 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Arroyo-Audifred v. Verizon Wireless, Inc., No. 07-1661,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 4, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee's ADEA case was properly summarily dismissed because, regarding one promotion, the employee failed to establish a prima facie case given that the person selected was two years his senior; regarding another, he did not show that the employer's reason for choosing someone else-his lack of professional maturity-was pretextual.
|
|||||
| Rosado-Quinones v. Toledo, No. 07-1425,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 4, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A police officer's ¿ 1983 case against department officials, wherein he claimed that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was assigned to new job duties, was properly dismissed because he had no constitutionally protected interest in particular job functions and a state court case that he filed did not address matters of public concern.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cruzado-Laureano, No. 06-1815,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 4, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 63-month sentence for crimes committed while he was mayor, imposed on remand, was upheld as, inter alia, the sentencing court properly limited its scope to the prison term as issues related to restitution and a fine were not made newly relevant; defendant's lack of remorse was also properly considered pursuant to 18 U.S.C.S. ¿ 3553(a).
|
|||||
| United States v. Rodriguez, No. 06-2656,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 4, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled to attempting illegally to reenter the U.S. after removal following a felony conviction under 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1326, his case was remanded for resentencing in light of controlling precedent indicating that consideration of immigration fast-tracking disparity was not barred as a factor in the overall ambit of 18 U.S.C.S. ¿ 3553.
|
|||||
| Jasty v. Wright Med. Tech., Inc., Nos. 07-1743, 07-1744,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 5, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no evidence that the doctor complained of the terms of the contract it entered into with the corporations or refused to comply. Therefore, in view of the doctor's own conduct, no reasonable factfinder could have concluded that the corporations violated his rights under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A through the alleged kickback activity.
|
|||||
| M.M.R.-Z. v. Puerto Rico, No. 07-2025,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 5, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In action based on alleged abuse of child and deprivation of educational services, insofar as interlocutory appeal presented cognizable legal issues judgment was affirmed because plaintiffs' claim was not cognizable only under IDEA, 20 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1415, but was independently available through other sources of law such as ADA and Rehabilitation Act.
|
|||||
| Negron-Almeda v. Santiago, Nos. 07-2013, 07-2140,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 5, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court was bound by the plain meaning of the 2004 order dismissing the employees ¿ 1983 claims against the state officials, and its misinterpretation of the order influenced its finding as to timeliness, and led to the denial of intervention. Thus, the denial of the corporation's motion to intervene under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a) was vacated.
|
|||||
| Cook v. Gates, Nos. 06-2313, 06-2381,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 9, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Constitutional challenge to Don't Ask, Don't Tell, 10 U.S.C.S. ¿ 654, was rejected because act forbade sexual activity that was expressly excluded from service members' Fifth Amendment liberty interest in adult consensual sexual intimacy in their own homes and private lives. First Amendment was not implicate since act regulated conduct, not speech.
|
|||||
| Boston Gas Co. v. Century Indem. Co., No. 07-1452,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Mass. Sup. Jud. Ct. R. 1:03, court certified three questions to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) because SJC had not yet resolved whether joint and several allocation or pro rata insurance allocation was applicable where insurer covered environmentally damaged site under various policies during 18 years of gas provider's ownership.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garcia-Ortiz, No. 06-1923,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant, who was also convicted of felony murder, was properly convicted of the predicate offense of intentional obstruction of commerce by robbery under 18 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1951, but was improperly given a life sentence under U.S.S.G. ¿ 3D1.2(c), as the maximum under the statute was twenty years, which was controlling.
|
|||||
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. |
