 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| INTERQUEST CORP. v. SHUWA INVS. CORP., B175799,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Dannenberg, S111029,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeal erred in holding that parole board had to set fixed date for parole release unless crime was particularly egregious compared to other offenses of the same class. Board only had to consider dangerous implications of crime individually.
|
|||||
| In re I.G., Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law, A105340,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re J.L., Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law, C050412,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re SHACHAR, D042346, D043648,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| LLP MORTG. v. BIZAR, B172072,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| LPP Mortgage, Ltd. v. Bizar, B172072,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mortgage company, as the assignee of a promissory note made to the United States Small Business Administration, was entitled to use the federal statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C.S. ¿¿2451(a), in pursuing its action against the borrowers to collect on a promissory note; the action was timely and the company was entitled to summary judgment.
|
|||||
| MADERA COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF'S ASS'N v. MADERA COUNTY CIV. SERV. COMM'N, F045077,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| MORRISON v. PRUNTY, D043566,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
