 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dickerson v. Simpson, C.A. No. 99C-10-017 HDR,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A landowner showed by a preponderance of the evidence that there had been adverse possession of the property in question for more than 20 years, and the boundaries of the property were determined to be as represented on a county tax map.
|
|||||
| In re Paxson Commun. Corp. S'Holders Litig., CONSOLIDATED CIVIL ACTION NO. 17568,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Chancery court dismissed shareholders' action alleging that directors wrongfully failed to pursue offer to purchase corporation's stock because claim was derivative and shareholders failed to comply with demand procedure required by court rules.
|
|||||
| In re Speedway Motorsports, Inc. Derivative Litig., Consol. Civil Action No. 18245,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, July 10, 2001
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because partnership had not decided whether to have its expert testify at trial, shareholders could not discover his identity or any facts or opinions held by him without agreement or exceptional circumstances.
|
|||||
| PNC Bank v. Marty's Mobile Homes, Inc., Civil Action No. 1434-K,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mobile home sales business collected taxes and fees that were due to buyers' state of residence as middleman for buyers so taxes and fees were not proceeds from operation of business under UCC that were subject to security interest held by bank.
|
|||||
| Saito v. McKesson HBOC, Inc., Civil Action No. 18553,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Shareholder was entitled to inspect corporation's books and records to determine if board had committed misconduct during merger with another corporation but inspection was limited to records created on or after date shares were purchased.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Williams, No. 493, 2000,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claims provided no basis for his release from prison since he was not being illegally confined and had no legal right to be released. His premature release from prison did not preclude responsibility for his parole violations.
|
|||||
| Woodward v. Farm Family Cas. Ins. Co., C.A. No. 00C-08-066,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, July 10, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: One-year insurance contract time limitation was upheld as reasonable and binding upon homeowners. Failure to file suit within one year of claim was fatal to homeowners' cause of action. Policy language was not ambiguous.
|
|||||
| Preston v. State, C.A. No. 2000-01-281,
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The employee was not entitled to workers' compensation benefits based upon the average overtime pay he received; the state employees' workers' compensation statute did not provide for overtime in its benefit calculation.
|
|||||
| Woodlin v. State, No. 284, 2001,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, July 11, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since defendant's notice of appeal was not timely and he could not show cause as to why it was untimely, it was dismissed.
|
|||||
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. |
