 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| People v. Vargas, E039738,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claim that Cruz waiver was not in effect when he committed robbery was rejected where, pursuant to Civ. Code, § 1636, 1638, it was apparent from terms set out in change of plea form, circumstances surrounding negotiation of plea, and parties' subsequent conduct that they intended Cruz waiver to remain in effect until actual sentencing.
|
|||||
| Reyes v. Van Elk, Ltd., B182068,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Undocumented employees had standing to sue under California's prevailing wage law, Lab. Code, §§ 1720-1861, because federal case law did not prohibit standing when claim was for work already performed. The Immigration Reform and Control Act did not preempt the prevailing wage law or statutes declaring immigration status irrelevant to labor claims.
|
|||||
| Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., B187743,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After paying $ 500,000 in indemnity, which was amount it was required to pay per occurrence, primary insurer had no further duty to pay for defense or indemnity in a suit against its insured regardless of potential coverage under successive policies; there was only one occurrence because the ensuing damage was the result of one cause: a landslide.
|
|||||
| Stone v. Davis, C051132,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, a California superior court had continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a child support order that was entered in 1997, where neither party had filed a written consent to transfer the matter to another state, and one of the parties still resided in California.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
