 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Thomas v. Aventis Pharm., Inc., No. 05-13378 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an ADEA case, a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a former employer was affirmed because a former employee failed to provide sufficient circumstantial evidence that the employer's legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons--work-rule violations--for disciplining and ultimately terminating him were pretextual.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gomez-Lopez, No. 05-14574 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided , April 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 46-month sentence under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a) and (b)(1) was affirmed, although the district court erred in its application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.1(d), because the sentence was within the correct range, and the district court said that it had considered the 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553 factors and the effect of Booker.
|
|||||
| United States v. Houston, No. 05-14052 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided , April 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's five year sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 2422(b) was affirmed because U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5C1.2(a)'s safety valve provision was inapplicable, U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(b)(6) only applied to drug offenses, and the Booker decision did not affect statutory minimums.
|
|||||
| United States v. Soreide, No. 04-15344,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided , April 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in denying defendant's motion to sever conspiracy and fraud charges. It was not sufficient for him to indicate that he wished to testify on some counts but not on others.
|
|||||
| Universal Express, Inc. v. United States SEC, No. 05-13142 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided , April 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's dismissal of a complaint was affirmed because the district court could consider a complaint filed by the SEC in another federal district court without converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and providing notice as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).
|
|||||
| Watkins v. City of Huntsville, No. 04-15607,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 18, 2006, Decided , April 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of an employer was affirmed because the employee failed to show that the employer's reason for not hiring her to a full-time position was pretext, and the district court did not err in determining that the employee did show a causal link between her termination and her filing of an EEOC charge.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
