 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| AT&T Corp. v. Faraday Capital Limited, No. 236, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's decision was reversed, where it held two stockholder lawsuits constituted one "Claim," and both claims were barred under insurance policies' prior litigation exclusions, as each pleaded cause of action may have constituted a separate claim. "Claim" meant demand for money damages or other relief, regardless of form in which presented.
|
|||||
| Dailey v. State, No. 490, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the grounds for an inmate's ineffective assistance of counsel claim had been addressed in his first postconviction motion, the motion court did not err in summarily denying his second postconviction motion without requiring a response from his counsel under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61(g)(2).
|
|||||
| In re Petition of Lewis, No. 618, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Having litigated the issue of a superior court's refusal to appoint substitute counsel for him in his direct appeal, an inmate could not use the mandamus writ process to attempt to argue the issue again; moreover, the inmate was unable establish a clear legal right to a new trial.
|
|||||
| Reid v. State, Case No. 0511019405,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant did not proffer any issues for consideration on appeal, and because there was substantial evidence to support a conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs and driving on the wrong side of the roadway, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 26(c), the appeal was without merit and counsel's motion to withdraw was moot.
|
|||||
| Reinbold v. Rooney, No. 257, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant-appellee was "occupier" under Guest Statute, Del. Code Ann. tit. 25, § 1501, as he was living with mother until he could save money to buy home and was contributing $100 per month for household expenses; that was his only residence, he was responsible for daily upkeep of his room, and his mother permitted him free use of premises.
|
|||||
| Spine Care Del., LLC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., C.A. No. 04C-04-264-JEB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Medical facility's summary judgment motion on the issue of waivers of defenses in an action against an insurance company was granted, because the company had waived the right to claim a defense to a facility fee because the company did not raise the defenses within the 30-day time frame of Del. Code Ann. tit. 21, § 2118B(c).
|
|||||
| Tekstrom, Inc. v. Savla, No. 464, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former worker was properly deemed an employee, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.S. § 203(e)(1), because the suing corporation failed to present any evidence at trial in its breach of contract suit that supported its claim that the worker was an independent contractor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
