 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Caldero-Guzman v. Holder, No. 08-2325,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 19, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner provided no reason to reopen a deportation order and the BIA offered a specific and cogent statement of the relevant facts and correctly applied the applicable law in affirming the IJ's denial of petitioner's motion to reopen. The court lacked jurisdiction to review a refusal to reopen a deportation order sua sponte.
|
|||||
| Sanchez v. Esso Std. Oil Co., No. 09-1211,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 19, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because not even the expansive equitable powers of the courts to remediate environmental harm could have excused the district court's premature determination of the merits of the service station and the operator's claims against the UST owner, the preliminary injunction entered pursuant to the RCRA, 42 U.S.C.S. § 6972, was vacated.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Melendez, No. 08-1497,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 19, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Remand was required because district court did not comply with its obligation independently to review the government's compliance with the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C.S. § 3500. District court should have determined whether a Form 302 pertaining to FBI interview of witness was producible as statement pursuant to 18 U.S.C.S. § 3500(e)(1).
|
|||||
| Waldron v. George Weston Bakeries, Inc., No. 08-2554,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 19, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's judgment as to plaintiffs' likelihood of success on their claims for breach of distribution agreements was consistent with the law and the discerned facts. That judgment represented a reasonable prediction of the probable outcome of the litigation, and the findings as to the other three elements were plausible.
|
|||||
| Rodriguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp., No. 07-2662,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 22, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant manufacturer was not a party in an action against entities that were jointly and severally liable with defendant, the solidarity doctrine required that, with respect to identical claims, the filing of an action against one solidarily liable defendant tolled the statute as to all defendants solidarily liable with the first.
|
|||||
| Starr v. Dube, No. 08-1322,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an inmate alleged that a false disciplinary charge was filed against him in retaliation for his exercise of First Amendment rights, the adverse act alleged was "de minimis" and thus did not give rise to a cognizable retaliation claim since, inter alia, the disciplinary charge against him was dismissed about a week after it was filed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Croto, No. 08-1856,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled guilty to possessing firearms after having been convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 922 and 924, his suppression motion was properly denied because, inter alia, the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause to support issuance of the search warrant.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez, No. 07-1541,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, June 24, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant argued that the court's instruction failed to require a jury finding that he consciously shared the principal actors' knowledge of the underlying criminal act, the jury instruction sufficed to inform the jury that defendant could only be guilty of aiding and abetting if he had willfully assisted in the commission of the crime.
|
|||||
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. |
