|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
California - April 22, 2008
|
| |
|
| |
Edwards v. Edwards, B191035,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, April 22, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Application of the child support guideline formula would be unjust or inappropriate as contemplated by Fam. Code, ? 4057, subd. (b)(5); although the parties had agreed to share college expenses, their son received a full financial aid package, and neither parent had physical responsibility for him under Fam. Code, ? 4055, subd. (b)(1)(D).
|
|
| |
|
| |
People v. Figueroa, E041876,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, April 22, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The trial court did not err in finding that defendant's sentences for aggravated sexual assaults of a minor had to run consecutively to each other pursuant to Pen. Code, ? 667.6, subd. (d). Consecutive sentencing was mandatory under ? 667.6, subd. (d).
|
|
| |
People v. Margarejo, B196889,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, April 22, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a trial for evading police, the jury could infer that defendant had the specific intent to assist other criminal conduct by gang members for purposes of a gang enhancement under Pen. Code, ? 186.22, subd. (b)(1), because defendant acted like he wanted to help his gang when he repeatedly made gang signs to pedestrians and officers during a chase.
|
|
| |
People v. Selga, C055082,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, April 22, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In sentencing defendant for stalking his ex-girlfriend, a protective order for the girlfriend's current boyfriend should not have been imposed under Pen. Code, ? 1203.097, subd. (a)(2), because the current boyfriend did not have the required relationship with defendant, as defined in Fam. Code, ? 6211.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Van Keulen v. Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., B198388,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, April 22, 2008, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing an action brought against an airline, a foreign defendant, for failure to diligently prosecute in a foreign court, where, after the trial court had stayed the action on the basis of forum non conveniens, plaintiffs failed to file suit in the proper forum for over four years.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback