 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Amie v. City of Jennings, m 05-31137,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court lacked jurisdiction to review an order denying a city's motion to sever the sexual harassment claims of eight employees; the order was not a final judgment under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1291, and the collateral order doctrine did not apply because the order denying severance was effectively reviewable on appeal after final judgment.
|
|||||
| Ampro v. Forgey, m 06-20073,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order imposing sanctions on attorney under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f) for disobeying district court order requiring him to appear at conference was affirmed; although attorney denied representing individual and company, record showed that he referred to them as his clients and told district court he was negotiating on their behalf and actually did so.
|
|||||
| In re Clients & Former Clients of Baron & Budd, P.C., No. 06-20835, No. 06-20836 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court's order that all future pleadings in the case be filed with the district court handling the MDL case was denied because, under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1407(b), the MDL district court's authority extended beyond depositions and embraced the present subpoena.
|
|||||
| Sanders v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 05-20656 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly granted summary judgment to an employee's former employer and former attorneys because there was little or no evidence that the attorneys conspired with the employer to end the employee's lawsuit or that the attorneys committed malpractice, and claims against employer were barred by res judicata and/or collateral estoppel.
|
|||||
| United States v. Jones, No. 05-30952,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 641 was supported by sufficient evidence showing that she collected fees from Army library patrons but never deposited or accounted for them and that defendant had government property in her home; the jury was free to reject defendant's explanations of why she was in possession of the property.
|
|||||
| United States v. Malloy, No. 06-40932,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it was undisputed that police had probable cause to search the oxygen tanks found in defendant's vehicle, it was permissible for the officer to conclude the search away from the scene after a brief delay (the officer took the tanks to a mechanic's shop and cut them open, revealing hidden compartments that contained drugs).
|
|||||
| United States v. Stevenson, No. 06-60243 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
