 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bergen v. State, No. 184, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The sentences imposed against defendant of three or two years imprisonment for possession of a deadly weapon, in violation of Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1448, aggravated harassment, in violation of Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1312, and carrying a concealed deadly weapon, in violation of Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1442, were within statutory ranges.
|
|||||
| Enodis Corp. v. Amana Co., L.P., C.A. No. 18836, C.A. No. 19688,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When corporations' declaratory judgment petitions had been stayed due to the pendency of a related case in another jurisdiction, the corporations were not entitled to have those stays lifted when a trial court in the other jurisdiction entered judgment because that judgment was appealed, so the reasons for issuing the stays continued to operate.
|
|||||
| Garvey v. State, No. 304, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant did not demonstrate that trial counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness or that any alleged error by trial counsel resulted in prejudice, his appeal from the denial of his Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion for postconviction relief was without merit.
|
|||||
| In re Will of Palecki, C.A. No. 1594-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to the plain language of Del. Code Ann. tit. 12, § 1306 and Del. Code Ann. tit. 12, § 202, a handwritten codicil unsigned and undated that was written by the testatrix out-of-state was not legally sufficient for enforcement in Delaware, therefore, summary judgment sought by the executor to enforce the codicil was denied.
|
|||||
| Mumford v. State, No. 494, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While prosecutor's statement that defendant was in handcuffs at police station 10 months after taking money from victim was misstatement, it did not prejudicially affect defendant's substantial rights or likely affect the outcome of the case as it likely had no bearing on jury's determination of defendant's intent to appropriate the victim's money.
|
|||||
| New Castle Shopping, LLC v. Penn Mart Supermarkets, Inc., No. 545, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Patterson v. State, No. 489,2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a crew supervisor agreed to transport prison contraband from defendant to a barber, the supervisor's claim of ignorance was not a defense for defendant; since the State's evidence was authenticated in accordance with Del. R. Evid. 901(a), it was sufficient to convict defendant of conspiracy and violating Del. Code Ann. tit. 16, § 4752(a).
|
|||||
| Scarborough v. State, No. 328, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied, matter was remanded to trial court as defense counsel and prosecutor failed to disclose oral side agreement as required by Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 11(e)(2). Failure to disclose side agreement also violated Del. Law. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3(a)(3).
|
|||||
| Wilmington Hospitality, LLC v. New Castle County, C.A. No. 03C-07-213 MMJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As genuine material fact issues remained on a LLC's equal protection claims against a county, and whether the county had a rational basis for its alleged differential treatment in preventing the LLC from opening its hotel, the county was denied summary judgment. Further, a Daubert hearing was ordered before an expert could testify as to damages.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
