 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brodie v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., S146979 S147030 C051409 C051790 C051894,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, May 3, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In apportioning a workers' compensation award under Lab. Code, §§ 4663, 4664, and consulting the tables in Lab. Code, § 4658, it was proper to use formula A, which apportioned to every current industrial disability of a given level the same compensation, irrespective of previous or nonindustrial disabilities.
|
|||||
| Fergus v. Songer, No. B182525,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, May 3, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: New trial order was erroneous in an attorney's action to collect a fee; the minute order was defective under Code Civ. Proc., § 657, because the grounds were not stated and the specification of reasons was not filed within 10 days, and the jury's reasonable fee verdict could not be set aside as against law because substantial evidence supported it.
|
|||||
| Hutton v. Hafif, B186084,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, May 3, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where client's malicious prosecution lawsuit met the statutory definition of a SLAPPback action in Code Civ. Proc., § 425.18, subd. (b)(1), an award of attorney fees in favor of attorney and law firm had to be reversed because attorney fees were not recoverable by a defendant who successfully filed a special motion to strike in a SLAPPback action.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
