 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abilene Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. United Indus. Workers Health & Benefits Plan, No. 06-10151,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of a benefit plan because a medical center's breach of contract claim was preempted by ERISA since the center was suing as an assignee of the patient, and center's negligent misrepresentation claim failed since the center could seek to recover unpaid amounts from the patient.
|
|||||
| Ghanem v. Upchurch, 06-10499,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the decision to revoke a visa was left to the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security under the statutory language of 8 U.S.C.S. § 1155, the decision was not subject to judicial review pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
|
|||||
| Horak v. Glazer's Wholesale Drug Co., No. 06-10854 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of a former employer was affirmed because a former employee's age discrimination claims under the ADEA and the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act failed since the employee did not rebut the employer's explanation that he was terminated as part of a state-wide RIF.
|
|||||
| Lambert v. McMahon, No. 06-10679 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was not error not to treat a motion for a continuance to obtain new counsel as a motion for extraordinary relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) because there was no final judgment; an employee abandoned her contentions on appeal because her brief failed to meet the requirement in Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A) to provide supporting citations.
|
|||||
| Le v. Cheesecake Factory Rests., Inc., No. 06-20006,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's final entry of summary judgment in favor of a restaurant was affirmed because the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying an amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(b) motion to permit withdrawal of deemed admissions, and summary judgment was proper even if the court had permitted the admissions to be withdrawn.
|
|||||
| Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United States, No. 06-30095,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly denied plaintiffs' motion seeking to relitigate choice of law issue on remand. District court followed appeals court's directions regarding scope of remand. Law of case doctrine applied to appeals court's prior holding that 940 La. Acts 315 did not apply to plaintiffs' suit, which sought to quiet title to mineral servitudes.
|
|||||
| Resolution Performance Prods., LLC v. Paper Allied Indus. Chem. & Energy Workers Int'l Union, Pace Local 4-1201, No. 05-30813,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court improperly vacated an arbitrator's award that found that an employer violated a CBA by subcontracting out all maintenance work when the CBA was silent about subcontracting work and by recognizing the union as the representative of maintenance workers, the CBA implied that the employer could not subcontract all maintenance work.
|
|||||
| United States v. Lee, No. 06-10807 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Magers, No. 06-50775 c/w No. 06-50801 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
