 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| AT&T Corp. v. Clarendon Am. Ins. Co., C.A. No. 04C-11-167 (JRJ),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because of the complexity, amount of coverage, and number of policies at issue, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 42, considerations of justice would be served by interlocutory review of an order granting summary judgment to the insurers.
|
|||||
| Cubbage v. Carroll, No. 153, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an inmate's failure to file a notice of appeal within 30 days was not attributable to court-related personnel, the case did not fall within the Del. Sup. Ct. R. 6(a), 10(a) exception to the general rule that mandated the timely filing of a notice of appeal; therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Gesoff v. IIC Indus., C.A. No. 19473, C.A. No. 19600,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A merger process led to a plainly unfair price for a going-private transaction, and damages were awarded based on a recalculated price. A member of the special committee tasked with examining a tender offer on behalf of minority stockholders of a subsidiary was entitled to the benefit of Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 102(b)(7) exculpation.
|
|||||
| In re Rhoades, No. 115, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a trial court had already ruled on an inmate's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion to correct his sentence, the inmate's petition for a writ of mandamus under Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(6) and Del. Sup. Ct. R. 43 was moot and failed to invoke the jurisdiction of the state supreme court.
|
|||||
| Keystone Ins. Co. v. Dunfee, No. 210, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lewis v. State, No. 182, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McGovern v. General Holding, Inc., C.A. No. 1296-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: General partner of a limited partnership (LP) breached his fiduciary and contractual duties to the LP by attempting to usurp the value of the LP's new products for himself after he claimed that the rights to these new products belonged to a holding company owned by the general partner. He led others to believe the LP controlled the new products.
|
|||||
| Miller v. State, No. 23, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Nance v. State, No. 460, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions on four counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, as the legislative intent of Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 1447 (2001) was to impose multiple convictions for the prohibited conduct.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
