 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Freedman v. State Farm Ins. Co., B202617,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, May 5, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Homeowners' insurance policy that excluded third parties' negligent conduct and defective workmanship whenever they interacted with an excluded peril did not provide any coverage for contractor negligence in driving a nail through a pipe, which brought about the excluded perils of corrosion and continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water.
|
|||||
| In re R.M. & S.M., B210077,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, May 5, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was insufficient to support the dependency petition as to mother. Although mother's children admitted engaging in inappropriate sexual conduct with each other, nothing in the record supported the conclusion that mother inadequately supervised them, for whatever reason, or that mother should earlier have been aware of their conduct.
|
|||||
| Nicholls v. Holiday Panay Marina, L.P., B202356,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, May 5, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Absent evidence that any marina tenants lived on their boats, it was error to dismiss a tenant's complaint under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., on the ground that the marina was a residence and not a public accommodation under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a); it was a rental establishment under 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(E).
|
|||||
| People v. Torres, D052887,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, May 5, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insufficient evidence supported a conviction for driving while under the influence, Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a), because there was no evidence that defendant's methamphetamine use actually impaired his driving ability. Testimony that dilated pupils from such use could cause momentary blindness did not mean that defendant experienced blindness.
|
|||||
| Rosa v. Morrison Homes, Inc., Case No. 373059,
APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY, May 5, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Homeowners satisfied the requirements for class certification under Code Civ. Proc., § 382, in a construction defect action because the theories of recovery, which included breach of warranty, were amenable to class treatment and the record contained substantial evidence that common defects were alleged and that the parties were similarly situated.
|
|||||
| 321 Henderson Receivables Origination LLC v. Sioteco, F056205,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, May 6, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of petitions for approval of transfer of structured settlement payments under the Structured Settlement Transfer Act, Ins. Code, § 10136 et seq., was erroneous; Cal. U. Com. Code, § 9408, did not bar the transfers absent objection, the transfers were not usurious, and rulings on independent professional advice and disclosures were in error.
|
|||||
| Manhattan Loft, LLC v. Mercury Liquors, Inc., B211070,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 6, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting anti-SLAPP motion filed under Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, by lis pendens recorders where they had improperly recorded notices of pendency of action because no action in a court of law was pending at the time they filed the lis pendens; the notices of pending action were filed in connection with arbitration proceedings.
|
|||||
| Scotch v. Art Institute of California , G039830,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, May 6, 2009, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Disabled instructor did not have a claim against his employer under Gov. Code, § 12940, for failing to offer a reasonable accommodation after the instructor was disqualified from teaching upper division courses by not having a master's degree because giving the instructor priority in assigning lower level courses was not a reasonable accommodation.
|
|||||
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. |
