 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Alevras v. Tacopina, No. 05-5371,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly granted summary judgment in favor of lawyers sued for malpractice by the client they represented in connection with a plea agreement because the judgments on ineffective assistance issues decided in the client's proceedings under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 were entitled to preclusive effect on the issues in the malpractice case.
|
|||||
| Andreoli v. Gates, No. 05-5417,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The grant of summary judgment to the employer on the Title VII hostile work environment claim was reversed because the evidence showed that the employee had to speak to five different supervisors about the co-worker's behavior in order to elicit any response from management after she first began complaining of sexual harassment.
|
|||||
| Ehleiter v. Grapetree Shores, Inc., NO. 06-2542,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied a motion to stay under 9 U.S.C.S. § 3, where the movant, a property owner, had engaged in active litigation of the personal injury claims for nearly four years, engaged in extensive discovery, and stipulated readiness for trial. Under such circumstances, any right to arbitration, if one existed, was waived by the movant.
|
|||||
| United States v. Reeves, No. 05-5464,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeals court lacked jurisdiction and could not review district court's decision not to grant defendant full departure under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K2.23 for time he sent in state prison. No violation of law was shown. The district court understood its discretion under the guidelines, but simply chose not to exercise that discretion.
|
|||||
| Shehu v. AG of the United States, Case No: 05-5072,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court had jurisdiction over alien's petition for review because BIA's denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief to Visa Waiver Program applicant, such as alien, was final order under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(a)(1); however, substantial evidence supported IJ's finding that alien was not eligible for asylum, so petition for review was denied.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
