 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ferer v. Aaron Ferer & Sons Co., No. S-05-954.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in declining to award prejudgment interest to the shareholders because there existed a reasonable controversy as to the shareholders' claim to the sale proceeds, when electing to pursue their litigation for dissenters' rights created a reasonable controversy with regard to their right to receive the sale proceeds.
|
|||||
| In re Budman, No. S-34-060001,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Canadian attorney met his burden of proving his law school education was functionally equivalent to the education received at an ABA-approved law school and that as a result, a waiver of the educational qualifications requirement of Neb. Ct. R., Admis. Att'ys 5A(1)(b) was appropriate. This requirement was waived as it applied to the attorney.
|
|||||
| Ronald L. v. Brian H. (In re Jaden M.), Nos. S-05-1527, S-06-073.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment providing that the father's consent to the adoption of his child was not required was reversed and remanded, because applying Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-104.22(7) infringed upon the father's constitutionally protected parental rights, as the putative father provisions of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-104 did not apply to a previously adjudicated father.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Columbus Metal Indus. v. Aaron Ferer & Sons Co., No. S-05-565.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Shareholders were not entitled to mandamus ordering company and board members to provide them with dissenters' rights as agreements did not constitute sale of all or substantially all of the company's property, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 21-20,138(1)(c), and notice was not the equivalent of enumerated forms of entitlement, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 21-20,138(1)(e).
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline v. Riskowski, No. S-05-1168.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in Nebraska for 1 year for failing to deposit an advance fee payment into his attorney trust account, agreeing to termination of his client's temporary alimony award without his client's consent, and forging his client's signature on a court filing and instructing his secretary to notarize the same.
|
|||||
| State v. Sims, No. S-06-249.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel was not ineffective, Sixth Amendment, for failing to make a motion for discharge on speedy trial grounds because the inmate conceded that 149 days were excluded from the 6-month period as attributable to his plea in abatement, 12 days were excluded for his motions requesting new counsel, and 36 days were excluded for his motion to continue.
|
|||||
| Worline v. ABB/Alstom Power Integrated CE Servs., No. S-06-038.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, December 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-185, there was sufficient evidence in the record to substantiate the conclusions reached by Workers' Compensation Court regarding employee's neck and low-back injuries. It did not err in finding that employee needed counseling for anger and frustration; thus, the employee had not reached maximum medical improvement.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
