 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Callahan v. Artysiewicz, No. 542, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 22, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A wife's appeal from various decisions of the Delaware Family Court was premature where there was still a motion pending before that court regarding attorneys fees; accordingly, the Delaware Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to review the matter pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 42, as there was no final order, and dismissal was required.
|
|||||
| Dolphin Ltd. P'ship I, L.P. v. Gupta, Civil Action No. 2486-N, Civil Action No. 1956-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, January 22, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Two shareholders' derivative actions against various corporate directors and others were consolidated under Del. Ch. Ct. R. 42(a) as common questions of law and fact were present as to improper use of corporate assets and all legal theories largely relied on same set of allegations, particularly as to propriety of related-party transactions.
|
|||||
| FGC Holdings Ltd. v. Teltronics, Inc., Civil Action No. 883-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 22, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Holding company and its owner were entitled to an award of a portion of their attorney's fees after a chancery court ruled that a telecommunications company's behavior in not recognizing the owner as a director was either the result of subjective bad faith or a negligent, frivolous, and oppressive disregard of the rights of the holding corporation.
|
|||||
| Fonds de Regulation et de Controle Cafe Cacao v. Lion Capital Mgmt., LLC, Civil Action No. 1509-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, January 22, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute over corporate ownership, the court found that stock had been validly issued under Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, §§ 152 and 153. A director's testimony indicated that he believed that defendant had contributed services, which would constitute valid consideration, and minutes provided further evidence of the validity of the issuance.
|
|||||
| Daimlerchrysler Corp. v. Del. Dep't of Ins., C.A. No. 06A-11-005 MMJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 23, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal of administrative hearing officer's denial of holders' motions to, inter alia, participate as affected parties in proceedings was dismissed because denial of motion was interlocutory ruling. Under Del. Code Ann. tit. 29, § 10126, commissioner's decision, after consideration of hearing officer's recommendations, was final determination.
|
|||||
| Middlebrook v. State, No. 358, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 23, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was not an abuse of discretion to deny an inmate's postconviction relief motion for DNA testing of trial evidence, under Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 4504(a) (2001), because (1) multiple handlings contaminated the evidence, (2) testing would not prove the inmate's innocence, and (3) evidence from his trial was destroyed, leaving nothing to test.
|
|||||
| Nagy v. Town of S. Bethany, No. 289, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 23, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Sample v. Morgan, C.A. No. 1214-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, January 23, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a company shareholder's action, in essence a claim for breach of fiduciary duty, the company's directors' Del. Ch. Ct. R. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss was dismissed. A charter amendment and incentive plan authorizing the issuance of shares was approved by shareholders without disclosure that the entire bloc of shares would go to three directors.
|
|||||
| Tailgates, Inc. v. Baranowski, No. 235, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, January 23, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in allowing reputation testimony from a store manager and a police officer that there were fights at a bar parking lot and that it was a hot spot for trouble, as such did not tend to prove that the bar was negligent in allowing a patron to be injured inside the bar; the evidence was so prejudicial that a new trial was mandated.
|
|||||
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. |
