 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| PEOPLE v. SANTANA, A102282,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| PEOPLE v. SINGLETON, D042452,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| PEOPLE v. TILLMAN, B163495,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Barragan, S105734,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A retrial of a strike allegation against defendant was permissible and not barred by the Due Process Clause, the law of the case doctrine, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
|
|||||
| People v. Johnson, S113803,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a recall of defendant's sentence, already in progress, did not change defendant's postsentence status for purposes of calculating credits, although defendant was temporarily in local custody, he was not entitled to presentence credits.
|
|||||
| RUBEN H., SR., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Real Parties in Interest., B170382,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| STEVEN DUNCAN et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. WASTE MANAGEMENT INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent., A098450,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Scott v. Metabolife Internat., Inc., C041029,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 29, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Manufacturer's anti-SLAPP motion to strike consumer's personal injury complaint was properly denied because gravamen of personal injury causes of action was injury sustained from allegedly defective product, not assertion of First Amendment rights.
|
|||||
| THE PEOPLE Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TYRONE LEE, Defendant and Appellant., F041991,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, January 29, 2004, 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. |
