 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Albert v. Schwartz, NO. 05-4824,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B), court dismissed plaintiff's appeal from judgment of dismissal and grant of summary judgment to police officers in his § 1983 action based on search and seizure of vehicle because none of actions asserted in Claim I constituted invitation of privacy subject to protection under constitution.
|
|||||
| Brokenbaugh v. Exel Logistics N. Am., Inc., NO. 04-4106,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment in favor of an employer on an employee's discrimination claim was appropriate where the employer met its burden to show a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating the employee, given its reasonable belief that the employee had been dishonest, and the employee's long record of work infractions.
|
|||||
| Colussi v. Woodruff Family Servs., LLP, No. 04-4595,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer was improperly awarded summary judgment on a Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gender discrimination claim given a question as to whether the employer's claim that an employee was terminated based on lack of seniority was pretextual, but summary judgment was proper as to another employee's performance-based termination.
|
|||||
| Glosser v. Maysville Reg'l Water Dist. (In re Midwest Portland Cement Co.), No. 05-2489,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Real estate sale contract between a Chapter 7 debtor and a buyer was not executory and could not be assumed by the trustee under 11 U.S.C.S. § 365 because failure to perform certain obligations that were unperformed as of the date of the bankruptcy petition, including a failure to record certain documents, would not be a material breach.
|
|||||
| Kuhnle v. Prudential Sec., Inc., No. 04-4598,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because state court made a finding of prejudice when it entered judgment of non pros against plaintiff, and the state court action was dismissed with prejudice in a well-considered judicial order, such a decision was "on the merits" and a subsequent action filed by plaintiff was barred by res judicata.
|
|||||
| Logan v. Am. Contract Bridge League, No. 04-4428,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant, whose vision was severely impaired, developed a special pack of cards from which he could competitively play bridge, and where bridge organization informed appellant that he could no longer use cards, there was no meritorious claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) because cards were not necessary to give him access to the organization.
|
|||||
| Rodgers v. Johnson, Case Nos: 04-4390; 05-2396; 05-3563,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's equal protection rights were not violated when he had to submit to fingerprinting when renewing his gun license because fingerprinting requirement applied to anyone applying for gun permit in city and plaintiff had not asserted that he was being treated differently than other similarly situated persons applying for gun permits in city.
|
|||||
| Stouts-Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship v. Bankers Trust Co., No. 05-1189,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the principals of a partnership were sophisticated and knowledgeable, their willing execution of a side letter precluded them from seeking to prove justifiable reliance on the bank's representations. Therefore, the court affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the bank.
|
|||||
| United States v. Newsome, No. 04-3292,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: By taking information from a victim's driver's license and employer ID, and combining that information with photographs of co-conspirators, appellant produced another means of identification that gave his co-conspirators access to the victim's assets -- precisely the type of behavior for which the identity theft sentencing enhancement was intended.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
