 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dos Santos v. Gonzales, Docket No. 01-4199-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order of BIA was affirmed because a violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-21(a)(2) constituted a "crime of violence" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.S. § 16(b), such that it was an "aggravated felony" under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(43)(F), enabling removal under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).
|
|||||
| Gao v. Gonzales, Docket Nos. 04-1874-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The petition for review was granted. Contrary to the IJ's conclusion, the alien established that under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42) the persecution she feared was on account of her membership in a particular social group: women who have been sold into marriage and who lived in a feudal community in China where forced marriage was condoned.
|
|||||
| Garb v. Republic of Poland, Docket No. 02-7844,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An action brought by Polish Jews challenging the Polish government's expropriation of their property following the Second World War was dismissed as they had not established either the commercial activity, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1605(a)(2), or the takings, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1605(a)(3), exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.
|
|||||
| Hassan v. Gonzales, Nos. 03-4503-ag (L); 03-4557-ag (Con) NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA's order, which summarily dismissed alien's appeal under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(2)(i)(A), was vacated and remanded where alien's notice of appeal was sufficiently specific to notify the BIA of his reasons for appeal because it substantially complied with 8 C.F.R. § 1003.3(b) because, inter alia, it undermined the IJ's adverse credibility finding.
|
|||||
| Long Qing Chen v. Gonzales, Docket Nos. 03-40469-ag (L), 03-40470-ag (CON) NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Aliens petitions for review of the denial of their asylum application was denied because the aliens were not entitled to relief based on the alleged forced sterilization of the alien wife's sisters, and the alien wife's claim that she might one day want to have more children was too speculative to form a basis for future persecution.
|
|||||
| Oliphant v. DOT, No. 05-0618-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a discrimination suit against a state agency and others, an employee was not entitled to a mandamus for review of the denial of a protective order preventing disclosure of medical information under the psychotherapist-patient privilege. The case did not raise a question of extraordinary significance, and there were other means to obtain review.
|
|||||
| Oparaji v. New York City Dep't of Educ., No. 05-3423,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ouangre v. Gonzales, No. 04-1507,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Roach v. Morse, Docket No. 05-2277-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Permanent injunction, which prohibited Vermont from asking questions of Medicaid applicants about a family loan, was vacated on finding that the applicants had failed to show that Vermont would deny their Medicaid application based on their answers to the questions if the applicants established that the loan was bona fide and for fair market value.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
