 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| DeLaura v. Beckett, A109948,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property owner, who sought declaratory relief against tenant, failed to explain why a procedure under city's rent ordinance, which would require tenant either to abandon or establish the validity of his claim to protected tenant status, did not sufficiently resolve owner's concerns.
|
|||||
| Doe v. Bakersfield City School Dist., F045480 ,,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff, who brought a petition under Gov. Code, § 946.6, of the California Tort Claims Act, demonstrated he was entitled to relief from the Act's claims-presentation requirements, where he presented undisputed evidence of circumstances giving rise to estoppel which occurred after the events identified in trial court's ruling denying relief.
|
|||||
| Guardianship of L.V., C046252,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Minor's parents were not entitled to have minor's guardianship terminated and minor returned to their custody on the basis that they were fit parents because they could provide adequate food, clothing, and shelter for minor; under Prob. Code, § 1601, minor's best interest was the sole criterion for termination of the guardianship.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Campbell, H028804,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a husband filed a motion under Fam. Code, § 4337, to terminate his temporary spousal support obligation on the ground his wife had remarried, the statute did not apply because the wife had attempted to remarry in another state while she was still married to the husband.
|
|||||
| Nunez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., No. B182381,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the Legislature intended former Lab. Code, § 4060 et seq., to remain operative for represented cases with a date of injury before January 1, 2005, as stated in Lab. Code, § 4062.2, subd. (a), a workers' compensation claimant who sustained a work-related injury in 2002 was not entitled to selection of a medical evaluator under new statutes.
|
|||||
| People v. Lee, F046238,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant and others coerced defendant's wife to bring drugs into a prison where he was an inmate, defendant was properly charged with, and convicted of, conspiracy to violate Pen. Code, § 4573.9, although only noninmates could be subject to increased penalties for the substantive offense of furnishing a controlled substance to an inmate.
|
|||||
| Progressive Concrete, Inc. v. Parker, D045798,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an employer's de novo appeal from an administrative award of unpaid sales commissions, the trial court did not err when it denied the employee's motion to dismiss the appeal by reason of the employer's failure to post an appeal bond because an undertaking under Lab. Code, § 98.2, subd. (b), was directory, rather than mandatory or jurisdictional.
|
|||||
| SJP Limited Partnership v. City of Los Angeles, B180220,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A bankruptcy lawyer's affidavit of fault was sufficient to relieve his client from judgment under Code Civ. Proc. § 473, subd. (b), even though the lawyer was not the attorney of record in the dismissed civil case, because the dismissal was caused by his incorrect legal advice that an automatic bankruptcy stay prevented dismissal of the civil case.
|
|||||
| Shamsian v. Department of Conservation, B184680,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, February 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly dismissed complaint alleging that the Department of Conservation failed to provide convenient, economical, and efficient beverage container redemption opportunities, as required by the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act, because Pub. Resources Code, § 14501, subd. (g), created no mandatory duty.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
