 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Samath Pheak Tum v. Gonzales, No. 06-1387,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 1, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA's denial of the alien's application for asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158 and for relief under the CAT was supported by substantial evidence since the alien failed to show that it was more likely than not that she would be tortured if removed to Cambodia.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tom, No. 07-1074,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 1, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence, which essentially substituted for a term of over three years' imprisonment a term of probation, was too lenient, and some term of imprisonment was required for the sentence to be reasonable where the district court erred in the significance it gave to the sentence imposed on a co-defendant by a different judge.
|
|||||
| Belanger v. N. Am. Specialty Ins. Co., No. 07-1497,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Principals of the construction company were not entitled to the protection of the Maine Insurance Guaranty Association Act, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 24, § 4432, because they were not claimants under or policyholders of a policy issued by an insolvent insurer, and thus, any claim against them could not have been a "covered claim".
|
|||||
| Palma-Mazariegos v. Keisler, No. 05-2248,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA properly denied the alien's motion to reopen because 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c) mandated that a motion to reopen proceedings to submit an application for relief had to be accompanied by the application for relief and all supporting documentation, and the alien's motion to reopen was not accompanied by the adjustment of status application.
|
|||||
| Torres-Negrn v. J & N Records, LLC, Nos. 06-2058, 06-2059,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's dismissal of the copyright infringement claims on the basis of the songwriter's failure to satisfy the deposit copy requirement for copyright registration because the songwriter's use of a reconstruction, created without access to or reliance on the original work, could not constitute a "copy" under 17 U.S.C.S. § 408.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cirilo-Munoz, No. 05-2469,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Remand was required because two judges agreed, in separate opinions, that conclusory and vague explanation of sentence imposed was inadequate as matter of law, in that it failed to meet the requirements of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(c). It compromised court's ability to conduct proper appellate review and did not meet goals of transparency and credibility.
|
|||||
| Echevarria v. Keisler, No. 06-2144,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review filed by alien who entered U.S. illegally was denied because she did not come within terms of a grandfather clause found at 8 U.S.C.S. § 1255(i), as her visa petition was not "approvable when filed." IJ properly found that answers to questions about alien's marriage were vague, inconsistent, or at odds with a bona fide marriage.
|
|||||
| Evelyne v. Keisler, No. 06-2314,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Way in which the IJ conducted the alien's immigration hearing did not violate her due process right to a reasonable opportunity to present evidence on her own behalf where while the IJ evinced some impatience at the disjointed pace of the alien's direct examination, he remained within the bounds of proper behavior in asking the questions he did.
|
|||||
| Fitzgerald v. Barnstable Sch. Comm., No. 06-2596,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Remedial scheme of Title IX was sufficiently comprehensive to demonstrate Congress's intention to preclude the prosecution of counterpart actions against state actors, entities and individuals alike, under § 1983. Therefore, the parents' Title IX claims, brought under the mantle of § 1983, were precluded.
|
|||||
| Guerrero v. Ryan, No. 07-1243,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 5, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In § 1983 action against police officer, arising out of incident involving plaintiff and her neighbor, plaintiff was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) because officer presented significant evidence supporting his version of events, including two eyewitnesses and expert testimony as to plaintiff's mental state.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
