 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Helms v. General Dynamics Corp., No. 05-16671,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Decided , January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An ERISA-plan administrator acted arbitrarily under 29 U.S.C.S. § 1104(a)(1)(D) by refusing to grant short-term disability benefits to a computer analyst who suffered from severe headaches; a nurse's review was inadequate to refute a neurologist's diagnosis, and the administrator should have relied on peer review or an independent medical exam.
|
|||||
| Main Drug, Inc. v. Aetna United States Healthcare, Inc., No. 06-12419, No. 06-12420,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In two cases governed by the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), two pharmacies' appeal of the district court's denial of their motion to remand was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as such appeals were discretionary under CAFA, and their notices of appeal filed in the district court did not meet the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 5(a)(1) and (2).
|
|||||
| McAdams v. Harvey, No. 04-16263 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Decided , January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a Title VII retaliation case on United States Supreme Court remand, the district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the employer was affirmed again because, inter alia, the Burlington Northern decision did not provide a basis for the appellate court to alter its decision on the employee's performance evaluation claim.
|
|||||
| Rodriguez v. United States AG, No. 06-13658 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an alien's testimony showed he refused to cooperate with Colombian guerillas and their demand that he pay a war tax, but he admitted the guerillas demanded such taxes from everybody, he did not establish that he was persecuted on account of a statutorily protected ground for asylum and withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C.S. §§ 1158, 1231.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garcia, No. 06-13485 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Decided , January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 846 was affirmed since a co-conspirator's testimony was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, and defendant's sentence was affirmed because the district court did not err in applying a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3C1.1 two-point enhancement for obstruction of justice.
|
|||||
| United States v. Newsome, No. 06-11181,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Decided , January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where, when arrested in a motel room and before being read his Miranda rights, defendant told officers where a gun was after the officers secured him with handcuffs and asked if there was anything in the room that the officers should know about, both the statement and the gun were properly admitted under the public safety exception to Miranda.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
