 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adams v. Aerojet-General Corp., No. C031323.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court improperly disqualified lawyer from toxic tort case based on presumption of imputed knowledge; matter remanded for inquiry into nature and extent of lawyer's involvement with former firm's earlier representation of defendant.
|
|||||
| Cherry v. Superior Court, No. B144293.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 7, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court was not precluded by principles of double jeopardy, res judicata, or law of the case from conducting a retrial on remand to determine whether petitioner's prior assault conviction qualified as a strike under state Three Strikes law.
|
|||||
| Drouet v. Superior Court, A092016,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 7, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Retaliatory eviction defense was not available to tenants evicted in unlawful detainer proceedings initiated by landlord under Ellis Act, but landlord was subject to monetary consequences for retaliation after the eviction.
|
|||||
| Manduley v. Superior Court, D036356, D036456,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 7, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Statutory amendment permitting prosecuting authority, in its discretion, to file certain criminal accusations against juveniles in either adult court or juvenile court was unconstitutional under separation of powers doctrine.
|
|||||
| People v. Quinn, No. B139439.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, February 7, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Statute allowing involuntary commitment of mentally retarded persons had no requirement that the defendant's dangerous condition be caused by mental retardation, but only that defendant was dangerous and mentally retarded.
|
|||||
| People v. Thang Van Bui, No. C029902.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's criticism of expert testimony went to weight, not admissibility. Testimony concerning effects of methamphetamine was based upon research generally accepted in scientific community. Evidence was admissible.
|
|||||
| Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court, No. H021144.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Peremptory challenge to case management judge was timely as 15-day time limit for direct calendar courts did not apply. Parties knew who would hear motion more than 10 days before hearing and challenge was filed more than 5 days before hearing.
|
|||||
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. |
