 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| FPL Energy Me. Hydro LLC v. FERC, No. 05-1871,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Electric company's petition for review of a federal regulatory commission's stay of its application for renewal of a license was denied as, while the issue was ripe for review, and its injury was sufficient to grant it standing, res judicata barred review as the same arguments under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1341, were made in state court.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ayala-Pizarro, No. 08-1321,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Visible Sys. Corp. v. Unisys Corp., Nos. 07-2730; 08-1410; 08-1411,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the corporation an award of attorneys' fees under 15 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1117(a) because the case company had a good faith belief that it was not in competition with the corporation and the company's behavior did not rise to the level of deliberate and willful conduct.
|
|||||
| Amilcar-Orellana v. Mukasey, No. 08-1563,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Review of denial asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT application was denied because substantial evidence, as 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1252(b)(4)(B) required, supported that husband was not a refugee under 8 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1101(a)(42) on the basis of political opinion; he testified against gang members as it was right thing to do-not due to political opinion.
|
|||||
| Barreto-Barreto v. United States, Nos. 07-2149, 07-2150, 07-2151, 07-2152, 07-2153, 07-2154, 07-2155, 07-2156 & 07-2157,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioners' 28 U.S.C.S. ¿ 2255 applications for relief were properly denied as untimely; they could not rely on Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)(B) because a final judgment had been entered and, even if equitable tolling applied, the argument that convictions constituted an extraordinary circumstance focused erroneously on the underlying criminal cases.
|
|||||
| Da Cunha v. Mukasey, No. 06-2225,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the IJ identified a specific discrepancy in the labor certification application that the alien failed to explain, the employer's "inactive" status, the IJ's conclusion that the alien's first labor certification was not "approvable when filed" because it was not meritorious in fact was supported by substantial evidence.
|
|||||
| Laurence v. Wall, No. 08-1380,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate proceeding in forma pauperis showed good cause for failure to effect service where the United States Marshals Service failed to fulfill its obligations under 28 U.S.C.S. ¿ 1915(d) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3). Therefore, the district court abused its discretion when it dismissed the inmate's amended complaint for insufficiency of process.
|
|||||
| Eastern Seaboard Constr. Co. v. Gray Constr., Inc., No. 08-1679,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 31, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arbitrator's omission of a contract balance, rather than a redetermination of the merits, was the type of clerical, typographical, technical or computational error which AAA Rule 47 permitted him to amend or clarify, and thus, the arbitrator did not exceed his authority under 9 U.S.C.S. ¿ 10(a)(4) by revisiting and reducing his initial award.
|
|||||
| United States v. Andrade, No. 08-1175,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, December 31, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Totality of circumstances facing a police officer were sufficient to give him a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing when he stopped and frisked defendant. The officer's actions--grabbing defendant and holding him over the car--were reasonably responsive to the circumstances. There was no Fourth Amendment violation.
|
|||||
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. |
