 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| DiSabatino v. DiSabatino, No. 553, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A husband's motion to reopen a default marital property division, under Del. Fam. Ct. R. Civ. P. 60(b), was properly denied because, while he had a meritorious claim, as all marital property was awarded to the wife, and she showed no substantial prejudice if the motion were granted, he did not show his conduct was attributable to excusable neglect.
|
|||||
| Freeman v. Burris Foods, C.A. No: 06A-04-001 (RBY),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A decision by the Delaware Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, holding that an employee's discharge from employment was based on just cause, was supported by substantial evidence pursuant to Del. Code Ann. tit. 19, § 3314(2), as the employee had engaged in two physical altercations with a co-worker.
|
|||||
| Fuller v. State, No. 338, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the State did not adequately comply with Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 16 in disclosing a videotape of defendant being interviewed by police, the violation did not require reversal, as evidence independent of the videotape was before the jury; the victim and another eyewitness, both of whom knew defendant, identified him as the assailant.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. State, No. 423,2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a probationer did not submit a written response to counsel's motion to withdraw, and did not submit any points for consideration on appeal, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 26(c), the probationer's appeal was deemed wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue; consequently, counsel's motion to withdraw was deemed moot.
|
|||||
| Luscavage v. Dominion Dental USA, Inc., C.A. No. 06C-07-219 RRC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, March 20, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Corporation's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' action alleging tortious interference with contracts was granted, as breach of a contract was a necessary element of the claim, and allegations by plaintiffs that the corporation's actions caused the termination of consulting contracts did not satisfy the requirement of proving a breach.
|
|||||
| Cruz v. State, No. 659, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Snyder v. Wyo. Concrete, C.A. No. 06A-01-001 RBY,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: No errors were made by Delaware's Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (UIAB) which would have contributed to the lateness of a claimant's appeal and the claimant did not provide sufficient reason for finding the UIAB abused its discretion in denying his untimely appeal.
|
|||||
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. |
