 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bunkers Glass Co. v. Pilkington PLC, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-02-0140-PR, Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-02-0175-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, August 25, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arizona Antitrust Act provision that permitted a "person" to sue to redress an antitrust injury did not restrict the right of action to direct purchasers injured by violations of the Act or preclude indirect purchasers from suing.
|
|||||
| State v. Prince, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-00-0328-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, August 25, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judge's unconstitutional imposition of death penalty against defendant was not harmless, as there was evidence from which jury could have found that aggravating circumstance was not established and that mitigating circumstance was established.
|
|||||
| Citizens Telcoms. Co. v. Ariz. Dep't of Revenue, 1 CA-TX 02-0017,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT T, August 26, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred when it granted summary judgment to Arizona Department of Revenue against regional telecommunications company on the issue of whether property of the company and local carriers, as comparison taxpayers, was functionally equivalent.
|
|||||
| Maricopa County v. Barfield, 1 CA-CV 01-0438,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, August 26, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of summary judgment to patient's law firm and insurer for third-party tortfeasor, liable to patient for his injuries, was correct: county could not enforce healthcare lien against either defendant, as they were not responsible for injuries.
|
|||||
| Shamrock v. Wagon Wheel Park Homeowners Ass'n, 1 CA-CV 02-0403,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, August 26, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mandatory membership in newly created homeowners' association could not be imposed on residents of existing subdivision, where deed restrictions to that effect did not exist during relevant time period and summary judgment for lot owners was proper.
|
|||||
| State v. Story, 1 CA-CR 02-0363,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, August 26, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions for possession of dangerous drugs and possession of drug paraphernalia together constituted defendant's first strike under Proposition 200, and the trial court erred in designating each offense as a separate strike under Proposition 200.
|
|||||
| State v. Torres, 1 CA-CR 02-0278, 1 CA-CR 02-0279 (Consolidated),
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, August 28, 2003, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A superior court erred in declining to consider defendant's request for new counsel, as the court was required to protect defendant's right to adequate legal representation by conducting an inquiry into the basis for the request.
|
|||||
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. |
