 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Collins v. Ashland, Inc., C.A. No. 06C-03-339-JRJ,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decedent's affidavit was inadmissible in products liability suit and was not considered in opposition to summary judgment motion because it was not made under sense of impending death and thus was not a dying declaration under Del. R. Evid. 804(b)(2). Co-worker's affidavit was not stricken despite widow's failure to properly respond to discovery.
|
|||||
| Hexion Specialty Chems., Inc. v. Huntsman Corp., C.A. No. 3841-VCL,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Submitted, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Email was subject to a valid attorney-client privilege claim; it was a communication from a lawyer to the client and another lawyer representing the client, made for the purpose of facilitating professional legal services, Del. R. Evid. 502(b). Its disclosure did not destroy or waive the claim of privilege. Plaintiff's motion to compel was denied.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Reserves Dev. Corp., C.A. No. 2175-VCS,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Based on the language of a deed which provided limited use of a disputed road for "ingress and egress," an easement rather than a fee simple interest was granted under Del. Code Ann. tit. 25, § 121(b); the easement had not been abandoned, and it could not be unilaterally relocated.
|
|||||
| State v. Monroe, I.D. # 0405005159,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's request for production of the transcripts of an evidentiary hearing was denied because he made no showing why he needed the transcripts. Some of the requested transcripts related to post conviction claims, which were procedurally barred, and none of them related to issues raised in defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion.
|
|||||
| State v. Parson, I.D. No. 86014749DI,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Pearlman, I.D. # 0707015257,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because both of defendant's grounds for relief attacked the sentence that the trial court imposed, and not the underlying judgment of conviction, defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion was summarily dismissed as repetitive and an inappropriate vehicle to obtain a modification of his sentence.
|
|||||
| Steel Partners II, L.P. v. Point Blank Solutions, Inc., Civil Action No. 3695-CC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, August 12, 2008, Submitted, August 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Corporation could not postpone annual meeting of stockholders as it failed to show good cause for additional delay beyond that agreed to in stipulation to resolve Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 211 motion to compel as any concerns regarding influence of an LP and former CEO on the election of directors could be communicated directly to the stockholders.
|
|||||
| Arday v. Nichols, No. 472, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 13, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. Bayer CropScience L.P., No. 389, 2008,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 13, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a purchaser did not show a reasonable probability of success on the merits of its claim, and because the balance of hardships weighed only marginally in its favor, the purchaser was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief 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. |
