 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brock v. Presbyterian Healthcare Servs., No. 06-2192,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted to former employer that disclosed negative information to a potential employer in an employee's suit under the False Claims Act whistleblower provision, 31 U.S.C.S. § 3730(h), because employee granted employer absolute immunity from suit by signing a release that authorized disclosure of his employment history.
|
|||||
| Kadonsky v. United States, No. 06-4170,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of the United States was affirmed because plaintiff failed to file a timely notice of appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B) or to request an extension within 180 days of the judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). Equitable tolling under the unique circumstances doctrine did not apply.
|
|||||
| Kenney v. Millennium Rail, Inc., No. 06-5169,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of an employee's Title VII claim was affirmed because the employee brought suit in Oklahoma, and the complaint indicated that Kansas was the only proper venue, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e-5(f)(3). Nothing indicated that pertinent employment records were maintained or administered in Oklahoma.
|
|||||
| Lafauci v. Hines, No. 06-7106,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate was not entitled to a COA pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(2) because three of his claims could not be addressed by the court, as they had been raised for the first time on appeal or were not stated with sufficient particularity, and no reasonable jurist could dispute the district court's cogent analysis rejecting the five remaining claims.
|
|||||
| Ray v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 05-1284 & 05-1420,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In case brought under 29 U.S.C.S. § 1132(a) of ERISA, award of long-term disability benefits to attorney who could not work in large office buildings was affirmed because the clearly erroneous standard applied to finding that the attorney, a partner dealing with complex real estate transactions, could only work at her occupation in such buildings.
|
|||||
| United States v. Campos-Davila, No. 06-2116,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed district court's judgment sentencing defendant who pled guilty to violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326 to 46 months' imprisonment because district court properly calculated defendant's sentence under USSG § 2L1.2 and defendant did not rebut presumption that his sentence was reasonable because it fell within the Guidelines range.
|
|||||
| United States v. Card, No. 06-4242,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the district court incorrectly treated a second or successive petition under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 as a true Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion and denied it on the merits, the court's order was vacated for lack of jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244, and the inmate's appeal was construed as an application to file a second or successive petition.
|
|||||
| United States v. Estrada-Lozano, No. 05-1566,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was reasonable where while the district court did not expressly weigh each 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factor, it did consider defendant's childhood and cultural assimilation to the United States, his criminal record, the likelihood he would recidivate and, in particular, the need for the sentence to promote respect for the law.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gordon, No. 04-6384,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals reversed district court's order requiring defendant who pled guilty to credit card fraud to pay restitution in the amount of $ 68,698 because plain language of defendant's plea agreement showed she did not agree to pay restitution beyond amount causally linked to single count to which she pled guilty, and that amount was $ 7,950.
|
|||||
| United States v. Williams, No. 06-6140,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Following a guilty plea to a violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 2422(b), the court of appeals enforced defendant's waiver of appellate rights because defendant's agreement not to appeal the ruling that he was a career offender within the scope of USSG § 4B1.1(a) was clearly a basis of his plea bargain, and he was still bound by the agreement.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
