 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| B-S Steel of Kan. v. Tex. Indus., No. 04-3327,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an arbitration panel found against the plaintiff on damage claims made for a period prior to the effective end date of the parties' arbitration agreement, the plaintiffs' claims for damages after the end date were barred by collateral estoppel because the issue was identical to the one decided in the arbitration.
|
|||||
| Fuerschbach v. Southwest Airlines Co., No. 04-2117,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where supervisors and police officers staged an arrest of an employee, the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity as to the employee's Fourth Amendment claims because, inter alia, the officers' alleged seizure was unreasonable since they lacked a warrant or probable cause; the New Mexico Workers Compensation Act barred certain claims.
|
|||||
| Juiliano v. Bruce, No. 05-3107,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's counsel's failed to bring a motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of defendant's arrest. Defendant failed to show that his counsel's representation was deficient in violation of the Sixth Amendment, because the motion was unlikely to succeed due to the existence of probable cause for defendant's arrest.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Barnhart, No. 04-7027,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Remand to the Commissioner of Social Security was required because the ALJ failed to present a proper hypothetical to the vocational expert, follow correct legal standards, discuss and explain the claimant's actual residual functional capacity, mention relevant listings, and explain why the claimant did not meet them.
|
|||||
| United States v. Anglin, Nos. 05-7070, 05-7071, and 05-7073,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The testimony of a USFS officer that defendants were walking in a forested area carrying ginseng probes and ginseng and their admission that they had no extraction permit were sufficient to support their convictions for cutting and removing a forest product from a national forest without authorization in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 261.6(h).
|
|||||
| United States v. LaVallee, Nos. 03-1515, 03-1522, 03-1523, 04-1000, 04-1538, 04-1540,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where correctional officers were accused of beating inmates, in violation of the Eighth Amendment and 18 U.S.C.S. § 242, the government was not required to prove that an inmate suffered a certain level or type of injury to establish excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and 18 U.S.C.S. § 242.
|
|||||
| United States v. Rith, No. 04-4258,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court properly denied a defendant relief under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 on his claim that trial counsel failed to present alibi evidence because only two people could have provided an alibi and their testimony would have either conflicted with the defendant's testimony or with the testimony of other defense witnesses.
|
|||||
| Jicarilla Apache Nation v. Rio Arriba County, No. 04-2320,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an assessor made the determination that a ranch, owned by an Apache nation, should have been reclassified from agricultural to miscellaneous non-agricultural to reflect the fact that a portion of the ranch was used for elk hunting, the court found that taxing higher-valued land at a higher rate was a legitimate interest for an assessor.
|
|||||
| United States v. Brooks, No. 04-3218,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where police found a loaded gun within 10 feet of the recovered evidence of an active methamphetamine laboratory during a search of the defendant's home, there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant for unlawful possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A).
|
|||||
| Wallace v. BLM, No. 04-1350,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: All four plaintiffs' claims against BLM were dismissed as moot either because plaintiffs dismissed their administrative appeals, the claims were derivative of others whose claims were moot, or because an as-applied challenge to a grazing permit modification or to stay regulations did not fit the "capable of repetition yet evading review" exception.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
