 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Denmark v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., No. 05-2877,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In ERISA case under 29 U.S.C.S. § 1132(a)(1)(B), denial of disability coverage was affirmed because--applying arbitrary and capricious review--medical reports, surveillance evidence, and lack of objective evidence to support inability to work provided substantial evidence supporting claim denial. En banc review of standard of review was suggested.
|
|||||
| Puerto Rico Telephone Co. v. Advanced Cellular Sys. (In re Advanced Cellular Sys.), No. 06-1332,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Tariff's fraudulent use provision provided that the debtor as a reseller, was solely responsible for any fraudulent use, by any person, of any numbers assigned to it. Under that plain reading of the fraudulent use provision, the debtor assumed responsibility for losses from cloning, and the dismissal of the creditor's proof of claim was vacated.
|
|||||
| United States v. Medina, No. 06-2142,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment sentencing defendant for violations of 18 U.S.C.S. § 841 was affirmed because, under the doctrines of law of the case and stare decisis, the court declined to reconsider the court's prior rulings that the phrase "cocaine base" in 21 U.S.C.S. § 841 applied not only to crack cocaine but to any form of cocaine base.
|
|||||
| United States v. Miliano, No. 05-2746,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal was dismissed because he knowingly and voluntarily entered into a plea agreement, through which he received significant consideration, including a minor role adjustment, in exchange for, inter alia, a waiver of his right to appeal, and no clear and gross injustice would have resulted from the enforcement of that waiver.
|
|||||
| Abboud v. Ground Round, Inc. (In re Ground Round, Inc.), No. 06-9002,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the bankruptcy appellate panel's grant of the partnership's motion for specific performance of the lease provision that required return of the license at the end of the lease where with a few exceptions, the debtor could not succeed to a greater interest in property under 11 U.S.C.S. § 541 than it held prior to bankruptcy.
|
|||||
| Fontes v. Gonzales, No. 05-1755,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien was not eligible for a waiver of deportability under former § 212(c) (8 U.S.C.S. § 1182(c)) (1994) (repealed) of the INA where "aggravated felony" and "crime of violence," although statutory grounds for deportation, were not statutory grounds for exclusion. Thus, the exclusion statute did not provide authority for waivers on those grounds.
|
|||||
| Ford v. Skorich (In re Skorich), No. 06-2395,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Wife's equitable interest in marital property was not a "claim" where it was neither a right to payment nor a right to equitable remedy for breach of performance; nor was the transfer of legal title to escrow agents on account of antecedent debt. Thus, 11 U.S.C.S. § 547 did not treat the transfer of the property proceeds as an avoidable preference.
|
|||||
| Int'l Strategies Group, Ltd. v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, No. 06-1790,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed judgment dismissing investor's action against attorney who was hired by investment firm to recover lost funds because investor did not have attorney-client relationship with attorney and it should have known that he might not keep his promise to recover investor's funds if doing so interfered with duties he owed the firm.
|
|||||
| Rodriguez v. DEA, Nos. 06-1795, 06-1832,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, March 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of a prisoner's suit alleging that the DEA's administrative forfeiture of cash violated due process was vacated because, in dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, district court read the complaint too narrowly. A clear misconstrual of the petition stated a due process claim within district court's subject matter jurisdiction.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
