 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alesi v. Bd. of Ret., No. D033709.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A claim seeking recovery of industrial disability retirement benefits was denied, because plaintiff's disability arose from a preexisting medical condition and was merely aggravated by his employment-related injury.
|
|||||
| Cal. State Auto. Ass'n Inter-Ins. Bureau v. Parichan, No. A081931.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Legal malpractice verdict affirmed where law firm's negligence caused insurer's exposure to a potential bad faith lawsuit, not merely exposure on the underlying personal injury claim; "case within a case" theory did not apply.
|
|||||
| In re Rubisela E., No. B137665.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's daughter was dependent because of his molestation of her, and her sister was dependent because of this abuse, but there was no demonstration of substantial risk of abuse to their brothers, so they were not dependent.
|
|||||
| Lester v. Lennane, Nos. C030662, C031941, C032406.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neither statute nor constitution allowed an appeal from interlocutory, temporary custody orders. Father failed to demonstrate that it was an abuse of discretion to order joint legal custody with mother having primary physical custody.
|
|||||
| Lolley v. Campbell, B136276,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX, October 31, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: California's Labor Code plainly required employee to incur attorney fees in order to recover them. Because employee was represented by Labor Commissioner free of charge, employee's request for fees was properly denied.
|
|||||
| People v. Harvest, No. A087494.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In murder case, victim restitution did not constitute punishment for double jeopardy purposes, and trial court's method of computing restitution was restrained and logical.
|
|||||
| People v. Ortega, No. A087932.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to strike one of appellant's convictions. Issue of double punishment under Three Strikes Law was not present until appellant committed another crime in the future.
|
|||||
| Sessions Payroll Management v. Noble Constr. Co., No. B128565.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in awarding attorney fees to defendant in third-party beneficiary breach of contract claim. Plaintiff had no independent right to recover fees under contract; thus defendant was not entitled to fees.
|
|||||
| Stony Brook I Homeowners Ass'n v. Superior Court, No. D035245.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prior to giving a deposition in a personal injury case, expert was not required to provide precise information about the number of cases in which he had testified or the amount of compensation he received.
|
|||||
| Walt Rankin & Assocs. v. City of Murrieta, No. E024139.,
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, October 31, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City breached a duty to subcontractor to require surety providing a payment bond prerequisite to receiving a public contract to be an admitted surety insurer or to confirm the sufficiency of the surety prior to accepting the bond.
|
|||||
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. |
