 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Joy M., No. G029812.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, June 6, 2002, Decided , June 6, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dependency proceeding, it was not necessary for county to prove expert's qualifications, as father failed to object to admission of expert's report, and denial of reunification services based on report was proper.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Heggie, No. G027302.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, June 6, 2002, Decided , June 6, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of a motion to set aside a stipulated judgment in a dissolution was reversed because a superior court had no discretion to grant a motion to set aside a property division that was based solely on an imbalance or windfall theory.
|
|||||
| In re Nicholas H., No. S100490.,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, June 6, 2002, Decided , June 6, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where parent admitted he was not the child's biological father, but where he wanted the privilege and responsibility of fathering the child, and no one else wanted the child, presumption of fatherhood was not rebutted solely by parent's admission.
|
|||||
| Joe B. v. Superior Court, No. G030358.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, June 6, 2002, Decided , June 6, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The problem with father's petition for writ of mandate, in which the father sought an order providing him with reunification services with his daughter, was that the petition did not lie in addition to his appeal.
|
|||||
| People v. Sparks, No. S098290.,
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, June 6, 2002, Decided , June 6, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The definition of burglary included entry into the victim's bedroom with the specific intent to commit rape.
|
|||||
| Palestini v. General Dynamics Corp., No. D037590.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, June 7, 2002, Decided , June 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee's allegations that the employers knew but concealed that his physical problems were caused by carcinogenic chemicals, and that his injuries were aggravated by this concealment, were sufficient to state a cause of action.
|
|||||
| People v. Benavides, No. F037844.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, June 7, 2002, Decided , June 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order protecting privacy rights of former jurors did not alter procedures and law already in effect to ensure State's right to prompt prosecution and did not alter State's right to the finality of verdict; therefore, order was not appealable.
|
|||||
| People v. Garcia, C038797,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, June 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated and remanded because he was entitled to participation in a drug treatment program and the superior court was prohibited from including incarceration as an additional condition of probation.
|
|||||
| People v. Howard, F036961,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, June 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted of second degree murder for his flight from police in a stolen vehicle that caused a fatal collision. A violation of the relevant statute was an inherently dangerous felony that supported the conviction.
|
|||||
| Trahan v. Trahan, No. A095792.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, June 7, 2002, Decided , June 7, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the trial court's confirmation of the appraiser's determination of the fair value of a dissolved corporation's shares as the value upon piecemeal sale of the assets.
|
|||||
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. |
