 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Kansky v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., No. 06-2042,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A claimant's ERISA, 29 U.S.C.S. §§ 1001-1461, suit was rightly dismissed as his schizoaffective disorder was a preexisting condition under his former employer's long-term disability plan; further, his disability occurred during the first 12 months of his employment and he could not combine his three months of work with 19 that he had years ago.
|
|||||
| Prostkoff v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., No. 06-2699,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted to insurers, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, on insured's claim for declaratory judgment because language in disability insurance riders was clear and unambiguous in providing that amount of insured's cost of living benefits was to be frozen at amount received by insured just prior to his sixty-fifth birthday.
|
|||||
| Wilson v. Moreau, No. 06-2630,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Former police chief, who asserted he was dismissed due to his political affiliation, had no valid First Amendment claim because he was not protected under Elrod v. Burns. The authority attaching to the police chief's position was decisive in determining that he was a policy making employee.
|
|||||
| Pike v. Guarino, No. 06-1019, No. 06-1020,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the Commonwealth waived its nonexhaustion defense and failed to establish a procedural default defense, the appellate court considered the merits of the inmate's claim in her 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 habeas petition that she was incompetent to stand trial in state court and found the district court's fact-bound rejection of that claim supported.
|
|||||
| United States v. Nascimento, No. 06-1152, No. 06-1153, No. 06-1154,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions for RICO violations under 18 U.S.C.S. § 1962 were affirmed because normal requirements of RICO applied to defendants involved with enterprises that were engaged only in noneconomic criminal activity. Although street gang to which defendants belonged was near the outer edge of conduct encompassed by RICO, it did not cross that line.
|
|||||
| Houghton v. Szwyd (In re Szwyd), BAP NO. MW-06-035,
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order overruling objection to claim of homestead exemption was affirmed. Bankruptcy court rightly found that nominee trust ceased to exist when debtor became its sole trustee and sole beneficiary. At that point all title vested in debtor and he became an owner in rightful possession of his principal residence under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 188, § 1.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mittel-Carey, No. 06-1960,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order suppressing defendant's statements was affirmed because totality of circumstances, including the level of physical control that eight FBI agents exercised over defendant during an early morning search and lengthy interrogation, indicated that defendant was in custody and Miranda warnings were required.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
