 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carter v. State, No. 151, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, October 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant appealed his convictions and sentences and his attorney filed a Del. Sup. Ct. R. 26(c) motion and moved to withdraw. Highest court found that appeal was totally devoid of merit and did not warrant argument of any issue so it granted State's motion to affirm judgment which made attorney's motion to withdraw moot.
|
|||||
| Riego v. State, No. 171, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, October 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neither Apprendi nor Blakely's Sixth Amendment holdings applied to sentence defendant received from trial court rather than jury after he pleaded guilty to violation of privacy as Delaware's sentencing guidelines were of voluntary and nonbinding nature. Two-year sentence that defendant received was affirmed as it was within guidelines' limits.
|
|||||
| Cantinca v. Fontana, No. 209,2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, October 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Del. Code Ann. tit. 16, ¿ 6636 was not the exclusive vehicle for regulating smoke detectors, the trial court erred in finding that the statute preempted a local ordinance and precluded evidence that a landlord violated the ordinance.
|
|||||
| Christiana Town Ctr., LLC v. New Castle County, C.A. No. 729-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, October 5, 2005, Decided , October 5, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where developer's county building permit for subdivision plan to create shopping center was premised on approval of realignment of highway connector by department of transportation, and where developer had pending action against department for breaching agreement to grant approval, developer's action against county to compel permit was stayed.
|
|||||
| John Doe No. 1 v. Cahill, No. 266, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, October 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A defamation plaintiff was required to satisfy a summary judgment standard before obtaining the identity of an anonymous defendant, and a public figure plaintiff failed to do so with regard to anonymous statements posted on an internet site since the statements that the plaintiff was paranoid and full of character flaws were opinion.
|
|||||
| Rogers v. Del. State Univ., C.A. No. 03C-03-218-PLA,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, October 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although, as an incorporated state entity with power to sue and be sued, a state university was not protected from liability by sovereign immunity or by Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, ch. 40, it was not liable for an attack on a student in the parking lot of overflow student housing because the incident was not foreseeable.
|
|||||
| Ruggerio v. Estate of Poppiti, Civil Action No. 18961-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, October 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In the injured party's action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and commingling of assets, the injured party failed to carry his burden of proof. The injured party had the opportunity to present witnesses and evidence and to cross examine witnesses, and he did virtually none of this.
|
|||||
| State v. Reed, Defendant ID No. 9911018706(R-1),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, October 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a defendant failed to show that his claims of ineffective assistance of trial court had any merit, his claims in his postconviction motion under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 were procedurally barred for failing to have presented the claims to the trial court or the appellate court on his direct appeal.
|
|||||
| Zimmerman v. Braddock, C.A. No. 18473-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, October 6, 2005, Decided , October 6, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: By allowing proceedings in dismissed case, order provided foundation that allowed court to find that derivative action could be maintained and resolved questions as to court's authority to consider claims. Order determined substantial issue and established legal right and was certified for interlocutory appeal under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 42.
|
|||||
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. |
