 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Colonial Ins. Co. v. Ayers, No. 121, 2000, No. 134, 2000 CONSOLIDATED No. 92, 2000, No. 127, 2000, No. 128, 2000, No. 135, 2000,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The plain language of Delaware's underinsured motorist statute precluded injured parties from stacking underinsured motorist coverage of different policies in determining whether a tortfeasor was underinsured.
|
|||||
| Dale v. Town of Elsmere, C.A. No. 99M-01-15-VAB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court granted summary judgment to a town. The town properly rejected signatures on a petition to hold an election to amend or repeal home rule. The rejected signatures were petitioners signed for by spouses, and petitioners who withdrew.
|
|||||
| Davis v. Town of Georgetown, C.A. No. 99C-04-006,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Request for production of 20 years' worth of party's personal employment, personnel, and military records was denied for failure to show how they were relevant to the case or how they might lead to relevant information.
|
|||||
| Fred H. Jensen & Sons, Inc. v. Coverdale, C.A. No. 00C-07-002,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Corporation had no greater right than joint owner to possession of property jointly owned; therefore, writ of replevin as to that property was denied.
|
|||||
| Griffin v. Daimler Chrysler & Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd., C.A. No. 00A-10-008 WCC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where unemployment insurance appeal board dismissed worker's appeal due to his failure to appear at board hearing, court lacked jurisdiction to review merits of worker's appeal because worker failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
|
|||||
| In re Watson, 120, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for a writ of prohibition in which defendant sought to set aside convictions based on allegedly illegal arrest was dismissed for many reasons, including the fact that such a writ was no substitute for regular appellate process.
|
|||||
| Isip v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd., C.A. No. 00A-06-002,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision of Delaware unemployment insurance appeal board, denying unemployment benefits to employee, was supported by substantial evidence and was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Kelley v. Smith, No. 318, 2000,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly denied appellant's replevin count as to three racehorses, but erred in declaring that appellee was the owner, as both parties had requested a jury trial on the remaining issues, including ownership of the horses.
|
|||||
| Lane v. Cancer Treatment Ctrs. of Am., C.A. No. 12207-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, April 27, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff narrowly avoided dismissal for failure to prosecute appraisal action several times, court ordered plaintiff to submit valuation report first, so defendant would not incur expense of report, unless plaintiff followed through.
|
|||||
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. |
