 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Balachandran v. Holder, No. 08-1494,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review was denied because a pattern-or-practice claim could not be based on a group's suffering due to violent civil conflict in the home country and because petitioner, a citizen of Sri Lanka, was not credible and he failed to provide adequate corroboration for his asylum and CAT claims.
|
|||||
| Insituform Techs., Inc. v. Am. Home Assur. Co., Nos. 08-1602, 08-1603,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a primary insurer provided coverage to an insured based on work performed on a subcontract, an excess umbrella policy did not provide coverage, because exclusions applied and the excess policy's contractor's endorsement did not create new liability for the excess insurer inconsistent with its other basic coverage and exclusion provisions.
|
|||||
| Sokun Thy Mam v. Holder, No. 08-1899,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Cambodian petitioners' asylum application was properly denied because the IJ's adverse credibility finding was supported by discrepancies and omissions, including inconsistencies about when the wife's alleged rape had occurred, and a discrepancy regarding the date and length of the alien's hospitalization after a motorcycle incident.
|
|||||
| United States v. Santiago, No. 07-2543,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: At trial in which defendant claimed entrapment, district court did not err in sustaining the Fifth Amendment privilege asserted by informants because defense was not entitled to call witnesses merely to have them assert privilege before the jury, and nothing indicated that informants would have confessed to applying any undue or improper pressure.
|
|||||
| Usman v. Holder, No. 08-1331,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an alien from Pakistan sought asylum, the court lacked jurisdiction to review the finding that his asylum application was untimely under 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1158 because, inter alia, he did not identify any specific deficiencies that would give rise to a violation of the Due Process Clause; claims for withholding of removal and CAT relief failed.
|
|||||
| Peralta v. Holder, No. 08-2073,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 28, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's motion to reopen was both time-barred and number-barred, and it was submitted to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) as a plea for the exercise of the agency's sua sponte power to allow reopening of removal proceedings. The BIA declined, and the exercise of its discretion not to reopen sua sponte was beyond a court's review.
|
|||||
| Guang Zhao Zhang v. Holder, No. 08-1489,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 29, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien from China was properly denied asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1101, withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1231, and CAT protection because, inter alia, he did not show that he would be targeted personally if returned to China, he had no personal encounter with the police, and family members still in China had not been harmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. McMullin, No. 07-2064,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, May 29, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant pled guilty to being an unlawful user in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C.S. ¿ 922, his motion to suppress was properly denied under the Fourth Amendment because probable cause existed to believe that he had contaminated his neighbor's well; his motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
