 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Donastrong-Martinez v. AG, No. 05-4503,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(a)(2)(D), court lacked jurisdiction to review IJ's denial of alien's request for waiver under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1182(c) because assertion that IJ failed to apply law, and thereby committed legal error or abused his discretion, did not itself establish question of law over which court had jurisdiction under REAL ID Act.
|
|||||
| Iverson v. City of Philadelphia, No. 05-3668,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City was properly granted summary judgment in § 1983 suit filed by owner after his property was demolished. Owner's U.S. Const. amend. V claim failed because he did not show that federal government was involved in demolition. Owner did not present evidence establishing municipal liability for alleged violation of his U.S. Const. amend. XIV rights.
|
|||||
| United States ex rel. Atkinson v. Pa. Shipbuilding Co., No. 04-3374,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 12, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jurisdiction was lacking over False Claims Act claims arising from an alleged failure to record security interests in connection with a U.S. Navy contract; the relator, who learned of the failure to record from country records; could not rely solely on public information to substantiate original source status under 31 U.S.C.S. § 3730(e)(4)(B).
|
|||||
| United States v. Rivera, No. 05-1937,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because it was abundantly clear that the district court gave meaningful consideration to the extent of defendant's cooperation with the Government, to his codefendants' sentences, and to all of the relevant provisions of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) when sentencing him at the bottom of the guidelines range.
|
|||||
| Bernback v. Greco, No. 05-4642; No. 05-4643,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed plaintiff to file Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2)(B) motion, seeking award of supplemental attorneys' fees, out of time. Excusable neglect had been found, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Amount of fees awarded was reasonable. Award was within reasonable range of uncontested lodestar amount.
|
|||||
| Foreman v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 06-1274,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prison officials were properly granted summary judgment on inmate's § 1983 claim that officials violated his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment by failing to provide appropriate shower chair for T-5 paraplegic because he was provided chair, although it was not specific chair he wanted, and he had not alleged "serious harm."
|
|||||
| United States v. Garcia-Morena, No. 05-4274,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the record was devoid of any facts that would allow the inference that district court imposed a harsher sentence on remand in order to punish defendant for appealing his conviction and sentence, and district court reasonably concluded that it could not properly characterize defendant's role as minor, defendant's sentence was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Walker, No. 04-4405,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 55-year consecutive mandatory minimum sentence under 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1) did not violate due process because Congress had the power to define criminal punishments without giving courts any sentencing discretion and did not violate the Eighth Amendment because the gravity of his offenses did not violate the proportionality principal.
|
|||||
| Wallace v. Federated Dep't Stores, Inc., No. 06-3286,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court improperly dismissed former employee's pro se complaint to extent she sought to raise claim under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981 because amendment would not be futile as employee cited store training session on eliminating racial profiling by store loss prevention detectives and indicated her suspicion that she might have been racially profiled.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
