 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dousman v. Kobus, C.A. No. 19258-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Shareholders who sought to acquire control of holding company stated cognizable claim that supermajority provision in company's by-laws was amended by implication, as board of directors acted as though it did not exist.
|
|||||
| Olds v. Olds, No. 311, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly concluded that there were no grounds upon which to reduce the amount owed by the husband to the wife; as the husband was $ 8, 500 in arrears on his payments, he was in contempt of the trial court's stipulated order.
|
|||||
| St. Louis v. State, No. 615, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying prisoner's mandamus petition alleging that correctional center's inmate grievance system was unconstitutional; prisoner did not establish, inter alia, that he had a right to the relief sought.
|
|||||
| Venoco, Inc. v. Eson, C.A. No. 19506-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Directors breached their fiduciary duty by giving inside information to companies that wished to sell back the corporation's stock, but as the companies did not solicit or take advantage of the information, they did not aid and abet the breach.
|
|||||
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. |
