 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alexander v. Astrue, No. 05-5015,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Magistrate judge did not abuse his discretion in allowing only a fraction of fees requested in application to recoup fees and costs associated with an initial EAJA fee application because referring to Coulter v. Tennessee for guidance was not improper, and magistrate judge clearly explained his reasons for discounting the amount of the fee request.
|
|||||
| Cruces v. Utah State Veterans Nursing Home, No. 06-4013,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer was entitled to summary judgment in its former employee's Title VII case under 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e-5 because the employee failed to show pretext as to the employer's assertion that it had discharged her because she had violated the company's "no-gossip" rule, and there was no evidence that the employee's discharge was racially motivated.
|
|||||
| Flores-Buenrostro v. Gonzales, No. 06-9556,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an alien's appeal from a BIA decision affirming an IJ's rejectiong of an alien's claim that removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her young daughter; there was nothing to indicate that the process employed to reach the decision was constitutionally deficient.
|
|||||
| Fogle v. Estep, No. 06-1413,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court denied request for a COA pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253 and dismissed a prisoner's appeal without reaching its merits because reasonable jurists could not differ in determining that petition was untimely under AEDPA. Improper filing of state application for certiorari did not toll statute of limitations for filing 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. Hoover, No. 06-2225,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To the extent that the inmate complained about his placement in administrative segregation or transfers to an out-of-state prison while confined in the New Mexico prison system, his claims against the prison officials were barred by New Mexico's three-year statute of limitations for civil rights actions, N.M. Stat. § 37-1-8.
|
|||||
| Jaramillo v. Vallejos, No. 07-2009,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate was not entitled to a COA pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(1) based on the argument that his sentence violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because the inmate misinterpreted his plea agreement and, in fact, the inmate's two consecutive sentences were from two different case files, so denial of relief under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 was proper.
|
|||||
| Lusero v. Welt, No. 06-1395,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State inmate stated valid claim alleging that correctional officers violated his right to due process when they kept him in administrative segregation for a prolonged period of time after he requested protection from another inmate, and court of appeals held that district court erred when it dismissed inmate's claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. Carr, No. 06-2069,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court denial of the officer's motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity was reversed where the officer's issuance of a citation to the detainee, even under threat of jail if not accepted, did not rise to the level of a Fourth Amendment seizure.
|
|||||
| McNulty v. Sandoval County, No. 06-2121,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted against employee on her claim for violation of 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e-3(a) of Title VII because, even assuming one of the grounds for termination--alleged racial slurs regarding another employee--constituted evidence of retaliation, the evidence as a whole showed that employer would have made the same decision.
|
|||||
| Piercy v. Maketa, No. 05-1192,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for employer was reversed on issue of whether a female deputy's inability to transfer to maximum security jail was an adverse employment action under Title VII. Given job posting's language that women need not apply, facial discrimination was clear, and duty differences between jails were such that transfer was not purely lateral.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
