the circuit court for specific, written findings of fact.
|
|||||
| Jacks v. Taylor, 2060455,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a boundary dispute between a property owner and neighbors, the property owner did not prove adverse possession under Ala. Code § 6-5-200, because his use of the disputed area was neither hostile nor exclusive; however, credible evidence supported the trial court's determination that the boundary line was an old cattle lane fence.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. State, CR-06-0455,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the circuit court failed to address petitioner's claim that his failure to appeal within the prescribed time was through no fault of his own, and because the claim was sufficiently pled under Ala. R. Crim. P. 32.3 and 32.6(b), the court had to remand the case for the circuit court to address the merits of the claim.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. State, CR-06-1357,
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While defendant's convictions for violations under the Community Notification Act, Ala. Code § 15-20-20 et seq., were upheld, his sentence for a violation of Ala. Code § 15-20-23(a) was reversed, as such exceeded the maximum allowed by law for a Class A misdemeanor. Thus, resentencing as to this count was ordered on remand.
|
|||||
| Kaufman v. Kaufman, 2060245,
COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF ALABAMA, November 2, 2007, Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the wife was precluded by the invited error doctrine from challenging the trial court's order on remand dividing the marital property of the parties and awarding the wife both periodic alimony and alimony in gross, said orders were upheld. Further, the wife failed to support her claims of error with specific citations to the record.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
