 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Fed. Ins. Co. v. HPSC, Inc., No. 06-1050,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a suit for rescission of an insurance policy based on an insured's alleged misrepresentation, a district court did not err in admitting evidence of an insurer's action on past applications as it was relevant to what influenced an underwriter's decisions. The record supported rulings against the insurer on the Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A claims.
|
|||||
| United States v. 6 Fox St., No. 05-2744,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of the undisputed material facts that conclusively established the requisite substantial connection between each of the properties and drug sales, the district court properly granted summary judgment forfeiting them to the United States under 21 U.S.C.S. § 881(a)(7).
|
|||||
| United States v. Caceres-Cabrera, No. 06-1129,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the basis for a district court's imposition of an upward adjustment under USSG § 2S1.1(b)(1) for knowing that laundered monies were proceeds of illicit drug transactions was not clear, the case was remanded for resentencing.
|
|||||
| United States v. Coloian, No. 06-1357,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 20, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America precluded ancillary jurisdiction over orders to expunge criminal records based solely on equitable grounds, a district court's order denying a motion to expunge was vacated, and the case was remanded for dismissal for want of jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Wine & Spirits Retailers, Inc. v. Rhode Island, No. 06-2224,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 20, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals upheld district court's judgment that amendments to R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 3-5-11 and 3-5-11.1 which nullified existing franchise agreements and prohibited package stores from running joint advertisements were constitutional because statutes were enacted to safeguard against anticompetitive behavior, not to protect instate businesses.
|
|||||
| Aspen v. Bissonnette, No. 06-1615,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of a prisoner's habeas petition under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 was affirmed because, although state appeals court misapplied Batson v. Kentucky and J.E.B. v. Alabama in analyzing prisoner's equal protection claim, the totality of the circumstances demonstrated that the prosecutor did not issue peremptory challenges on the basis of gender.
|
|||||
| Costa v. Robotic Vision Sys. (In re Robotic Vision Sys.) , BAP NO. NH 06-027,
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's omnibus objection to payment of the Chapter 11 administrative professionals from funds in a carve-out provision and as an administrative expense was properly overruled because appellant had not earlier objected to the carve-out agreement and his current objection was barred by judicial estoppel and res judicata.
|
|||||
| United States v. Caraballo-Rodriguez, No. 03-1795,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed district court's judgment convicting defendant of misprision of felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 4, because defendant did not show that district court committed plain error when it found that his conduct violated § 4 and it could not be said that allowing him to plead guilty raised questions about judicial process.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tobin, No. 06-1883,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's jury instruction on the "intent to harass" element of 47 U.S.C.S. § 223(a)(1)(D) broadened the statute unduly and it was prejudicial to defendant; the reviewing court read subsection (D) to require an intent to provoke adverse reactions in the called party and held that a bad motive of some other kind standing alone was not enough.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
