 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Frederick T. B. v. Danita G., File No. A-524, Petition Nos. 98-05173 and 98-05909,
FAMILY COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, February 10, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because daughter was in her mid-teens, and her wishes regarding her living arrangements were well founded, court found that they should have been respected. Daughter continued to reside primarily with the father.
|
|||||
| In re 244.5 Acres of Land, C.A. No. 98C-02-021,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, February 10, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff had not exhausted the procedures for determining whether a taking had occurred, an inverse condemnation proceeding was required before it could have brought an unconstitutional taking without just compensation action.
|
|||||
| Meekins v. Barnes, No. 381, 1998,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, February 10, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of medical malpractice action for negligent diagnosis was proper; statute of limitations began to run on date of negligent diagnosis, not on date six months later when defendants should have reexamined plaintiff.
|
|||||
| State v. Goldsborough, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, February 10, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A defendant who committed series of unlawful sexual conduct with children was not entitled to a bill of particulars for precise information of which he was aware and which was readily available to him.
|
|||||
| State v. Shaia, Criminal Action Nos. 99-03-0615, et seq.,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, February 10, 2000, Date Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court granted defendants a new trial; despite juror assurances they would decide case only on evidence properly admitted at trial, the jury had been given court clerk's trial notes during deliberations.
|
|||||
| State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. A.H. Angerstein, Inc., C.A. No. 98-12-0104,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, KENT, February 11, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because plaintiffs could not establish an agency relationship between the defendants, they could not prevail on their negligence claim, and the court entered judgment on behalf of the defendants.
|
|||||
| State v. Block, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, February 11, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not entitled to a bill of particulars because the information presented at defendant's preliminary hearing provided him with the information he would have received in such a bill.
|
|||||
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. |
