|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
California - January 17, 2008
|
| |
Amtower v. Photon Dynamics, Inc., H030386, H030477,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 17, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a suit involving a corporate merger, trial court properly dismissed a claim under ? 11 of federal Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. ? 77k, by former president of the acquired corporation; the claim was barred by statute of limitations as a matter of law, and there was no evidence that president could produce that would change that result.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Nguyen v. Nguyen, G038705,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 17, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a case in which a candidate, after an election contest, sought to be declared the winner of an election for a county supervisorial seat, Elec. Code, ?? 15627 & 19253, permitted paper ballots to be recounted manually while electronic ballots could be recounted electronically, notwithstanding the candidate's argument to the contrary.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Sheller v. Superior Court, B190479,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 17, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: No authority existed for trial court to order attorney appearing pro hac vice under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40, to pay attorney fees to opposing party or to formally reprimand him; court had inherent authority to revoke his pro hac vice status in, at least, any circumstance in which it could disqualify California attorney from particular case.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback