 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Amber R. v. Superior Court, G035611,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, May 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After termination of her parental rights, a mother lacked standing to petition for visitation and telephone contact with a child; she could not seek to be identified as an individual important to the child under Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.3, subd. (e), because only the social services agency and the child had standing to identify such persons.
|
|||||
| Drum v. Superior Court, E039264,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because "collateral order" rule respecting monetary sanctions awards continued to apply such that in limited civil cases orders for monetary sanctions not involving discovery were immediately appealable, and appellant failed to appeal such orders in timely fashion under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 122(a).
|
|||||
| People v. Lewis, E031035,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in instructing the jury that defendants, who caused a fatal car crash while fleeing from police, could be convicted of second degree felony murder based upon the predicate offense of violating Veh. Code, § 2800.2; such a violation was not inherently dangerous to human life because it could be committed without endangering life.
|
|||||
| People v. Saunoa, B185161,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, May 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court had no jurisdiction to retry defendant prior to issuance of a remittitur. The trial court's failure to wait for remittitur before conducting the retrial rendered all proceedings conducted prior to retrial, and their results, null and void.
|
|||||
| Ross v. Figueroa, B182738,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, May 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a domestic violence case, the contents of a TRO were consistent only with the conclusion the TRO was issued under Fam. Code, § 243, subd. (b), because it instructed the applicant that she had to serve respondent with a copy at least 5 days before a permanence hearing; thus, the trial court lacked discretion to deny respondent a continuance.
|
|||||
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. |
