 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carter v. Escondido Union High School Dist., D046833, D047649,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which teacher had informed athletic director that football coach had recommended nutritional supplement to student, Ed. Code, § 49423, could not form basis for teacher's wrongful termination action; statute did establish fundamental and well-established public policy against teachers recommending weight-gaining substances to students.
|
|||||
| Conservatorship of Tian L., D049033,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which the trial court reestablished a conservatorship pursuant to the California Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, the conservatee's due process rights were adequately protected, where the conservatee received a copy of the petition for reestablishment and at least two written notices of her right to a hearing and a jury trial.
|
|||||
| Diablo Valley College Faculty Senate v. Contra Costa Community College Dist., A108713,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Chancellor of the California Community Colleges properly found that a community college district was not required to consult with community college's academic senate before implementing an administrative reorganization because Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 53200, subd. (c)(6), did not require collegial consultation for management reorganizations.
|
|||||
| Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC v. NAK Sealing Technologies Corp., C050813,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the trial court's conclusion that a seller of oil seals breached the implied warranty of merchantability under Cal. U. Com. Code, § 2314, subd. (1), by providing seals that contained an abrasive material and caused damage to machines in which the buyer's customer installed them.
|
|||||
| Golden Eagle Ins. Corp. v. Cen-Fed, Ltd., B179851,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commercial general liability insurer owed neither a defense nor an obligation to indemnify the insured for damages awarded against it in an underlying action for breach of a commercial lease because the underlying complaint asserted only economic loss, not property damage, and the personal injury coverage was limited to claims by natural persons.
|
|||||
| People v. Brown, D047721,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's acts of attempted murder, attempted robbery, and assault with a deadly weapon did not arise from a single objective, the trial court did not violate the double-punishment prohibition contained in Pen. Code, § 654, when it imposed sentences on the convictions arising from those acts.
|
|||||
| Van Horn v. Watson, B188076, B189254,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a personal injury action arising from a single-car accident, the immunity provision of Health & Saf. Code, § 1799.102, did not apply to a friend who pulled a passenger from the car, purportedly fearing that it would catch fire or blow up, because the risk was not medical; § 1799.102 applied only to the rendition of emergency medical care.
|
|||||
| Zenith Ins. Co. v. O'Connor, B184684,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: General circumstances of a reinsurance contract under Ins. Code, § 620, did not create an attorney-client relationship between the ceding insurer's counsel and the reinsurer or a duty of care running to the reinsurer; hence, the trial court did not err in granting the law firm's demurrer in a professional negligence action brought by the reinsurer.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
