 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS, F042614,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| PEOPLE v. ZIMMONS, B165437,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| PHASE 2 DEVELOPERS, CORP. v. CITICORP REAL ESTATE, B160111,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Powell, B168083,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly denied defendant's request for a jury trial because his attorney had the right to waive such a trial in the not guilty by reason of insanity commitment extension trial; defendant was properly removed from the trial.
|
|||||
| ROSA O. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY, G032904,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| SCHMUEL v. GROVER HOLLINGSWORTH & ASSOCS., B163193,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Simon v. Walt Disney World Co., Case No. F040732, Case No. F040879,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A theme park operator was not a common carrier with respect to its entire theme park; the operator was properly granted summary judgment in an action alleging that it discriminated against guests in offering cheaper tickets to nearby residents.
|
|||||
| URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL v. CITY OF SANTA BARBARA, B164886,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, January 8, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
