LexisNexis
  
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 25 - February 26, 2008

  
Henry v. Superior Court, B200690, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, February 25, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Trial court erred in ruling that homeowners, sued by contractor for injuries suffered as a result of a fall on their property, could not introduce evidence that medical malpractice by hospital emergency room doctors, who were not parties to action, aggravated contractor's injuries because liability could be apportioned under Civ. Code, § 1431.2.3.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
In re Carl N., D050037, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 25, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Judgment committing defendant to California Youth Authority was upheld, where there was substantial evidence to show it was probable such commitment would benefit him, and a less restrictive alternative would be ineffective and inappropriate and would not adequately promote public safety or serve societal interest in punishment and rehabilitation.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Noble v. Draper, C053918, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, February 25, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
People v. Paredes, D050150, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Trial court committed reversible error in granting defendant's motion to vacate his voluntary manslaughter conviction, or in the alternative, to enforce a plea agreement defendant made with the People on the ground that such action was necessary to fulfill the plea bargain's promise of no deportation. There was no breach of the plea agreement.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Quihuis v. City of Los Angeles, B196367, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Real Estate Analytics, LLC v. Vallas, D049161; D049890, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: In an action for breach of a contract to sell a large parcel of commercial coastal property, refusing to grant specific performance was error under Civ. Code, § 3387, because the presumption that monetary damages were inadequate was not rebutted merely by the fact that the buyer's primary motivation was to quickly turn the property for a profit.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Searles Valley Minerals Operations, Inc. v. State Bd. of Equalization, D049905, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Utility companies' purchases of coal were not exempt from the use tax under Rev. & Tax. Code, §§ 6007, 6008, as property purchased for resale in the regular course of business because the coal was not incorporated into a final product within the meaning of Cal. Code Regs., tit. 18, § 1525, but functioned as a catalyst in producing electricity.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Taheri Law Group v. Evans, B192828, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, February 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Lawyer's claim against second lawyer for soliciting a client arose from protected activity within meaning of the anti-SLAPP statute because the action arose directly from communications about pending lawsuits and thus were communications in connection with an issue being reviewed by a judicial body under Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (e)(2).

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
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.