 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Acierno v. New Castle County, Civil Action No. 1173-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 8, 2006, Decided , June 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A county's motion to dismiss was granted; developer did not file suit with 60 days after notice of his record plan's denial was published in a local newspaper, as the Statute of Repose, Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 8126(b), required, and the court thus had no subject matter jurisdiction over the action. Statute did not specify publication form needed.
|
|||||
| Barry v. Town of Dewey Beach, C.A. No. 1083-S,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, June 8, 2006, Decided , June 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the residents' mere statement that they were property owners and voters was insufficient to merit standing, and because the public had sufficient opportunity to comment on the issue of conversion and on potential changes to be made to the preliminary draft of an ordinance, their motion for summary judgment was denied.
|
|||||
| Brehm v. Eisner (In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litig.), No. 411, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 8, 2006, Decided , June 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decisions to approve a company president's employment agreement and to terminate him on a non-fault basis did not result from breaches of fiduciary duty by the president and the corporate directors, because the decisions were protected business judgments, made without any violations of fiduciary duty. A claim of corporate waste failed.
|
|||||
| Crisco v. Mandarano, C.A. No. 05C-05-079 MJB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A summary judgment motion was premature; one lease clause made tenant liable for fire losses, but another made it landlords' duty to repair heating and electric systems. Tenant claimed that either system caused fire, no one yet knew for sure, and summary judgment was not granted if it was better to look more into facts to clarify law's application.
|
|||||
| Handloff v. City Council of Newark, C.A. No. 05A-07-003 RRC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property owner's petition for certiorari review pursuant to Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 562, of the denial by a city council of an application for a subdivision and a parking waiver was denied, as the denial was not manifestly contrary to law and the council did not exceed the scope of their powers.
|
|||||
| Atamian v. Ryan, C.A. NO: 03C-12-038(RBY),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, June 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a patient admitted that he did not realize what the dentist had done until after leaving the dentist's office, there could have been no fear of harm until after the treatment was completed. Thus, the patient could not assert a claim for assault.
|
|||||
| Manlove v. State, No. 544, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant had previously been acquitted of conspiracy, accomplice liability was not an issue at his retrial; therefore, the trial court's reading Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 275(a) (2004) to the jury in response to a question about accomplice liability undermined the jury's ability to perform its duty in returning a verdict.
|
|||||
| State v. Downing, I.D. # 0110011346A,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion for postconviction relief under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 was denied. Defense counsel's allowing the State's chief detective to forego testifying at trial while allowing statements made by him to be admitted into evidence was a trial strategy with which defendant agreed and did not fall below an objective standard of reasonableness.
|
|||||
| Watson v. Formosa Plastics Co., C.A. No. 05A-11-006 JRJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An unemployment benefits claimant had been terminated with just cause after he mistakenly opened a valve, causing an environmental leak. In failing to observe and/or act in accordance with a red light indicating pressure in a 401 reactor, the claimant had acted heedlessly and recklessly and thus had engaged in wanton conduct.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
