 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Am. Cont'l Ins. Co. v. Am. Casualty Co., No. B138343.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer's action for equitable contribution from another insurer following the settlement of a medical malpractice suit was properly dismissed for failure to state a claim; second insurer had no obligation to defend insured in suit.
|
|||||
| Calfarm Ins. Co. v. Wolf, No. C033885.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where passenger in car hit by drunk driver made a claim through his own uninsured motorist policy, and driver of car in which passenger rode paid claim, passenger could also make claim on his own uninsured motorist policy.
|
|||||
| Century City Medical Plaza v. Sperling, No. B133901.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in rejecting arbitrator's final award and confirming original award without first conducting evidentiary hearing to determine, under proper legal standard, that final award's confirmation was not justified.
|
|||||
| Coors Brewing Co. v. Stroh, No. C031851.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Writ of mandate denied to beer company challenging prohibition against cash promotions of alcoholic beverages; a cash prize fell under the prohibition against awarding any premium or free goods in connection with such promotions.
|
|||||
| Downen'S, Inc. v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelopment Agency, No. B132012.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Statute authorized litigation expenses to appellants for inverse condemnation action and litigation expenses for petition for writ of mandate to enforce their judgment arising out of the inverse condemnation action.
|
|||||
| Hale v. S. Cal. Ipa Medical Group, No. B137947.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In order to bring a shareholder derivative suit against multiple defendants, plaintiff was only required to furnish a $ 50,000 bond.
|
|||||
| Hill Med. Corp. v. Wycoff, No. B134869.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Covenant not to compete entered between medical corporation and doctor was void and unenforceable, as the covenant did not fall within a narrow exception set forth in the California Business and Professions Code.
|
|||||
| Kinney v. CSB Constr., Inc., No. A089737.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: General contractor did not owe subcontractor's employee a duty in tort to correct conditions arising solely from subcontractor's conduct. General contractor did not affirmatively contribute to creation of the hazard.
|
|||||
| People v. Allen, No. B136331.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's conduct of opening an unlocked passenger door and thereafter lifting a trunk latch was insufficient to support a conviction for burglary.
|
|||||
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. |
