 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bruns v. E-Commerce Exchange, Inc., B201952,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, March 23, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Repeated stays of discovery in an action alleging unsolicited fax advertisements were stays of the prosecution of the action, within the meaning of Code Civ. Proc., ¿ 583.340, subd. (b), and were subject to exclusion in computing the five-year period for bringing the action to trial under Code Civ. Proc., ¿¿ 583.310, 583.360.
|
|||||
| Hauselt v. County of Butte, C054927,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 23, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Reasonableness standard, not strict liability, applied to an inverse condemnation action under Cal. Const., art. I, ¿ 19, because the property owner alleged an increased discharge of water from a county's flood control activities into a watercourse historically subject to flooding; the trial court did not err in finding the county acted reasonably.
|
|||||
| M.L. v. Superior Court, No. B212274,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, March 23, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported a finding of exigent circumstances under Welf. & Inst. Code, ¿ 306, subd. (a)(2), to detain a newborn because the newborn was exposed to drugs during gestation and mother discharged herself within an hour of giving birth but reappeared next evening, was agitated, and revoked a report in favor of adoption agency.
|
|||||
| People v. Henry, B206420,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, March 23, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prying open the hood of a locked car that normally could not be entered without pulling a latch in the passenger compartment was an entry under the auto burglary statute, Pen. Code, ¿ 459. There was sufficient evidence of intent to commit a theft because defendant's car was the same make and model and defendant measured something under both hoods.
|
|||||
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. |
