 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Doeblers' Pa. Hybrids, Inc. v. Doebler, No. 04-3848,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in granting summary judgment on a trademark infringement and trade secret misappropriation case involving related family businesses because facts were in dispute with respect to ownership of the surname trademark and whether plaintiff's brand names were legally protected as trade secrets.
|
|||||
| Mashore v. Beard, No. 04-1793,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's right to counsel claim was not properly exhausted. Further, because the certificate of appealability encompassed only defendant's right to counsel claim, the appellate court did not address his additional claims presented to the district court. Defendant was properly denied 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 relief.
|
|||||
| Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. v. United States, No. 05-1480,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court lacked authority to enjoin government's indictments of plaintiffs, where, under terms of conditional leniency agreement, government agreed not to bring criminal prosecution against plaintiff company for certain acts; plaintiffs had access to federal forum post-indictment in which they could assert agreement as defense.
|
|||||
| United States v. Bond, No. 05-1664,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's seizure did not violate the Fourth Amendment and his motion to suppress evidence was properly denied because a police officer had probable cause to arrest defendant for violation of 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 6108 based solely on the officer's observation that he was in possession of a firearm on the streets of Philadelphia.
|
|||||
| United States v. Giaquinto, No. 05-2212,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 23-month post-Booker sentence imposed upon her guilty plea to charges arising out of incident when defendant smuggled ecstasy into U.S. was affirmed because sentence was reasonable as it was below minimum advisory guideline range, and district court considered 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors and all of defense counsel's arguments.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hamani, No. 05-2181,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence based on finding that defendant qualified as career offender under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.1(b) was affirmed because district court's finding under Guidelines that instant offense and defendant's prior convictions were "crimes of violence" did not violate his rights to a jury trial and to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
