 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bailey v. ACME/ASCO/Albertson's, Inc., No. 322, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A supermarket was entitled to summary judgment in a customer's action alleging that it sold him contaminated apple juice because the customer did not produce an expert report by a scheduling order deadline. His inability to obtain test results on the juice from the supermarket was no excuse for failing to submit his expert opinion by the deadline.
|
|||||
| Campbell v. DiSabatino, No. 256, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A landlord was entitled to summary judgment in tenants' suit alleging that it was negligent in the maintenance of a rental home because the tenants failed to provide evidence that the landlord's conduct proximately caused the injuries they sustained from mold in the home. Expert testimony was required to show the source of invisible, airborne mold.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. State, No. 457, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Superior court properly denied defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence, as his claim that he was sentenced upon false information presented by the prosecutor was belied by the record, and an alleged violation of Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 32(a)(1)(C) was untimely.
|
|||||
| Martin v. Hackett, No. 409, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Upon the agreement by the Family Court that it made an "unintentional error" in its written modification of a prior visitation order, and based on its suggested correction, said modification was reversed, and the case was remanded instructing the Family Court to correct its written modification.
|
|||||
| Marvel v. State, No. 11, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion for correction of illegal sentence was properly denied as motion challenged errors in underlying conviction. Such relief could be pursued only through motion for postconviction relief. Relief under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) could be afforded only when there were errors in sentence itself.
|
|||||
| State v. Frink, ID No. 0307001199,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Wright, No. 176, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's petition for a writ of mandamus under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 43 was dismissed as moot because, at the time that the inmate had filed his mandamus petition asking the court to compel the superior court to act upon his motion for sentence modification, the superior court had already granted his motion.
|
|||||
| Pennewell v. State, No. 521, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's statement that he had derived income from selling cocaine was admissible for purposes other than prior bad act evidence barred by Del. R. Evid. 404; statement was evidence of intent to complete a controlled drug buy. No limiting instruction was required where first five Getz factors were satisfied.
|
|||||
| State v. Wonnum, I.D. # 0505004361,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
