 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Estate of Barrett v. United States, No. 05-1905,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The dismissal of FTCA claims was affirmed because there was no jurisdiction over them where, by filing a complaint in the absence of agency action and in less than six months of filing her administrative tort claim, an administratrix failed to exhaust her remedies as required by 28 U.S.C.S. § 2675.
|
|||||
| Francis v. Providence Sch. Bd., No. 05-2353,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly entered for an employer on an employee's action claiming violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.S. § 12101 et seq., because the employee offered no evidence showing that her impairment stemming from cervical spine and neck injuries substantially or materially limited an activity of major importance in her own daily life.
|
|||||
| Subsalve USA Corp. v. Watson Mfg., Inc., No. 05-2645,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's order granting a dismissal and at the same time ordering a transfer to another venue was internally inconsistent; however, based on the record, the order was construed as a transfer order under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1631 and not immediately reviewable, and thus, the remainder of the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| United States v. Henderson, No. 03-1888,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of suppression motion was reversed and conviction was vacated because critical finding--that a police officer credibly testified that defendant, a passenger in a stopped car, was not wearing a seat belt--was clearly erroneous. No other justification met Fourth Amendment standards for investigation of defendant's identifying information.
|
|||||
| United States v. Potter, Nos. 05-2676, 05-2677, 05-2678,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants were properly convicted of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 371, 1343, and 1346, because the possibility that the state official they wished to influence through large payments was unwilling or unable to perform, or that the scheme never achieved its intended end, did not preclude conviction.
|
|||||
| Carmona-Rivera v. Puerto Rico, No. 05-2500,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, September 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment against a disabled employee was affirmed because there was no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that delays in providing accommodations to the disabled employee resulted from either intentional discrimination or retaliatory behavior in violation of the ADA or Title VII.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
