 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| DePalma v. Rodriguez, B190062,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the general substance of defense expert's opinion at a deposition was that one would not expect plaintiff to have suffered any injury arising from a low speed automobile accident, the expert's subsequent testimony at trial regarding the lack of any expectation of specific knee or shoulder injury resulted in no unfair surprise for plaintiff.
|
|||||
| El Dorado Meat Co. v. Yosemite Meat & Locker Service, Inc., F049334,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After a defense judgment in an illegal business practices case, the trial court did not err in awarding a large amount of costs for preparation of exhibits because the presentation of several years' worth of business data and the labor to create the exhibits were reasonably necessary within the meaning of Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (c)(2).
|
|||||
| Hollywood Screentest of America, Inc. v. NBC Universal, Inc., B187256,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which plaintiffs sued a broadcaster for, inter alia, misappropriation of property, none of plaintiffs' causes of action could survive a motion for summary judgment, where the broadcaster presented undisputed evidence of independent creation, thus preventing a finding that the broadcaster used plaintiffs' ideas.
|
|||||
| Imagistics International, Inc. v. Department of General Servsices, C051385,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Brandy R., G037792,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Orr v. City of Stockton, C050196,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As filing of petition to preserve evidence under Code Civ. Proc., § 2035.010 et seq., did not constitute filing of a suit for purposes of satisfying Gov. Code, § 945.6, subd. (a)(1)s statute of limitations, plaintiff's action against city was time-barred; he failed to file suit within limitations period following notice of his claim's rejection.
|
|||||
| People v. Ranger Ins. Co., G036803,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, May 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a surety's motion to extend the 180-day exoneration period under Pen. Code, §§ 1305, 1305.4, because the surety made only minimal efforts to locate the defendant; the surety obtained a probable address in Mexico but did nothing more to investigate until after the exoneration period expired.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
