 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Levine v. Gerson, No. 05-0748-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment dismissing arrestee's FTCA claims was proper; FTCA did not waive sovereign immunity for claims against federal prosecutors, and arrestee failed to offer, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e), admissible evidence rebutting sworn affidavits filed by the individual defendants.
|
|||||
| Li Xue Yue v. Gonzales, No. 04-3846-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien failed to show that BIA abused its discretion in denying her motion to reopen where the exception to time and numerical limitations, under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3), was not applicable because basis of her motion was not to apply or reapply for asylum and alien did not explain how changed country conditions served as the basis for the motion.
|
|||||
| Mei Fang Lu v. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 04-4395-ag (L), 04-4396-ag (Con), 04-4397-ag (Con) NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Adverse credibility finding and denial of asylum was based on substantial evidence because the IJ correctly rejected the claim of past persecution when the forced abortion claim was not in the asylum application, the alien testified that she had a miscarriage, and the testimony of the alien and her husband was inconsistent as to the pregnancy.
|
|||||
| Ming Chung Chen v. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigration Servs., No. 03-40595-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where alien did not pursue his case with due diligence during 14 months between BIA decision and his motion to reopen, his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel did not operate to toll the 90 day time-period under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2). BIA did not abuse its discretion when it denied alien's motion to reopen because it was filed out of time.
|
|||||
| Ndiaye v. Gonzales, No. 03-4068-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of asylum and withholding of deportation, 8 U.S.C.S. §§ 1158, 1231, was vacated where neither the IJ nor the BIA provided any reasoned discussion of alleged past persecution so that it was impossible to determine whether the petitioner was entitled to the presumption of a well-founded fear under 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1).
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Gonzales, No. 03-4242-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's petition for review was granted. IJ did not make explicit finding that alien's testimony lacked credibility; although IJ concluded that alien failed to present sufficient testimonial and corroborative evidence to establish his claim for asylum relief, the IJ erred in analyzing the evidence submitted in support of the alien's asylum claim.
|
|||||
| Pew v. Cardarelli, No. 05-1990-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of securities fraud claims, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349, was affirmed because even assuming the company's failure to disclose that it had almost no remaining assets and no operating income, its SEC filings were replete with other warnings such that it could not be said that the nondisclosures were responsible for the investors' losses.
|
|||||
| Rasmussen v. Filion, No. 05-1166-pr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Habeas relief was denied where state trial court's refusal to admit a DNA laboratory report pursuant to New York's Rape Shield Law, N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 60.42 did not violate petitioner's fair trial rights where admission of the DNA laboratory report would not have created reasonable doubt that did not otherwise exist.
|
|||||
| Rozsa v. SG Cowen Secs. Corp., No. 05-1437,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of investor's negligence, breach of contract, and conversion claims against a securities clearing broker was affirmed where the clearing broker owed no duty to the investor as a third-party who deposited funds into the a customer account of an introducing broker.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
