 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Perez v. Miami-Dade County, No. 05-10261,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of summary judgment to the county as to the detective's § 1983 claim of Fourth Amendment excessive force was vacated where the evidence of the county's failure to discipline officers for excessive force despite its notice was sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the county had a custom of using excessive force.
|
|||||
| RDP Royal Palm Hotel, L.P. v. Clark Constr. Group, Inc., No. 04-16203, No. 05-11713,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly found in favor of general contractor on its counterclaims and hotel owner's breach of contract claims; owner waived "time is of the essence" clause by allowing completion date to pass without setting new one and by continuing to issue change orders, and contractor was entitled to recover costs associated with the changes.
|
|||||
| Rollins, Inc. v. Black, No. 04-15876,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in vacating punitive damages award made to individual in suit against company; although arbitrator might not have realized that punitive damages were not available under Fla. Stat. Ann. §§ 501.201-501.213, such was not manifest disregard for the law, and punitive damages could have been awarded on negligence and fraud claims.
|
|||||
| United States v. De Jesus Matute-Santos, No. 05-10291,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Fifth Amendment rights were not violated where a sentence was imposed after a judicial finding of drug quantity because the sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum based upon the allegations in the indictment. There was no plain error in sentencing under the mandatory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual either.
|
|||||
| United States v. Jackson, No. 05-14594 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's concurrent sentences for violating 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 371, 471, 472, and 473 was affirmed because he waived review of the reasonableness of his sentence, and the district court did not err in applying U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B5.1(b)(2) and (b)(4) enhancements to defendant's sentence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Walker, No. 05-14711 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's denial of a pro se inmate's motion to correct his unlawful sentence was vacated and remanded because the appellate court did not know whether the district court construed the inmate's motion as a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion or whether it denied the motion on the basis of some other authority.
|
|||||
| Vuksanovic v. United States AG, No. 04-13246,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided , February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's petition for review was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the alien's conviction for second-degree arson under Fla. Stat. § 806.01(2) was a crime of moral turpitude, and 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(a)(2)(C) deprived the appellate court of jurisdiction to review the final order of removal.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
