 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Armstrong v. Advocacy Ctr. for Persons with Disabilities, Inc., No. 05-14706 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer properly was awarded summary judgment on employee's sexual harassment claim where employee alleged supervisor touched her inappropriately and made improper comments but employee did not file written complaint as required by employer. Employee did not properly plead harassment claim and did not raise triable fact issue regarding her claim.
|
|||||
| Bond v. Ivy Tech State College, No. 05-11491 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's dismissal of a former employee's suit for lack of personal jurisdiction was affirmed because the district court could not exercise jurisdiction under Fla. Stat. § 48.193. The district court did not abuse its discretion by not transferring the case since the former employee knew Indiana was the proper forum when she filed suit.
|
|||||
| Ingram v. Sch. Bd., No. 05-12693 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Construing a district court's dismissal of a Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 claim as a dismissal without prejudice, the dismissal was affirmed because the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the state law claim so that it could be brought in state court following the dismissal of an employee's Title VII claim.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ashcroft, No. 05-12627 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence of 71 months imposed on conviction of being felon in possession of firearm and of possessing and stealing stolen firearms was reasonable based on 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a)'s factors where district court considered defendant's extensive criminal history and need to reflect seriousness of offense, afford adequate deterrence, and protect public.
|
|||||
| United States v. Brillhart, No. 04-15393 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2) was affirmed in part because the district court did not err in not applying a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 reduction, but the sentence was vacated in part and remanded because the district court erred in applying the USSG as mandatory.
|
|||||
| United States v. Byrd, No. 05-13546 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: On appeal, defendant argued district court erred in denying motion to suppress evidence seized during traffic stop. However, defendant did not enter conditional plea, Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2), but rather entered unconditional guilty plea without reserving in writing right to appeal district court's denial of motion, so conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Duboc, No. 05-10715 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of conspiracy to tamper with a witness under 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 371 and 1512(b)(1), the district court did not err in imposing a consecutive sentence, because, inter alia, U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5G1.3(c) applied and the district court considered the guidelines and factors listed in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a).
|
|||||
| United States v. Duncan, No. 05-12230 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed since the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the tape recordings into evidence, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find defendant guilty of perjury, and the district court did not clearly err in declining to reduce his sentence for an acceptance of responsibility.
|
|||||
| United States v. Lisbon, No. 05-12637 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 10, 2006, Decided , February 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for violating 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 2119, 924(c), and 922(g) were affirmed because the statutes were not unconstitutional exercises of Congress' Commerce Clause power. Defendant's sentences were affirmed because they were reasonable.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
