 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ciappa Constr., Inc. v. Innovative Prop. Res., LLC, C.A. No. 05L-07-035,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although Del. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 54 and Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 5101 provided that a contractor was entitled to the time billed for a legal assistant and expert testimony, the contractor was not entitled to duplicate attorney's fees and costs for photocopying and deposition transcripts that were not introduced into evidence.
|
|||||
| Cropper v. State, No. 155, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant conceded that his sentence for attempted murder fell within the statutory range of authorized sentences for the crime, the trial court properly denied his Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion for correction of an illegal sentence.
|
|||||
| Somerford Corp. v. Buono, C.A. No. 06-08-0080,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, KENT, June 12, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Daughter was not personally liable for money owed to assisted living facility under resident's lease because the daughter made it clear that she signed her father's residency agreement under a power of attorney, provided a copy of the power of attorney to the facility, and listed herself as a power of attorney at prominent places on the documents.
|
|||||
| In re Barker Trust Agreement, C.A. No. 20455-VCL,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father, named trust beneficiary, properly exercised power of appointment granted by trust instrument in favor of son adopted as adult 24 years after settlor's death; settlor retained sophisticated law firm to draft trust agreement, and evidence showed he clearly knew of son's existence and that father was raising son, 755 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/2-4(e).
|
|||||
| Serv. Corp. v. Guzzetta, Civil Action No. 2922-VCP,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Homeowners' association was granted a preliminary injunction to enjoin property owners in a community from demolishing a house on a property which the owners purchased and then converting the property to a grassy playfield because the association made a sufficient showing on the merits to justify imposition of the injunction.
|
|||||
| Araneta v. ATR-KIM Eng Fin. Corp., No. 60, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 14, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hall v. Dep't of Servs. for Children, No. 134, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 14, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Yarnall, Defendant ID No. 0505008426 (R-1),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, June 14, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant did not show how or why the removal of "legal papers" impacted his decision to acknowledge a violation of probation, and because his claims regarding police conduct and the prosecutor's alleged perjury were not timely raised, defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion for postconviction relief was denied.
|
|||||
| Upper Deck. Co. v. Topps Co. (In re Topps Co. S'holders Litig.), Consolidated C.A. No. 2786-VCS, C.A. No. 2998-VCS,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 14, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Vote by a target corporation's stockholders on a proposed merger was enjoined until the corporation took corrective actions as to a competing bidder because the injunction was to ensure that the stockholders were not irreparably injured by the loss of an opportunity to make an informed decision and to avail themselves of another tendered offer.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
