 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Goodlett, No. 318, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 21, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant did not demonstrate that the trial court lacked jurisdiction or exceeded its jurisdiction when it accepted his guilty plea and considered his motion to withdraw the guilty plea, and because defendant offered no basis to conclude that the appellate remedy would be insufficient, he was not entitled to a writ of prohibition.
|
|||||
| In re Paskins, No. 305, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 21, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a petitioner failed to comply with Del. Sup. Ct. R. 43(b)(vi) by seeking mandamus relief from the Superior Court in the first instance, his request to the Delaware Supreme Court compelling the Court of Common Pleas to provide him with various papers relating to the waiver of his preliminary hearing in a Superior Court case was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Perez-Melchor v. Balakhani, C.A. No. 04C-05-269 RRC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, September 21, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parents of an adult child could potentially be "suppliers" or "entrustors" of a negligently entrusted instrumentality when they gave money to their adult son to purchase a car, knowing that he had a drug and alcohol problem and a poor driving record. It was unnecessary for the parents to have had "control" of the car at the time of the accident.
|
|||||
| Stone v. Ritter, Civil Action No. 1570-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, September 26, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' motion to continue sealing certain portions of a shareholder derivative complaint was denied; the alleged result of the complaint's allegations did not rise to the level of good cause under Del. Ch. Ct. R. 5(g), in particular, when weighed against the public's legitimate interests in litigation filed in the courts.
|
|||||
| Arthur-Lawrence v. Div. of Family Servs., No. 133, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights was upheld where record showed that the mother never attended the required mental health assessments, failed to plan adequately for children's physical needs or mental and emotional health and development, failed to obtain safe, stable housing, failed to attend appointments, and failed to respond to mailings.
|
|||||
| Lehman Capital v. Lofland, C.A. No. 03L-11-029,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, September 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Saunders v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., C.A. No. 04A-07-001 WLW,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because industrial accident board determined that a worker knew the employer would not be able to find another position for him, and that finding was supported by relevant evidence, its conclusion that the worker was no longer totally disabled and had an obligation to seek other employment was proper under the displaced worker doctrine.
|
|||||
| State v. DeJesus, ID. No. 0303004601,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, September 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the additional charges and knew the facts surrounding a victim's contradictory statements, and because the decision not to cross examine a child witness was strategic, defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion for postconviction relief was summarily dismissed.
|
|||||
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. |
