 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Akhlaghi v. Orange County Superior Court, G038800,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because submission of false Social Security numbers did not amount to making a false financial statement under Pen. Code, § 532a, subd. (1), their submission was likewise insufficient to support a conspiracy to make a false financial statement; the dismissal of the substantive charges meant that the conspiracy charges could not be maintained.
|
|||||
| Bilafer v. Bilafer, A117381, A118093,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trustor of two irrevocable trusts had standing, although he was not a beneficiary and had no pecuniary interest, to petition for reformation under the trial court's common law equitable power, preserved by operation of Prob. Code, § 15002, to reform an irrevocable trust on the ground that a drafting error had defeated the trustor's intentions.
|
|||||
| Cook v. Orange County Superior Court, G040100,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of state party official's action to prevent congressional candidate from using title of "mayor" in her ballot designation was required where secretary of state was an indispensible party, but had not been named real party in interest or respondent; secretary had interest in subject matter of action because it affected way she did her job.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. Paramount Citrus Assn., Inc., F050528,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case arising out of an accident that occurred at a point where farm road and public road intersected, landowner did not owe duty to plaintiff arising from nonpermissive, negligent use of its property by third party. Landowner did not owe a duty to place a warning on its farm road alerting drivers to approaching intersection with public road.
|
|||||
| In re Singler, C054634,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of parole to an inmate convicted of second degree murder was an abuse of discretion under Pen. Code, § 3041, subd. (b), because the evidence demonstrated that he was sincerely remorseful and had excellent work habits and an exemplary disciplinary history; dumping the victim's body in a rural area did not make the crime especially heinous.
|
|||||
| People v. Sutton, B195337,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's right to a speedy trial under Pen. Code, § 1382, was violated, where defendant never waived time and the sole reason given for continuance was unavailability of codefendant's attorney and justification for continuance trial rested squarely on the preference for a joint trial, even though case was relatively straightforward and simple.
|
|||||
| Plumas County Child Services v. Rodriquez, C055005,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Fam. Code, § 3951, subd. (a), a mother of an 18-year-old child was not obligated to compensate relatives for the voluntary support of her child, who began living with the relatives full time while he finished his senior year in high school, without an agreement for compensation.
|
|||||
| State Water Resources Control Bd. Cases, C055104,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Private environmental groups that acted in concert with public water agencies in obtaining mandamus relief against the State to require implementation of a water flow plan for protection of salmon were entitled to receive attorney fees under Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.5, even though the agencies might have succeeded without their assistance.
|
|||||
| Travis v. Board of Trustees of California State University, B196907,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, March 26, 2008, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State university trustees did not violate California's Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, Gov. Code, § 11120 et seq., when they met in closed session to discuss a former chancellor's controversial decision to return from a lengthy leave of absence and assume a teaching post; the personnel exception in Gov. Code, § 11126, subd. (a)(1), was applicable.
|
|||||
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. |
