|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
Delaware - September 8 - September 9, 2005
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Nevins v. Bryan, C.A. No. 05C-07-041 - ESB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, September 8, 2005, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Where a former employee alleged that the employer's breach of fiduciary duty counterclaims in a chancery case constituted malicious prosecution, his motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied under Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, ¿ 8803 because, inter alia, he failed to show that the employer lacked probable cause to make the assertions.
|
|
| |
Rhineway v. Dep't of Servs. for Children, Youth and their Families, No. 23,2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 8, 2005, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Family court properly terminated a father's parental rights to his four children pursuant to Del. Code Ann. tit. 13, ¿ 1103; the agency made adequate attempts to reunify the family, the father failed to plan for the welfare of the children, and the termination was in the best interest of the children.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Zimmerman v. Braddock, C.A. No. 18473-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 8, 2005, Decided , September 8, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: A shareholder sufficiently pled allegations that, if proven to be true, could state a viable claim of insider trading and misappropriation of confidential information. The company's board members had not demonstrated that amendment of the complaint would be futile under Del. Ch. Ct. R. 23.1 or failed to state a claim under Del. Ch. Ct. R. 12(b)(6).
|
|
| |
Frenz v. Gencor Indus., Civil Action No. 1204-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, September 9, 2005, Decided , September 9, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: As an emergency motion to enjoin an annual shareholders' meeting, or amend proxy materials to include a specific nominee for director exceeded the scope of Del. Code Ann. tit. 8. ¿¿211, plaintiffs failed to cite to any other statutory authority to grant the same, and failed to show the elements for an injunction, said motion was denied.
|
|
| |
Providence Creek Acad. Charter Sch., Inc. v. St. Joseph's at Providence Creek, C.A. No. 1210-K,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 9, 2005, Decided , September 9, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Because a tenant's complaint could fairly be read to allege that the parties, by an oral agreement or their conduct, formed a joint venture that overrode or superseded their lease agreement, the tenant's claim for a resulting trust and injunctive relief under a joint venture with the landlord survived the landlord's motion to dismiss.
|
|
| |
Rockwell Automation, Inc. v. Kall, C.A. No. 526-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 9, 2005, Decided , September 9, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Pursuant to an employment agreement between the parties, the employer was granted full access to its proprietary material stored in a computer used by the employee upon his termination. But, it was not for the court to determine whether it could access the employee's personal documents, because that claim was not fairly framed in the complaint.
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|