 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., B198220,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, February 11, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Final adjudication on the merits of a widow's loss-of-consortium claim against a tobacco company resulted in a res judicata bar of the widow's subsequent wrongful death action for loss-of-consortium damages against the same company arising from the same injury to the widow's husband that was the basis of the widow's loss-of-consortium claim.
|
|||||
| Farm Raised Salmon Cases, S147171,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, February 11, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because California's laws regulating color additives and their labeling were authorized by 21 U.S.C. ¿ 343-1(a), they could be privately enforced in a consumer action against grocery stores that allegedly sold artificially colored farmed salmon without proper labeling; 21 U.S.C. ¿ 337(a) did not preempt the consumers' state law claims.
|
|||||
| Hammond v. County of Los Angeles, B189262,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, February 11, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where employee raised a triable issue with respect to her claims for race and age discrimination and retaliation, all in violation of FEHA, Gov. Code, ¿ 12900 et seq., summary judgment for county employer and supervisor was improper; there was evidence that supervisor's reduction of employee's teaching assignments was attributable to race and age.
|
|||||
| People v. Calvin, A111633,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 11, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prosecutor exercised peremptory challenges to excuse four African-American jurors on basis of individual responses to jury questionnaires, not on basis of attitudes he imputed to them as a consequence of their race. Skeptical views toward criminal justice system for which prosecutor challenged jurors were actually expressed by jurors themselves.
|
|||||
| People v. Ramirez, A115138,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 11, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the trial court, in finding that defendant violated his probation, exceeded its jurisdiction when it increased defendant's previously imposed, unexecuted sentence, defendant was not entitled to relief. Defendant forfeited his challenge to the order imposing the increased sentence by failing to seek a timely appeal from that order.
|
|||||
| Cohen v. Five Brooks Stable, A116938,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, February 14, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a personal injury suit alleging that a trail guide caused horses to gallop without warning, a release describing the risk that a horse could move unexpectedly did not clearly apply to a stable employee's negligent conduct in increasing a risk inherent in riding, and Civ. Code, ¿ 1654, required that the ambiguity be construed against the drafter.
|
|||||
| Grosset v. Wenaas, S139285,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, February 14, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Shareholder lacked standing to continue litigating a derivative action after he was compelled to sell his shares in a Delaware corporation as a result of a merger; under either Corp. Code, ¿ 800, subd. (b), or Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, ¿ 327 and Del. Ch. Ct. R. 23.1, a plaintiff in a derivative suit was required to maintain continuous stock ownership.
|
|||||
| People v. Reyes, B196415,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, February 14, 2008, 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. |
