 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bridget A. v. Superior Court, B195282,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, March 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile court's authority at a Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.22, hearing was broad enough to continue family maintenance services after returning children to parental custody; hence, the juvenile court erred by terminating jurisdiction without determining whether continued court supervision was necessary to ensure the children's safety.
|
|||||
| California Statewide Communities Development Authority v. All Persons Interested etc., S124195,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, March 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Bond financing agreements benefiting pervasively sectarian religiously affiliated schools could be found valid in an inquiry under Cal. Const., art. XVI, § 5, if the schools offered a broad curriculum in secular subjects and provided information and coursework that was neutral with respect to religion.
|
|||||
| People v. Giles, S129852,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, March 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a trial for defendant's murder of his ex-girlfriend, it did not violate the Confrontation Clause to admit the ex-girlfriend's testimonial statement to police regarding a prior incident of domestic violence because under the equitable doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, defendant forfeited his right to confront the victim when he killed her.
|
|||||
| Hasso v. Hasso, G036369,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Finding that funds distributed to a marital trust by a subchapter S corporation of which trust was a shareholder were to be allocated to income was proper; distribution to trust did not result from a partial liquidation of distributing entity based on greater than 20 percent distribution to gross assets ratio, Prob. Code, § 16350, subd. (d)(1)(B).
|
|||||
| People v. Matye, C050332,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a trial for defendant's abuse of his 60-year-old mother, the evidence was sufficient to show that the mother was a dependent adult within the meaning of Pen. Code, § 368, because a stroke had some impact on her mental abilities and caused partial paralysis. Restrict was not synonymous with preclude but was only a limitation or restraint.
|
|||||
| People v. Perez, C051800,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's proposed statement of reasonable grounds for appeal, which raised the issue of his competency to stand trial, was frivolous because there was no evidence that defendant was unable to understand the nature of the proceedings or to assist counsel in his defense.
|
|||||
| People v. Sun, G035328; G036443,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in dismissing nine counts in indictment charging violations of Pen. Code, § 12020, subd. (a)(2), possession of large-capacity magazines, because the dismissal was effected by court's merging 10 counts of violating § 12020 into one count, which was in direct contradiction to statutory authority of Pen. Code, § 12001, subd. (l).
|
|||||
| Ulloa v. McMillin Real Estate & Mortgage, Inc., D048066,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which home sellers cross-complained against real estate company for fraud and related counts, the trial court properly excluded evidence pertaining to real estate agent's signing of a sales agreement on behalf of one of the buyers. As a matter of law, there was no causal connection between agent's conduct and sellers' damages.
|
|||||
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. |
