 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hernandez v. City of Pomona, B182437,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, April 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A federal jury's verdict in favor of a city and three of its police officers and a federal district court's judgment in favor of a fourth officer in a case brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 did not preclude the same plaintiffs from bringing a state law negligence action in state court against the same defendants based on the same facts.
|
|||||
| In re Fernando M., B184836,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, April 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile court applied incorrect test when evaluating the termination of the parental rights exception under Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(D), where it made no finding that child's grandmother was willing and able to adopt child and what impact threats to take the child from grandmother had on her initial unwillingness to adopt.
|
|||||
| People v. Castro, F046915,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, April 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an anonymous tip that defendant had said he was on his way to kill his wife led to an investigatory stop and defendant's arrest for possession of a firearm by a person with a qualifying prior conviction, the stop was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, U.S. Const., 4th Amend., because the danger to the wife was an exigent circumstance.
|
|||||
| Mineral Associations Coalition v. State Mining & Geology Bd., C049201,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 3805.5, subd. (d), which required the concurrence of the California Director of Department of Conservation before a lead agency could notify a mine operator that the operator had satisfied the conditions of a reclamation plan and was no longer required to post financial security, was a valid regulation.
|
|||||
| People v. Hinton, S037302,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| People v. Shabazz, S131048,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Vasquez v. State of California, D045592,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a taxpayer waste action, a union official was entitled to attorney fees pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.5, as a prevailing party because she obtained a stipulated injunction to enforce wage provisions of prison labor laws, the action vindicated a variety of important societal interests, and a significant benefit was conferred on the public.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
