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!
   State Courts - Delaware - September 10, 2008
  
Aveta, Inc. v. Olivieri, C.A. No. 07C-11-119 MMJ, SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendants' motion under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 42 for an order certifying an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court of an order denying their motion to dismiss was denied because they failed to demonstrate that Rule 42(b) criteria applied. Defendants did not establish the existence of exceptional circumstances to warrant certification.

Search Cases for Free
  
Duthie v. Corsolutions Med., Inc., C.A. No. 3048-VCN, COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 10, 2008, Decided, September 10, 2008, EFiled
View this case - free  

Overview: Full defense of the witnesses against the charges brought by the corporations, whether in litigation or in the public forum, required the advancement of fees to pay for the assertion of defamation claims. The court instructed the witnesses' counsel to certify in good faith that the fees for which advancement was sought were incurred reasonably.

Search Cases for Free
  
Hill v. State, No. 101, 2008, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Because defendant's claims on appeal were either unpreserved or a misstatement of Delaware law, Del. Sup. Ct. R. 8 precluded appellate review; accordingly, defendant's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 motion was properly denied.

Search Cases for Free
  
In re Countrywide Corp. S'holders Litig., C.A. No. 3464-VCN, COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, KENT, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Chancery court, under Del. Ch. Ct. R. 26(c) and 45(c), determined that limited additional discovery regarding objecting shareholders' derivative claims was appropriate as a matter of efficiency and to avoid needless, and likely unhelpful, speculation when class representatives and corporate directors and a bank entered into a settlement agreement.

Search Cases for Free
  
In re Tyrrell, No. 448, 2008, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free
  
Jamison v. State, No. 158, 2008, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Because defendant had the requisite number of prior felony convictions to establish his habitual offender status, he was properly declared a habitual offender pursuant to Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, ? 4214(a); accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying his motion for modification of sentence.

Search Cases for Free
  
Marvel v. State, No. 345, 2008, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: An inmate's Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 postconviction relief claims were procedurally defaulted because no evidence showed (1) the indictment did not give him full notice of charges or bar a later prosecution, (2) introducing his letter to a coconspirator violated his free speech rights, or (3) insufficient evidence supported his convictions.

Search Cases for Free
  
Medek v. Medek, C.A. No. 2559-VCP, COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Trial court denied motion to dismiss former wife's claim of fraudulent conveyance of property in violation of Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, ? 1301 et seq. (UFTA), for alleged lack of subject matter jurisdiction; that claim sought an equitable remedy over which the trial court had concurrent jurisdiction under the UFTA.

Search Cases for Free
  
Smith v. State, No. 252, 2008, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Because defendant did not dispute the requisite number of qualifying convictions to support his habitual offender status under Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, ? 4214(b), and because ? 4214(b) had previously been found constitutional, defendant's claim that his sentence was illegal under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) was denied as being without merit.

Search Cases for Free
  
State v. Morris, Def. ID No. 0205019125, SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, September 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free
  
Back to Top
  


Copyright© 2011 LexisNexis®, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.