 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Estate of Ricci v. Salt Lake City Corp., No. 05-4185,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court properly denied plaintiff's Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) motion because she failed to show how additional discovery would have enabled her to oppose the operative facts; summary judgment was properly entered for the city defendants on the § 1983 civil rights claims as there was no genuine dispute about their lack of involvement.
|
|||||
| Initiative & Referendum Inst. v. Walker, Nos. 02-4105, 02-4123,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the supermajority requirement in Utah Const. art. VI, § 1(2)(a)(ii) for wildlife initiatives allegedly imposed a "chilling effect" on the exercise of plaintiffs' First Amendment rights, they had standing, but the claim failed because the provision did not implicate the freedom of speech based on, inter alia, a core political speech theory.
|
|||||
| Klitz v. Barnhart, No. 05-7112,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The judgment of the district court was reversed and the case was remanded because a Social Security ALJ failed to consider, when making an RFC finding, the claimant's use of a home nebulizer two or three days a week and two times per day on those days. On remand, the ALJ was to develop details about the claimant's need to use the nebulizer.
|
|||||
| Oliver v. Zenon, No. 05-1286,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's request for COA pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(1)(A) to appeal denial of his § 2254 petition was denied because his habeas petition was filed after end of one-year statute of limitations set forth in 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(d) and he failed to show extraordinary circumstances beyond his control that kept him from filing in timely manner.
|
|||||
| Oliveros v. Mitchell, No. 05-2163,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the officers' acts of mishandling of a firearm and handcuffs while apprehending the deceased was not negligence that endangered the general public, the representative could not avail herself of the immunity waiver provided in N.M. Stat. § 41-4-6. Thus, the grant of summary judgment to the officers on the negligence claim was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Peoples v. CCA Det. Ctrs., Nos. 04-3071 & 04-3124,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, May 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court, on rehearing en banc on appeal from district court's dismissal of Bivens action for failure to state claim, was evenly divided on issue of whether Bivens action was available against employees of privately operated prison. Because there was no majority on the en banc panel, the district court's determination on that issue was affirmed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
