 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| E. Savings Bank, FSB v. LaFata (In re LaFata), No. 05-2510, No. 06-9009,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 3, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even some nominal encroachment by a debtor's principal residence on mortgaged property did not trigger the anti-modification provision of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1322(b)(2); thus, district court properly allowed bifurcation of bank's claims on debtor's property into secured and unsecured portions. Bank's failure to object to valuation was also not justified.
|
|||||
| Haag v. United States, No. 06-2200,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 3, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: IRS was properly granted summary judgment in a taxpayers' suit alleging failure to provide notice of a collection due process hearing under 26 U.S.C.S. § 6320 because a government affidavit showed that timely notification letters were sent to the taxpayers, and receipts for delivery of these letters showed that the taxpayers received this notice.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garcia-Carrasquillo, Nos. 05-1684, 05-1685, 05-1686,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 3, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient that defendants aided and abetted the knowing possession of cocaine and cocaine base with intent to distribute under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1) because one defendant admitted to possession of the drugs, and the other defendant traveled with him to the site where the drugs were stored and fled at the approach of the police.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tejeda, No. 06-1824,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 3, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Throat-slitting gesture made by defendant's grandfather during trial did not require mistrial where incident was not so harmful such that trial court's instruction could not cure it. Court weighed risk of threat that juror might think that gesture was made by someone defendant knew with jurors' statements that they could impartially reach verdict.
|
|||||
| Selim Rroshi v. Gonzales, No. 06-1329,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B) supported the denial of asylum for an alien, a native and citizen of Albania, because a U.S. State Department report established changed circumstances in Albania with respect to persecution due to political party affiliation, and the alien did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution.
|
|||||
| Torres v. Puerto Rico, No. 06-1771,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion in denying a commonwealth's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings for the commonwealth's failure to timely comply with a case management order. The court had jurisdiction to review the challenged matter under the collateral order doctrine.
|
|||||
| Spratt v. R.I. Dep't of Corr., No. 06-2038,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Rhode Island DOC failed to meet its burden under RLUIPA where although it had a compelling state interest in maintaining prison security, it failed to show that the blanket ban on all inmate preaching was the least restrictive means available to achieve its interest.
|
|||||
| Taffanelli-Figueroa v. Fajardo-Velez, No. 06-1760,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court abused its discretion when it dismissed the mother and son's action with prejudice on the ground that they failed to comply with the court's order to appear where they filed a pro se motion, which stated that the purpose of the appearance was to comply with the order, and that motion constituted an appearance, as a matter of law.
|
|||||
| United States v. Henry, No. 06-1530,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claims of discovery violations were rejected because there was nothing to indicate any error in quashing overly broad and redundant subpoenas on the eve of trial nor that the requisite prejudice existed; even assuming Justice Department guidelines were not followed in handling an informant, any cause for concern was not a matter for the court.
|
|||||
| Joost v. United States, No. 04-2317,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because materials that petitioner received post-conviction from his FOIA request which showed that FBI agents purposefully directed petitioner's energies towards higher penalty offenses did not alter the main thrust of what the jury learned at trial, petitioner's Brady claim failed and his § 2255 petition was properly dismissed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
