 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Kreisler v. Goldberg, No. 05-2238,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Automatic stay under 11 U.S.C.S. § 362(a)(1) and (3) did not apply to creditors' state ejectment action against the non-bankrupt subsidiary of corporate debtors because the debtors' subsidiary was a distinct legal entity, and the subsidiary's loss of its property due to the creditors' action affected only the value of the debtors' interests in it.
|
|||||
| United States v. Freeman, No. 06-7999,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Hartley, No. 06-4904,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In light of Booker, defendant's sentence was remanded for resentencing, as district court may have sentenced defendant while misunderstanding scope of its discretion. District court was to assess factors of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) during sentencing, but farther district court diverged from advisory guideline range, divergence required explanation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hemphill, No. 06-7852,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Ingram, No. 06-4513,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Jackson, No. 06-7902,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Kebe, No. 06-7416,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Logan, No. 06-7914,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Midgette, No. 05-4765,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a probation officer, after receiving a tip that defendant might have been in possession of a firearm, asked police officers to search defendant's person, vehicle, and house for contraband, the searches did not violate N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1343(b1)(7) because the probation officer directed and maintained supervision over the police officers.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
