 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bader v. Warden, No. 05-2587,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Discovery was properly limited in 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 action because, although habeas counsel found evidence of meeting which provided an opportunity for leniency-for-testimony deal, when three social workers were deposed they said there was no agreement for leniency towards inmate's son made or disclosed at the meeting. Depositions were sufficient.
|
|||||
| Cordoba-Quiroz v. Gonzales, No. 06-1600,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA properly denied alien's motion for reconsideration because it reached correct legal conclusion that motion to reopen received 91 days after BIA's final decision was untimely. Generally, an alien was required to file motion to reopen within 90 days of a final administrative decision, pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1229a(c)(7)(C).
|
|||||
| Feliz v. Gonzales, No. 06-1579,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where nothing indicated that another continuance would have resulted in an appearance by an alien's wife, an IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying a continuance to allow the wife to appear, especially when none was requested; as for the propriety of the BIA's summary affirmance, the argument was rejected as the IJ's decision was proper.
|
|||||
| Massie v. Gonzales, No. 06-2111,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Aliens were not entitled to asylum pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42)(A) because past incidents of religious discrimination--sporadic incidents involving no physical abuse--did not add up to more than mere discomfiture, unpleasantness, harassment, or unfair treatment. BIA did not err by failing to order transcript of missing portion of testimony.
|
|||||
| Mewengkang v. Gonzales, No. 06-1976,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of withholding of removal was affirmed because discrepancies in alien's testimony, regarding events giving rise to claim for withholding and regarding application for asylum and withholding on religious basis, provided substantial evidence supporting IJ's credibility determination and conclusion that alien was motivated by economic concerns.
|
|||||
| Monge v. Cortes, No. 06-2286,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted to two defendants in driver's § 1983 action because driver's failure to file a timely opposition to summary judgment motion allowed district court to deem the motion unopposed and adopt defendants' facts as stated, pursuant to D.P.R. R. 56(e). No genuine issue of material fact existed as to the two defendants.
|
|||||
| Segarra-Jimenez v. Banco Popular De P.R., No. 06-1816,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was proper against former suspect on his claims of slander, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress because suspect could not provide record evidence to meet required elements of any claim and never moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) for extension of the summary judgment deadline.
|
|||||
| Sher v. United States VA, No. 06-1537,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court properly found that the MSPB properly sustained a failure to cooperate charge against a VA hospital's chief pharmacist, under investigation for obtaining free drug samples for personal use, as he was represented by counsel, in person and via phone, and had letter notice of possible job loss for failure such that immunity attached.
|
|||||
| United States v. Bravo, Nos. 05-1144, 05-1145, No. 05-1146, No. 05-1147,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court correctly denied defendants' motion to suppress the bales of marijuana seized from the vessel on the grounds that the U.S. Coast Guard lacked reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment to stop and search the vessel because the Fourth Amendment did not apply to activities of the U.S. against aliens in international waters.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
