|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
California - January 8 - January 9, 2007
|
| |
August Entertainment, Inc. v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., B184276,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Directors and officers policy issued under Corp. Code, § 317, subd. (i), did not cover corporation's contractual debt or officer's liability for breaching a contract because breach of contractual obligation asserted did not give rise to a loss caused by a wrongful act within meaning of policy; thus, insurer was not liable for underlying settlement.
|
|
| |
|
| |
In re James F., B188863,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, January 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In dependency proceedings, the juvenile court committed reversible error, regardless of the strength of the evidence supporting a termination of parental rights, because it appointed a guardian ad litem for the father under Code Civ. Proc., § 372, without explaining the consequences. The error was structural and did not require a harm analysis.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Neilson v. City of California City, F049143,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Redevelopment agency interpreted Health & Saf. Code, § 33031, subd. (a)(4), erroneously when it found that a lack of legal and physical access to a right-of-way meant that vacant lots were of irregular form and shape; access did not determine the regularity of a lot's form and shape for purposes of a blight finding under § 33031, subd. (a)(4).
|
|
| |
|
| |
Schatz v. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP, D047347,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a case involving an attorney fee dispute between a client and a law firm, the client was entitled pursuant to Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6204, to a trial de novo and was not bound by the binding arbitration provision of his retainer agreement with the firm, even though the client had signed a prospective waiver of trial after arbitration.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|