 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abell v. Sothen, No. 06-1165,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed judgment dismissing in part and denying in part tax protesters' petition against revenue agent, his coworkers, and the IRS because protesters' claims against them were claims against the United States and were barred by sovereign immunity, mandamus was not available, and summonses to lenders within court's jurisdiction were proper.
|
|||||
| Casey v. W. Las Vegas Indep. Sch. Dist., No. 06-2054,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: School superintendent's claims that she was fired in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights were largely rejected because, under Garcetti v. Ceballos, statements, primarily directed to the school board conveying concern about the Head Start program's lack of compliance with federal regulation, were pursuant to her official duties.
|
|||||
| Copeman v. Ballard, No. 05-7085,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's appeal from the summary dismissal of his § 1983 action against state officials for wrongfully seizing his property was summarily disposed of on the basis of res judicata.
|
|||||
| Estate of DiMarco v. Wyo. Dep't of Corr., Nos. 04-8024 and 04-8067,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of a prisoner, who lived as a female but had male genitalia, was reversed because the appeals court could not conclude that the decision to place the prisoner in segregation for 14 months imposed such an atypical and significant hardship on the prisoner as to create a liberty interest that required due process protection.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. Zadroga, No. 06-1410,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's claims were dismissed as frivolous because verbal insults did not rise to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation and he had not alleged that officers used excessive force or acted with the intent to harm him when they placed him in restraints during a suicide watch; he also failed to state any due process violations.
|
|||||
| Parkhurst v. Pittsburgh Paints, Inc., No. 06-8047,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for paint company, corrections officials, and others on prisoner's product liability claim against paint company and federal law claims against remaining defendants was affirmed because product liability claim and 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 claims were barred by applicable Wyoming statutes of limitation and RICO claim was time-barred.
|
|||||
| Persaud v. Doe, No. 06-6234,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for prison employees on prisoner's Bivens action, alleging an Eighth Amendment violation in the care of his ankle, was affirmed because he failed to directly and personally implicate two employees in the alleged deliberate indifference to his medical needs, and employees who treated the prisoner were not deliberately indifferent.
|
|||||
| United States v. Acosta-Quinones, No. 06-8050,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from his conviction for illegally reentering the United States after a previous deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a)(1)-(2), (b)(2), was dismissed as frivolous because defendant's substantial criminal history while in the United States made the 87-month sentence recommended by the USSG appropriate.
|
|||||
| United States v. Castellon, No. 06-2044,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A sentence to 71 months was affirmed on appeal because the presumption of undue influence under USSG § 2G1.3(b)(2)(B), based on 26-year age difference between defendant and the victim, was not overcome, and the presumption was not applied in a conclusory way; also, defendant failed to rebut the presumption that the sentence was reasonable.
|
|||||
| United States v. Davis, No. 05-6312, No. 05-6363, No. 06-6002,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentences imposed on remand were affirmed as they were constitutional, procedurally correct, and substantively reasonable; the district court's use of facts found in the initial sentencing was particularly appropriate where the guideline calculations and enhancements were previously affirmed, and use of facts found by the judge was proper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
