 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Casarotto v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, C.A. No. 03C-06-018 JTV,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After a review of the costs submitted by an insurer to cover its medical expert witness fees and travel time, sought pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. Civ. P. 68, the court revised the costs requested, granting the insurer's motion with the revisions and in light of the Medico-Legal Committee's fee schedule for a neurologist.
|
|||||
| Clayton v. State, No. 396, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A photographic identification of defendant was not suggestive, and the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress since the photograph did not show either his braces or possible decay and the placement of the photograph as number one within the array was done at random by a computer.
|
|||||
| Davis v. Sussex County Planning & Zoning Comm'n, C. A. No. 05A-05-001 (THG),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal of the approval of a subdivision application was dismissed as the applicant was an indispensable party under Del. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 19(b), who could not be joined as the 60-day period in Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 8126 had long since passed.
|
|||||
| Hirneisen v. Champlain Cable Corp., No. 211, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in denying spouse death benefits under § 2330 as spouse met statutory conditions and there were no exceptions for employees who had retired or had received pension benefits. Although her husband had retired and had failed to seek disability benefits, she had independent entitlement to death benefits.
|
|||||
| In re Johnson, ID No. 9806008595 (R3),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's third motion for postconviction relief was procedurally barred under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61(i)(1), (2), and (4) where it was three years too late, it was repetitive, and it raised claims regarding ineffectiveness of counsel and admission of a photograph that had been previously adjudicated.
|
|||||
| In re Snow, Civil Miscellaneous No. 11548-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A father was a disabled individual under Del. Code Ann. tit. 12, § 3901, and one of his sons and his wife were appointed equal co-guardians. The evidence showed that there was a danger that designing persons would take advantage of the father, as he had 12 surviving children with competing concerns and bad blood among various family factions.
|
|||||
| Krafchick v. State, No. 124, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Nichols v. State, No. 28, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Sudler v. State, No. 412, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
