 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| EEOC v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co, No. 05-30712,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an ADA case, the finding of liability and the awards of back pay and punitive damages were affirmed because they were supported by sufficient evidence; however, the district court's award of front pay was reversed because the district court abused its discretion.
|
|||||
| Pipkins-Thomas v. United States (In re Thomas), m 06-20115; m 06-20777,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of the debtor's appeal of an Agreed Order was affirmed because the Agreed Order had rendered moot any claims to the bankruptcy court's prior order that denied their objection to the IRS's amended proof of claim that was ruled to have validly amended a claim the debtors had filed on the IRS's behalf.
|
|||||
| Planned Parenthood v. Sanchez, No. 06-50013, No. A03-CA-415 SS,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's denial of attorney's fees to six family planning groups was affirmed as neither the district court's entry of a preliminary injunction favoring the groups or the appellate court's opinion in an earlier interlocutory appeal could be a basis for finding that they were a prevailing party within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.S. § 1988.
|
|||||
| United States v. Craft, No. 06-20396 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed because any implication conceivably recognized by the jury regarding his failure to testify was de minimis in the absolute, and defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel failed in light of the overwhelming evidence against him.
|
|||||
| Walgreen Co. v. La. Dep't of Health & Hosps., No. 06-30358 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly entered summary judgment against a commercial pharmacy operator on res judicata grounds. Factual circumstances were identical to prior suit that operator had filed against state health and hospitals department. Operator could not prevail on its challenge to department's regulations without relitigating prior suit's holdings.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
