 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cacho v. Boudreau, S133378,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ordinance allowing mobilehome park owners to pass through property taxes to residents was not preempted by California's Mobilehome Residency Law because separate charges for governmental assessments and fees allowed under Civ. Code, § 798.49, subd. (a), could be included as a component of rent within the meaning of that term in Civ. Code, § 798.31.
|
|||||
| In re Player, D047042,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State prison inmate who was removed from a credit-qualifying work assignment as a result of a disciplinary finding that was later vacated was entitled to favorable behavior points under Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15, § 3375.4, subd. (a), for periods as to which he was awarded "S" time under Cal. Code Regs., tit. 15, §§ 3045.3, 3043.6, subd. (c)(2).
|
|||||
| Kurwa v. Harrington, Foxx, Dubrow & Canter, LLP, B187363,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a tortious interference action by a doctor against lawyers representing the doctor's associate, a letter from the lawyers to the president of an HMO was not of public interest under Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute, because the letter concerned a private matter as to who would reap the benefits of a provider agreement.
|
|||||
| Nicole K. v. Superior Court, C053987,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dependency proceeding, orders terminating reunification services and scheduling a permanency hearing had to be vacated because notices under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) were inadequate in that they were sent to an incorrect address. Limited remand was not appropriate because different standards would have been applied under ICWA.
|
|||||
| Org. of Women Architects & Design Professionals v. Health Net of Cal., A108832 & A109222,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Rappaport-Scott v. Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club, B184917,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Facts alleged in insured's complaint were insufficient to state a claim for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing where underinsured motorist claim by insured was for first party coverage; because a genuine dispute existed as to amount payable on her claim, insurer's withholding of benefits due under policy was not unreasonable.
|
|||||
| Samples v. Brown, A112343, A112594,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which a citizen challenged statutory provisions pertaining to impoundment of vehicles, the statutory phrase "mitigating circumstances" in Veh. Code, § 14602.6, subd. (b), was not unconstitutionally vague on its face. The mitigating circumstances standard was reasonably specific and certain when viewed in context.
|
|||||
| Zembsch v. Superior Court, A114157,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, January 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
