 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Donald v. State, No. 256, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a probationer who had been arrested gave officers permission to conduct an administrative search of his home, which he shared with defendant, and defendant did not expressly object to the search, the search was valid. The officers were not required to take affirmative steps to obtain defendant's consent once the probationer had consented.
|
|||||
| Martin v. Hopkins, C.A. No. 05C-04-027,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, June 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Tenant did not lose his option to buy; he was late with rent under commercial lease, but landlord's notice of a default was wrong, in that rent for one of months claimed was not due, and claim that tenant had lost option was wrong. Thus, without valid notice of deficiency, there was no default or forfeiture of option, and lease was still in effect.
|
|||||
| Osborne v. Two Farms, Inc., C.A. 05A-12-001-ESB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, June 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While an employee failed to sustain her burden to show that her back problems were caused by a work accident, because her accident at home did not affect her ability to work, the Board erred in finding that it was an unforeseen, intervening, superseding event that broke the causal chain to the injury.
|
|||||
| Schoon v. Troy Corp., C.A. No. 1677-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 27, 2006, Decided , June 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To inspect corporate books, under Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 220, a shareholder had to certify that a party it would reveal information to said it was a bona fide purchaser of the shareholder's shares, identify the type of competitor it was, say when information would be revealed, and give the corporation the purchaser's confidentiality agreement.
|
|||||
| Teti v. State, No. 500, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence of 20 years for Kidnapping First Degree was within the statutory range of Del. Code Ann. tit. 11 §§ 783A and 4205(a)(2), despite a SENTAC guidelines sentence of 5 years, and a judge that had considered defendant's criminal record, his prior abuse of the victim, and a need for correctional treatment had not exhibited a closed mind.
|
|||||
| Carroll v. State, No. 569, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant's claims about the DNA testing in 1999 lacked merit, because his claims were untimely, and because he did not raise a colorable claim of a miscarriage of justice due to a constitutional violation, pursuant to Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(i)(2), (5), defendant's claim for postconviction relief was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Knight v. State, No. 557, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, June 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a probation officer's testimony was more credible than defendant's, because defendant's due process rights under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 32.1 were not violated, and because the sentence was within the permissible limits, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 26(c), defendant's appeal lacked merit, and counsel's motion to withdraw was moot.
|
|||||
| Macy's v. Campbell, C.A. No. 05A-11-007 MJB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, June 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Award of total disability benefits to a workers' compensation claimant was reversed as there was not substantial evidence from which to determine when claimant's benefits terminated or whether claimant's condition had worsened between time that her benefits terminated and date that she filed a claim for a recurrence of her total disability.
|
|||||
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. |
