 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Herring v. State, No. 71, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant stole from a victim who was being held at knifepoint by a codefendant, this constituted a degree of robbery. Defendant was not entitled to a theft instruction, as theft was not a degree of robbery.
|
|||||
| In re Student Loan Corp. Derivative Litig., C.A. No. 17799,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because majority of directors were not impartial, demand was excused. Due to lack of impartiality, breach of loyalty was shown. However, transactions were not so one-sided to constitute waste of corporate assets.
|
|||||
| Peter C. Russo & J.P.'s Wharf v. Corbin, C.A. No. 01A-07-001 HDR,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, January 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State human rights commission decision awarding damages for denial of service in restaurant was affirmed where substantial evidence supported finding that restaurant's reasons for denying service were mere pretext.
|
|||||
| Rogers v. Elisabetta Props., Civil Action No. 2000-07-140,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Preponderance of evidence showed that former tenant failed to timely claim his property from the leased premises and/or to reimburse the landlord for the removal and storage expenses in a reasonable amount, and landlord properly disposed of property.
|
|||||
| State v. Ramos, Case No.: 0109021150,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the evidence consisted solely of fact witnesses, it was the court's duty to determine their credibility; it found that defendant was guilty of assault for intentionally scratching an officer's face and of resisting arrest based on her actions.
|
|||||
| CNA Holdings, Inc. v. Dir. of Revenue, C.A. No. 01A-03-001-SCD,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 9, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Taxation of sale proceeds that amounted to almost double taxation of recapture component of gain constituted unreasonable result. "Gain" was economic gain from sale of the property plus state depreciation.
|
|||||
| Jacobson v. Dryson Acceptance Corp., C.A. No. 17684,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 9, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Triable fact issues as to purpose of employee's transfer of funds to company and as to nature of real estate transaction precluded summary judgment on employee's claims for specific performance, breach of fiduciary duty, and an accounting.
|
|||||
| Moore v. State, No. 285, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 9, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant did not raise any of his due process objections to the trial court. The appellate court found no plain error with respect to any of his due process claims resulting from his violation of probation hearing.
|
|||||
| Pumphrey v. State, No. 4, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 9, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Hearsay rule was not to be applied mechanistically to defeat ends of justice, but there needed to be some corroboration of proposed hearsay to show its trustworthiness. Trial court properly excluded uncorroborated hearsay.
|
|||||
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. |
