|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
California - June 30, 2006
|
| |
|
| |
Craft v. Superior Court, G036155,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: No substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that defendant suffered no prejudice under Cal. Const., art. I, § 15, cl. 1, from a 17-month delay in bringing him to trial; he spent those 17 months in jail, and months of incarceration were unaccompanied by course of treatment that served as basis for trial court's suspension of proceedings.
|
|
| |
Farber v. Bay View Terrace Homeowners Assn., G036069, G036454,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: A condo seller's action was properly dismissed for lack of standing under Civ. Code, § 1354, subd. (a), because she attempted to enforce declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) when she no longer owned the condo; obligations she sought to enforce were obligations owed by homeowners association to buyer under CC&R's.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
People v. Failla, E038122,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: After denying a certificate of rehabilitation, trial court properly ruled that defendant had to wait five years from the date of denial to file another petition because that conclusion was a reasonable interpretation of Pen. Code, § 4852.11, which provided that the trial court could deny the petition and determine a new period of rehabilitation.
|
|
| |
Sierra Pacific Industries v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., C050589,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, June 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) guidelines were applicable, pursuant to Lab. Code, § 4600, subd. (b), to a case that was pending when § 4600, subd. (b), was enacted; hence, it was error to find chiropractic treatment for injured worker that did not comply with the ACOEM guidelines to be reasonable and necessary.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|