 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Aicco, Inc. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., No. A092096.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Demurrer to unfair competition claims was abuse of discretion; insurer had transferred policy obligations to new division of parent company and disclaimed responsibility without policyholders' consent, and sent deceptive notices.
|
|||||
| Cwynar v. City, No. A089841.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: On review of an order sustaining a demurrer to a takings claim, the appellate court determined that sufficient facts existed to support plaintiffs'' claim that a city ordinance was a taking of their property without just compensation.
|
|||||
| Musser v. Provencher, A088934,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, July 10, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice case against co-counsel, attorney's settlement with client did not bar her from seeking equitable indemnity from her co-counsel.
|
|||||
| Finnegan v. Schrader, Nos. A088188, A089476.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a state employee's appointment violated state conflict-of-interest law he was required to disgorge all compensation he received under his employment contract.
|
|||||
| In re Lance V., No. F037282.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order changing mother's visitation was stricken where hearing was held to solve mediation issues regarding visitation. Mother had no notice that visitation would change, and no opportunity to refute unsworn assertions or present evidence.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Duncan, No. D033482.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Valuation of capitol investment business as of date of parties' separation was proper where overwhelming evidence showed husband was largely responsible for success of business.
|
|||||
| Prof'l Eng'rs in Cal. Gov't v. State Pers. Bd., No. C028402.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Program to promote state workers as "career executives" was constitutional in general, but regulations that did not require "competitive," i.e., ranked, examinations for appointments or transfers exceeded statutory authority.
|
|||||
| State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Pietak, No. C028694.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an insurance action, as insured's counsel was misinformed by an erroneous point of law, insured was entitled to relief from the consequences of a dismissal.
|
|||||
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. |
