 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Fields Station LLC v. Capitol Food Corp. (In re Capitol Food Corp.), No. 06-2327,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the owner made no prima facie showing that the debtor submitted its Chapter 11 petition in bad faith under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1112(b), the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the owner's motion to dismiss the Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition or relief from the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C.S. § 362(d)(1).
|
|||||
| Lemus v. Gonzales, No. 06-1628,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review of order denying fifth motion to reopen removal proceeding was denied because motion was time barred and numerically barred pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and alien did not really contend that country conditions in Guatemala had worsened since ordered of removal, as was necessary under exception in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3).
|
|||||
| United States v. Andujar-Basco, No. 06-1288,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's cocaine-related convictions, pursuant to 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, were affirmed although, under circumstances of case, the Fifth Amendment barred government witness's testimony concerning defendant's explicit mid-interrogation assertion of his Miranda rights, and it was error to permit such testimony to go to the jury.
|
|||||
| United States v. Earle, No. 06-1727,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an illegal reentry prosecution under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326, the lawfulness of deportation simply was not an element of the offense. Therefore, defendant was not entitled to a jury instruction on the lawfulness of deportation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Malpica-Garcia, No. 05-2728,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's challenge to the testimony of a co-conspirator about a meeting did not violate the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment because the conversations about the meeting were not testimonial statements, but were part of private conversations held without any expectation that the information would be saved and used at a trial.
|
|||||
| French v. Corporate Receivables, Inc., No. 06-1533,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Reduction of a couple's request for attorney's fees per the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1692k(a)(3), and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 9, was not an abuse of discretion due to their de minimis trial success; the failure to obtain actual damages, and that there was an offer that would have completely compensated them, showed that going to trial was wasteful.
|
|||||
| Int'l Ass'n of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental & Reinforcing Iron Workers Union Local #7 v. Associated Gen. Contr. of Mass., Inc., No. 06-2393,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arbitration award requiring a union local to enforce payment and bonding requirements of trust funds to which the local contributed pursuant to CBA was affirmed because the grievance was arbitrable under CBA, arbitrator's simplified application of the CBA's bonding requirement was within his informed discretion, and public policy was not violated.
|
|||||
| Massamont Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., No. 06-2465,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurance company was not entitled to defense or indemnification on its errors and omissions (E&O) policy upon claim brought by nonparty insurer because company's transfer of accounts from nonparty insurer in breach of contractual exclusivity clause was not "professional" act but was simply a business decision outside E&O policy's coverage.
|
|||||
| Pan v. Gonzales, No. 06-2166,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After his request for 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158 asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT protection was denied, an alien's petition for review was denied as he failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that his request was timely, and his reliance on 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252 was misplaced; a challenge to the IJ's factfinding would not restore jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| United States v. DeSimone, No. 05-2314,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction of defendant, an art broker, for filing a false tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C.S. § 7206(1) was affirmed because, under Fed. R. Evid. 703, the district court properly allowed the admission of a summary chart prepared by an IRS agent itemizing defendant's receipt of payments and net profits relative to the sale of certain paintings.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
