 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ramunno & Ramunno, P.A. v. Gary S. Nitsche, P.A., C.A. No. 08C-03-037-JRJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 23, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Giery v. Stover Homes, L.L.C., C.A. No. 08C-04-146 JAP,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A subcontractor sued by an employer's employee for injuries sustained on a job site could not obtain contribution or indemnification against the employer because (1) Del. Code Ann. tit. 19, § 2304 exclusivity barred the employer's liability, and (2) no contract or special relationship between the subcontractor and employer allowed indemnification.
|
|||||
| Matthews v. Food Lion, L.L.C., No. 306, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment to a company in an action for negligent supervision and retention of an employee was affirmed. The question whether the workers' compensation "exclusivity rule," Del. Code Ann. tit. 19, § 2304, barred the claim was not properly before the court; injuries occurring outside the scope of employment were not governed by the statute.
|
|||||
| Stevens v. State, No. 482, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officer's stop of defendant's vehicle for a noise ordinance violation did not violate the Fourth Amendment because, although the officer was unable to recite the noise ordinance verbatim, he knew that it contained a 50-foot standard, and, since the officer heard defendant's music from 300 feet away, he had proper grounds to stop defendant.
|
|||||
| Tecot Elec. v. Curtis-Howett, C.A. No. 08A-05-009 JAP,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of motion to terminate total disability benefits was proper, as Industrial Accident Board was entitled to accept testimony of employee's expert over employer's expert, and substantial evidence supported decision, including testimony employee had continuing pain, was heavily dependent on pain medication, and was unable to work even part-time.
|
|||||
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. |
