 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Crowhorn v. Boyle, C.A. No. 00C-02-032-JRJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 2, 2002, Submitted , January 2, 2002, Bench Ruling Issued; March 14, 2002, Written Opinion Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor's causation opinion was excluded where it did not come close to being the product of a scientifically valid methodology or applicable to the facts at hand.
|
|||||
| Silverman v. Shahan, C.A. NO. 00-10-022,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, January 2, 2002, Submitted , January 2, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a breath test could not have been done at the police station where the driver was requested to take one, his refusal to take it after being advised of the penalties for such refusal were sufficient to order suspension of his license.
|
|||||
| State v. Costango, ID No. 0003008658,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 2, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion for postconviction relief was summarily dismissed, where defendant appeared to be seeking a modification of his sentence, as a motion for postconviction relief was not the appropriate vehicle to seek such modification.
|
|||||
| Wessells v. Am. Int'l Group, C.A. No.: 01A-05-003-RSG,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 2, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Physician's testimony supported industrial accident board's denial of workers' compensation benefits for claimant's elbow injury. However, denial of compensation for aggravated shoulder injury was not supported by substantial evidence.
|
|||||
| Baxter v. State, No. 492, 2000,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 3, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where trooper discovered a concealed weapon in defendant's car, trooper had probable cause to search entire vehicle for concealed weapons. Trial judge was not biased for ruling against defendant on a motion to suppress.
|
|||||
| Eden v. Dunckel, No. 111, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 3, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly declined to follow a therapist's recommendation as to visitation; it was not an abuse of discretion to expand visitation slightly to afford the mother an equivalent amount of visitation as she previously enjoyed.
|
|||||
| Holmes v. Wooley, No. 113, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 3, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Each of best interests factors listed in Delaware custody statute was to be independently considered and then given its due weight and importance relative to other factors in a manner reflecting best interests of the child.
|
|||||
| In re Aquila, Inc. S'holders Litig., Consolidated Civil Action No. 19237,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 3, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Delaware court refused to enjoin tender offer by former parent to reacquire shares of former wholly owned subsidiary; shareholders failed to show likelihood of prevailing on merits, or any potential inequity.
|
|||||
| Jacobs v. City of Wilmington, Civil Action No. 18679,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 3, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Non-mandatory traffic accident reports were specifically exempted from public disclosure. As such, they were not public records subject to disclosure under Delaware Freedom of Information Act.
|
|||||
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. |
