|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
New York - February 2, 2007
|
| |
De Angelis v. Protopopescu, 1559 CA 06-00744,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: Supreme court erred in denying plaintiff's motion for directed verdict, CPLR 4401, at close of the evidence on ground that plaintiff assumed risk of collision with other skier, as, viewing evidence in light most favorable to plaintiff, there was no rational process by which jury could have found collision was caused by conduct on part of defendant.
|
|
| |
De Angelis v. Protopopescu, 1558 CA 06-00743,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
DeLapp v. DeLapp, 1487 CA 06-00813,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: As a husband was solely entitled to the increase in pension benefits due to his purchase of three additional years of credit for military service, the trial court was ordered to amend the amended QDRO to reflect the same on remittal. But, denial of a motion to vacate and amend the QDRO was upheld in all other respects.
|
|
| |
DeLapp v. DeLapp, 1488 CA 06-01569,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Dick v. NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc., 129 CA 06-01478,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
Overview: In plaintiff's personal injury action arising out his being run over by a forklift truck, defendants met their burden by establishing as a matter of law that the forklift truck was reasonably safe, thus satisfying their duty not to market a defective product and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
|
|
| |
Doyle v. Barden & Robeson Corp., 192 CA 06-01581,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Doyle v. Barden & Robeson Corp., 190 CA 06-01428,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Doyle v. Barden & Robeson Corp., 193 CA 06-01582,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Doyle v. Barden & Robeson Corp., 191 CA 06-01501,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Doyle v. Barden & Robeson Corp., 189 CA 06-01345,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT, February 2, 2007, Decided , February 2, 2007, Entered
View this case - free
|
|
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
