 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dixon v. Golden-Masano-Bradley, NO. 06-3977,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Borrower's claims that efforts to recover the amount due on a promissory note violated the FDCPA and Pennsylvania statutes were properly dismissed; 15 U.S.C.S. § 1692a(5) and the state statutes required that a "debt" be for personal, family, or household purposes, and the language of the note prohibited such uses of the proceeds.
|
|||||
| Keyrupyan v. AG of the United States, No. 06-1330,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's petition for review was denied because fact that alien was punched while taking public transportation home from school as child, that bomb in car of her mother's friend exploded when they left church, and that she was struck by motorcyclist who laughed at her did not reach level of persecution under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42)(A), 1158(b)(1).
|
|||||
| Liu v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., No. 06-1678,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(2), (d), court denied alien's petition to review denial of withholding of removal as there was no reason to reject IJ's finding that adverse incidents to which alien testified were acts of criminals and did not constitute persecution under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1231(b)(3), and there was no procedural reason to grant review.
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Brooks, NO. 06-4361,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's appeal from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 action, alleging that his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault was invalid, was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because the inmate's conviction had not been invalidated, and thus, the complaint was barred by Heck v. Humphrey.
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Cross, NO. 06-4367,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's appeal from dismissal of his civil rights action was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because his conviction had not been invalidated, so his claims that relied on invalidity of his aggravated assault conviction were barred by Heck v. Humphrey, and his other claims were barred by doctrine of judicial immunity.
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Evans, NO. 06-4362,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's appeal from dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 action alleging that his conviction and sentence for aggravated assault was invalid was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because the inmate's conviction had not been invalidated, and thus, the complaint was barred by Heck v. Humphrey.
|
|||||
| Nicholas v. Heffner, NO. 06-3919,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To the extent the inmate sought damages under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 for malicious prosecution, he had no cause of action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 because his conviction had not been reversed, expunged, declared invalid, or called into question by a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, and thus, it was barred by Heck v. Humphrey.
|
|||||
| Nychis v. Cranmer, No. 04-3324,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Public employers were properly granted summary judgment on employees' state law wrongful discharge claims because as at-will employees, they had no remedy for procedural mistakes in their discharge; employers were properly granted summary judgment on § 1983 claim because employees failed to show that political affiliation was factor in discharge.
|
|||||
| United States v. Desarro, No. 05-4964,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The government presented sufficient evidence to support defendant's 18 U.S.C.S. § 1341 mail fraud conviction, arising from his filing of insurance claim for arson-caused damage to his building. Jury could infer that defendant intended or knew that his attorney would send letter to insurance company and that letter was sent as part of fraud scheme.
|
|||||
| United States v. Moody, No. 05-2120,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's imposition of 72-month sentence following defendant's guilty plea conviction to drug offenses was affirmed because it adequately addressed all of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553 factors and balanced defendant's rehabilitation, family situation, and sentences received by similarly situated defendants in conspiracy with seriousness of crime.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
