 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hendry v. Hendry, Civil Action No. 18625-NC,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, December 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel's earlier representation of a relative of both parties to a lawsuit, in an entirely unrelated matter, did not violate Del. Law. R. Prof. Conduct 1.9 and did not warrant disqualification; subpoenas were properly issued and served, and no prejudice would result from allowing untimely amendment of complaint.
|
|||||
| Hopkins v. Martin, Civil Action No. 1359-S,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, December 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A lessee was not entitled to reargument with respect to a claim for equitable relief from forfeiture or termination that he alleged was overlooked because the only issue before the chancery court was an interpretation of whether the lessee was in default; the issue of the validity of the lease had to be brought in superior court.
|
|||||
| Mullen v. Schaeffer, C.A. No. 05C-05-025-JEB,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, KENT, December 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mayoral candidate's suit under Del. Code Ann. tit. 15, ¿ 5941 alleging irregularities in the handling of absentee ballots against a town was dismissed, as nothing unusually addressed by the remedy sought was presented by the complaint. Furthermore, as writs of quo warranto and certiorari were not available as remedies, a protective order was moot.
|
|||||
| Spanish Tiles, Ltd. v. Hensey, C.A. No. 05C-07-025 RFS,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, December 1, 2005, Submitted
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the suppliers alleged that the two tortious interference with contractual relations counts alleged against them were inconsistent, dismissal was not appropriate since inconsistent pleadings were permitted under Del. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 8(e)(2).
|
|||||
| In re White, No. 376, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, December 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prisoner could not demonstrate that he had no adequate remedy other than mandamus because he could have appealed, but did not appeal, an order that granted him less credit for time served than that to which he claimed he was entitled. The prisoner could not use the extraordinary writ process as a substitute for a properly filed appeal.
|
|||||
| Sierra Club v. Del. Dep't of Natural Res. & Envtl. Control, Civil Action No. 1724-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, December 2, 2005, Decided; November 29, 2005, Argued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Delaware legislature acted within its powers in enacting legislation that resolved any doubts about whether benefits of dredging canal outweighed costs; this short-circuited any administrative arguments regarding costs and benefits and made preliminary injunctive relief unavailable to an environmental organization.
|
|||||
| Oliver Press Ptnrs, LLC v. Decker, C.A. No. 1817-N,
COURT OF CHANCERY OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, December 6, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Request for expedited trial or preliminary injunction hearing in LLC's suit challenging corporation's advance notice bylaw provision was denied where LLC delayed filing the complaint, had not alleged irreparable harm, and there was no evidence of recent extraordinary change of circumstances at corporation justifying the request for relief.
|
|||||
| State v. Barrow, ID. NO. 9506017661, ID. NO. 9506017682,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, December 6, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' motions for postconviction relief were procedurally barred under Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61(I)(1) because they were filed more than three years after the conviction became final. Because neither defendant appealed his most recent sentence, those sentences became final on January 4, 2002.
|
|||||
| In re Petition of Atamian, No. 492, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, December 7, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for writ of mandamus asking court to review superior court's order denying application for certification was dismissed since there was no basis for issuance of writ, in that decision to certify case for decision under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 41 lay entirely within discretion of certifying court; thus, plaintiff had no clear legal right to relief.
|
|||||
| In re Petition of Crump, No. 402, 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, December 7, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prisoner's petition for writ of mandamus to order lower court to act on his postconviction relief motions for guilty plea colloquy and sentencing hearing transcripts and for counsel appointment was denied. Prisoner had adequate remedy by direct appeal and did not allege how lower court failed to perform its duty while controlling its docket.
|
|||||
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. |
