 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carter v. Diamondback Golf Club, Inc., Nos. 06-11961 & 06-14817 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plain language of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(c) required courts to grant relief to which party in whose favor it was rendered was entitled, even if the party had not demanded such relief in party's pleadings, so case was remanded for consideration of available remedies based on facts and circumstances of this case.
|
|||||
| Douglas County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co., No. 06-13198 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where services provider did not seek indemnity from insured during claims-made policy period, and insured failed to notify insurer during policy period of potential indemnification claim, of which insured was aware, indemnification claim did not fall within policy period. Thus, insured was not entitled to reimbursement for sum paid to provider.
|
|||||
| Mackey v. United States, No. 06-12547 Non-Argument Calendar, No. 06-13271 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a consolidated appeal, a district court's denial of two pro se federal inmates' Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4) motions was affirmed because the judgments denying the inmates' 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motions were not void; a district judge's earlier recusal did not deprive him of jurisdiction to rule on the § 2255 motions.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cheney, No. 06-14935 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Echevarria, No. 06-14973 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez-Millan, No. 06-14868 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided , March 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 24-month for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (B)(i) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 2 was affirmed since the district court did not plainly err in applying a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.1(b)(5) (2005) enhancement; defendant's argument failed that the power to regulate traffic was a power reserved to the states.
|
|||||
| Ambrosia Coal & Constr. Co. v. Morales, No. 05-14255,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 2, 2007, Decided , April 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Presumption of collusion under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1359 was improperly applied for assignments of claims from subsidiaries to a parent company for state law claims regarding a settlement agreement with leasehold owners because the company was real party in interest and the assignments were absolute transfers made in exchange for valuable consideration.
|
|||||
| Bailey v. Silberman, No. 06-13463 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 2, 2007, Decided , April 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly found that it lacked jurisdiction to issue mandamus relief under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1361 to direct a state court and its judicial officers in the performance of their duties to address merits of a state prisoner's habeas petition. Thus, action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 was properly dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915A.
|
|||||
| Rojas v. United States AG, No. 06-14312 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 2, 2007, Decided , April 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A petition for review was denied because it could not be said that the evidence an alien submitted in support of her motion to reopen was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at her earlier hearing before the IJ. Accordingly, the BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the alien's motion to reopen.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
