 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Aihua Chiv Wang v. Mukasey, No. 06-2749,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's petition for review was denied because the BIA justifiably denied the alien's petitions for asylum, withholding of removal, and the CAT. The future likelihood of the alien's persecution in China if she had additional children was speculative and did not come within 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42).
|
|||||
| Curnin v. Town of Egremont, No. 07-1876,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a couple owned property but were not registered to vote, a preliminary injunction was properly denied on their claim that their First Amendment rights were violated when they were not permitted to speak at town meetings called per Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 39, § 9 as forum analysis was inapposite and they had no right to speak as non-legislators.
|
|||||
| Liu Lie Tjong v. Mukasey, No. 07-1167,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's petition for review of a final order of removal by the BIA after it denied his second motion to reopen his removal proceedings was denied because none of the BIA's rulings were made without rational explanation, nor did they reflect an inexplicable departure from established policies or rest on some impermissible basis.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hoey, No. 07-1454,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The 63-month sentence of a defendant who pled to 18 U.S.C.S. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) child pornography possession was upheld as a four-level increase under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2G2.2(b)(4) was proper; evidence showed that an image depicting a young boy being penetrated by the sex organ of a much older man was of a real child and sadistic.
|
|||||
| Bourne v. Norhtwood Props., LLC (In re Northwood Props., LLC), No. 07-1146,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Condominium developer's reorganization plan was confirmed when a finding that it could not extend its development rights sans consent of creditors (unit owners) was reversed as Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 183A, § 5(b)(1) was misinterpreted; knowing their interest percentage would track approximate ratio of their units' value to that of all units sufficed.
|
|||||
| Gosal v. Mukasey, No. 07-1498,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, November 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In removal proceedings under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1227(a)(1)(B), petition for review of BIA's denial of an alien's reconsideration motion was denied because the denial was entirely reasonable and well explained. The BIA made it clear that alien's testimony had not been overlooked--it simply had not affected the result. That explanation was not irrational.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
