 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Donohue v. State, No. 602, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's claim that his counsel was ineffective was wholly unsubstantiated, because his claim of prosecutorial misconduct and coercion was procedurally barred, and because the sentence imposed was the same as was discussed during the plea colloquy, defendant's motion for postconviction relief was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Hackett v. State, No. 90, 2009,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Julian v. Eastern States Constr. Serv., Civil Action No. 1892-VCP,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Stockholder's motion in limine was granted, and the other stockholders were precluded from arguing against the applicability of all or any part of an amendment to a stockholder agreement based on their averments of unclean hands, equitable estoppel, and unjust enrichment because their claims were barred by judicial estoppel and waiver.
|
|||||
| Miller v. State, No. 72, 2009,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Brower, No. 266, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 5, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred when it ruled post-trial that it should have instructed the jury sua sponte on lesser-included offenses not requested by the State or defendant because it was obligated to instruct the jury only on the lesser-included offense the State requested after it found a rational basis in the evidence to support the instruction.
|
|||||
| Jakks Pac., Inc. v. Thq/Jakks Pac., LLC, C.A. No. 4295-VCL,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, May 6, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Beck v. Walton Corp., C.A. No. 08A-05-001 RRC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 8, 2009, 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. |
