 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Narragansett Jewelry Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., No. 08-1008,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 6, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insurer was not required to provide coverage under a jewelry company's general liability insurance contract because, applying the pleadings test, the policy's control of property exclusion governed. Factual allegations in the underlying complaint against the insured described a loss related to property in the insured's care, custody, or control.
|
|||||
| SEC v. Papa, No. 08-1172,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 6, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court rightly dismissed SEC's claims under § 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 78j, and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, for failure to state claim as, while SEC argued that letters signed by individuals assisted in breach of fiduciary duty, non-disclosures in issue did not cause allegedly wrongful transactions or resultant losses.
|
|||||
| Sierra Club v. Wagner, No. 08-1978,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 6, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision to uphold the U.S. Forest Service's approval of two forest timber harvesting projects was affirmed where the Forest Service's Environmental Assessment discussion complied with NEPA since it made it clear that it considered all of the arguable categories of harm and that it addressed claims concerning the impact of the roadless rule.
|
|||||
| Day v. Staples, Inc., No. 08-1689,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 9, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Terminated employee was not entitled to whistleblower protection under 18 U.S.C.S. § 1514A, since the employee's complaints concerning inaccurate internal tracking systems and failure to maximize profits were insufficient to support an objectively reasonable belief that the identified practices constituted shareholder fraud.
|
|||||
| United States v. Rivera-Rivera, Nos. 05-2495, 05-2498,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 9, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants were not entitled to reversal of their convictions on a Hobbs Act charge pursuant to 18 U.S.C.S. § 1951(a) because the government proved that lottery business robbed by defendants was engaged in interstate commerce and the robbery both depleted the assets of business and resulted in business's temporary closure on the day of the robbery.
|
|||||
| Stevenson v. Bankowski (In re Stevenson), BAP NO. MB 08-037,
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 10, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A bankruptcy court's decision to deny the debtor's request for a refund of the undistributed Chapter 13 plan payments was affirmed where the debtor offered no justification for her failure to appear at the hearing on the trustee's motion for an order to disburse the payments to an administrative claimant.
|
|||||
| Rivas-Mira v. Holder, No. 08-1604,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 11, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an alien from El Salvador alleged that armed gang members linked to union organizers robbed bus passengers and shot him, he was properly denied asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42) because substantial evidence supported the IJ's adverse credibility finding under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158 based on inconsistencies in his application and testimony.
|
|||||
| United States v. Combs, No. 06-2258,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, February 11, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While defendant argued that a bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearm and Explosives agent's conduct violated due process as her actions interfered with his Sixth Amendment right to freely present witnesses, trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to instruct on witness intimidation as there was no prejudice-the witness testified for him.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
