 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cohen v. Brown, B206223,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, April 24, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney's filing a State Bar complaint against co-counsel, through the client in an underlying suit, was properly found to be extortion. Because the act was illegal, it was not a protected activity under Code Civ. Proc., ¿ 425.16, and did not support an anti-SLAPP motion to strike co-counsel's complaint arising from that activity.
|
|||||
| County of Sonoma v. Superior Court, A122450,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, April 24, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Law enforcement officers' union could not compel arbitration because Code Civ. Proc., ¿ 1299 et seq., by giving the board of supervisors only veto power over arbitration decisions, impermissibly intruded upon the county's authority under Cal. Const., art. XI, ¿ 1, subd. (b), to establish compensation and terms of employment for county employees.
|
|||||
| Estate of Earley, B209782,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 24, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which administrator of decedent's estate filed petition to admit a holographic will to probate, trial court properly found that petition was untimely under Prob. Code, ¿ 8226, subd. (c), where petition was filed more than five months after the determination of intestacy and more than three months after administrator discovered will.
|
|||||
| Iglesia Evangelica Latina, Inc. v. Southern Pacific Latin American Dist. of the Assemblies of God, B203800,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under neutral principles of law, a district council's assumption of control over a local church and conveyance of its property was improper. Rule of deference to ecclesiastical decisions, such as to the decision to demote the local church's status, did not require the court to ignore the local church's corporate form.
|
|||||
| In re Edward S., A118547,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Performance of a minor defendant's former counsel was deficient and prejudicial where counsel failed to investigate potentially exculpatory evidence, sought an inadequate continuance based on a mistake of law, and failed to move for a substitution of counsel knowing he was unable to devote time and resources necessary to properly defend the minor.
|
|||||
| Murphy v. Burch, S159489,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which plaintiff sought to quiet title to an easement along an access road, federal government's issuance of two land patents did not support implication government reserved a right of access over the property that was eventually conveyed to defendants while retaining the landlocked property that was eventually conveyed to plaintiff.
|
|||||
| Olvera v. El Pollo Loco, Inc., B205343,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The high degree of procedural unconscionability of an employment arbitration agreement as a whole, along with the substantive unconscionability of a class arbitration waiver, rendered that provision unconscionable.
|
|||||
| People v. Bonnetta, S159133,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Orders striking additional terms of imprisonment required or authorized by enhancement allegations were subject to reversal, where trial court did not set out reasons for striking the enhancements in an order entered upon the minutes, as required by Pen. Code, ¿ 1385, subd. (a), even though reasons appeared in the transcript of the proceedings.
|
|||||
| Sakaguchi v. Sakaguchi, B208353,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, April 27, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A wife's default judgment against her incarcerated husband was not void where service of process and service of the statement of damages were properly made because the wife served process on the litigation unit coordinator at the husband's prison in accordance with the procedures for service by mail set out in Code Civ. Proc., ¿ 415.30.
|
|||||
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. |
