 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co. v. McClafferty Printing Co., C.A. No. 05C-08-040 WCC,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 27, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Agency agreement provisions pertaining to arbitration between insurance company and local insurance agency did not permit arbitration of claim assigned by printing company to insurance company; printing company's claim was for negligence in local insurance agency's procurement of insurance for it and did not involve agency agreement provisions.
|
|||||
| Deiter v. DeFelice, C.A. No. 06C-09-003-ESB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, August 27, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a girlfriend would not have borrowed money to purchase a manufactured home and place it on the father's property unless he had told her that he would convey it to her and his son, the girlfriend and the son should be co-owners of the property; thus, the father lacked standing to remove the girlfriend and the home from the property.
|
|||||
| State v. Miller, ID No. 0607013529,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 27, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant never raised the issue of coercion or threats relating to his acceptance of a plea offer in a prior appeal, and because defendant never demonstrated a substantial likelihood that the outcome would have been different had the issue been raised, pursuant to Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61(i)(3), his claim was procedurally defaulted.
|
|||||
| State v. Wright, CR.A.NOS.: IN00-11-1484-RI, IN00-11-1485-RI, IN00-11-1486-RI.,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 27, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to compel disclosure of grand jury proceedings was denied because, although defendant claimed a need to review the proceedings to ensure that there was sufficient evidence to indict him with conspiracy, the State dropped this charge before trial. Defendant's sole motivation was to uncover identity of witnesses against him.
|
|||||
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. |
