 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Nieves-Vega v. Ortiz-Quinones, No. 05-2043,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an employee was sent notice on June 13, 2002, that her salary would be reduced as of July 1, 2002, and she did not file suit until July 1, 2003, her political discrimination claim was time-barred because the one-year statute of limitations began to run on June 13, and her challenge letter did not toll the limitations period.
|
|||||
| Teragram Corp. v. Marketwatch.com, Inc., Nos. 05-1635, 05-1636,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court affirmed a summary judgment granting a licensor one year's fees for one type of software in a license agreement dispute because the licensee failed to give notice of an alleged prior material breach. No damages were owed for a second type of software, which failed to perform as warranted.
|
|||||
| Cardona-Martinez v. Rodriguez-Quinones, No. 04-1494,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employees were bound by district court's unchallenged finding that First Amendment did not bar state employers from removing them from their positions on the basis of political affiliation. Employees failed to appeal determination that positions that they occupied were in fact political positions despite their designation as career positions.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez-Rodriguez, No. 05-1121,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was entitled to new trial on conspiracy to import, possess, and distribute large quantity of cocaine under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 based on newly discovered evidence where he presented co-defendant's affidavit stating that he did not meet defendant until after their arrest and defendant did not know about drugs in container from Venezuela.
|
|||||
| United States v. Landrau-Lopez, No. 05-1299,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine was affirmed because an instruction to the jury venire was not erroneous, and the district court properly applied Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) and did not abuse its discretion by allowing testimony concerning prior bad acts involving drug smuggling.
|
|||||
| United States v. Saez, No. 05-2001,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals found that district court did not err when it sentenced defendant who pled guilty to aiding the distribution of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. § 841, to 130 months' imprisonment, even though another judge sentenced a codefendant to 39 months' imprisonment because, inter alia, defendant had a more extensive criminal history.
|
|||||
| Cruz-Gomez v. Rivera-Hernandez, No. 05-1864,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals did not have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1291 to hear appeal filed by Secretary of Labor of Puerto Rico from a district court's order denying the Secretary summary judgment on claims employee filed under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 because district court's ruling was based on its determination that there were issues of fact for trial.
|
|||||
| United States v. Alli, No. 05-1698,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant stole credit cards from letters, his sentence was upheld because reasonably foreseeable loss qualified as intended loss under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B1.1(b)(1)(E), and "trafficking" sufficient to satisfy § 2B1.1(b)(9)(B) did not require a violation of the trafficking statute, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1029(a).
|
|||||
| United States v. DeLeon, No. 04-1592,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The prior deportation of defendant, accused of illegal reentry, was not invalid under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(d) due to the government's failure to inform him of his eligibility for relief because the defendant gave a false name at his deportation hearing, and the government had no way of knowing that the defendant may have been eligible for relief.
|
|||||
| United States v. Smith, No. 05-1725,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, April 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals found that a sentence of 46 months' imprisonment followed by six years of supervised release which the district court imposed on defendant who pled guilty to six counts of distributing crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. § 841, was unreasonably low, and it vacated defendant's sentence and remanded for resentencing.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
