|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
California - February 23, 2007
|
| |
Dyer v. Martinez, G037423,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Real property claimant's lis pendens did not provide constructive notice to opposing claimant under Code Civ. Proc., § 405.24, where it was not indexed at time opposing claimant took his interest in property and thus could not have been located by a diligent title search; as a result, opposing claimant took his interest free from claim.
|
|
| |
People v. Duarte, C049554,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant conspired to use his minor son to transport cocaine in violation of Health & Saf. Code, § 11353, subd. (b), because son's presence, in estimation of defendant and coconspirators, would have enabled defendant to avoid detection; there was no doubt that defendant's taking son with him as he transported cocaine would have endangered son.
|
|
| |
Reedy v. Bussell, G036327 (Consol. with G036328, G036329, G036330 & G036331),
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the trial court's decision to grant motions for terminating sanctions under former Code Civ. Proc., § 2023, in consolidated probate cases, based on failure to produce documents or respond properly to discovery and an attempt to take additional depositions during a trial recess while misrepresenting their nature.
|
|
| |
Yoo v. Jho, B189586,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Due to the illegal object of a contract between a buyer and a seller, i.e., the sale of a business dealing in counterfeit goods, which both parties had knowledge of, a trial court erred in entertaining buyer's action and in awarding any relief to buyer because the illegal object of the contract precluded any recovery pursuant to Civ. Code, § 1608.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|