 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alpha Therapeutic Corp. v. Home Ins. Co., B134257, B135081, B138225, B138843,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, July 25, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where blood processor was sued for distributing contaminated blood and was denied coverage by excess insurers, court misapplied anti-stacking rule and facts were insufficient to establish carriers could have no obligation to indemnify processor.
|
|||||
| Estate of Guidotti, No. B145085.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A clause in a husband's testamentary trust restraining wife's future relationships was void as a restraint on marriage.
|
|||||
| Gursey, Schneider & Co. v. Wasser, Rosenson & Carter, B142728,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN, July 25, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Public policy did not bar accountant's indemnity suit against lawyer who represented same client at same time, where client first sued lawyer and accountant for malpractice but malpractice suit against lawyer was barred by statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| James 3 Corp. v. Truck Ins. Exch., No. H020687.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insurer had the right to control the defense it provided to its insured provided there was no conflict of interest; plaintiffs' action for declaratory relief was properly dismissed on summary judgment.
|
|||||
| McIntyre v. Santa Barbara County Employees' Ret. Sys., No. B144038.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The county retirement board fulfilled, rather than breached, its fiduciary duties when it retained staff, lawyers and doctors to represent it at petitioner's benefit hearing. Petition for writ of mandate was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Panico v. Truck Ins. Exch., No. G024336.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting insurer's motion for nonsuit, where trial court appeared to have been misled by the absence of any offer of proof of a structural defect submitted by insured consistent with the concept of imminent collapse.
|
|||||
| People v. Ashburn, C036029,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, July 25, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant motorist was not entitled to the suppression of evidence found in his car during an impound search, the officers's reliance on a DMV record fell within the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.
|
|||||
| People v. Hardacre, No. B143800.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court had the discretion to deny sexually violent predator's request for appointment of an expert in preparation for a show cause hearing, and it did not err when it declined to set the matter for a full hearing.
|
|||||
| People v. Hutchins, No. A092450.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, July 25, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a sentencing appeal following defendant's conviction for a gang-related murder, the judgment was modified to strike a two-year enhancement, and to order that defendant not be paroled until he had served a minimum of 15 years.
|
|||||
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. |
