 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Lyons v. Chinese Hospital Assn., A107461,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, February 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contractor was entitled to attorney fees pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.5, in an asbestos exposure lawsuit because he prevailed on a significant issue by obtaining injunctive relief; moreover, because litigation costs far exceeded the estimated value of the case, the contractor lacked sufficient personal incentive to bring the litigation.
|
|||||
| People v. Rubics, D045636,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was involved in a felony hit-and-run accident in violation of Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a), that caused the victim's death, it was proper under Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (f), for the trial court to order defendant to pay the victim's funeral expenses because the victim suffered economic loss as a result of defendant's conduct.
|
|||||
| People v. Salas, S126773,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, February 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which jury had convicted two defendants for selling unregistered securities, in violation of Corp. Code, § 25110, one defendant was entitled to instruction on the affirmative defense of absence of guilty knowledge, but instructional error was harmless as to that defendant because there was overwhelming evidence of his guilty knowledge.
|
|||||
| Premier Medical Management Systems, Inc. v. California Ins. Guarantee Assn., B179325,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a complaint alleged anticompetitive activity based on petitioning to stay processing of workers' compensation bills and lien claims, these activities were in the exercise of the right to petition and fell within the Noerr-Pennington doctrine; hence, an anti-SLAPP motion to strike under Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, should have been granted.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
