 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bledsoe v. Barnhart, No. 04-4531,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Administrative law judge (ALJ) did not procedurally err in determining that claimant was not disabled under step three of social security disability evaluation process because ALJ explicitly stated that he considered the combination of all impairments, and ALJ did not err by not spelling out every consideration that went into the determination.
|
|||||
| Dubuc v. Parker, No. 04-1901,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a civil rights action challenging the admission procedures of Michigan's Board of Law Examiners, the appellate court determined that the case was moot because plaintiff had been granted admission to the Michigan bar; plaintiff lacked the irreducible constitutional minimum of standing to continue prosecuting his case.
|
|||||
| Galluzzo v. Champaign County Court of Common Pleas, No. 04-3527,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a father challenged constitutionality of provisions of Ohio law that led to his designation as a noncustodial parent, arguing that his fundamental right to raise his children had been violated, but was not petitioning the federal court for the custody of his children, lawsuit was inappropriate means to challenge Ohio parental custody laws.
|
|||||
| Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, Inc. v. Cleveland Pub. Library, Case Nos. 04-4415; 04-4508,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed district court's judgment on the basis of its conclusions that district court did not err either in sending to jury the issue of whether insurer's notice defense was waived or in refusing to grant a new trial on that issue, and in instructing jury on definition of "loss" and including a reference date in the instruction.
|
|||||
| McDonnell v. Cardiothoracic & Vascular Surgical Assocs., Nos. 04-4151/4509,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Surgical association and health care system were properly awarded summary judgment on doctor's claims of fraud because doctor did not produce material evidence showing association and system intended to deceive him when they neglected to inform him before he accepted job that physician recruiting agreement was required as condition of employment.
|
|||||
| Morgan v. Gandalf, Ltd., No. 05-3189,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the employee's corrected affidavit purported to clarify two points, the appellate court found that it was not harmless error when the district court refused to consider the corrected affidavit. The exclusion of the affidavit was critical to the district court's assessment of the summary judgment issues.
|
|||||
| Rexha v. Gonzales, Nos. 04-3700,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: By failing to indicate that it had adequately considered 34 of the 37 documents the alien submitted, the immigration judge prematurely cut short the required procedure in denying the alien's application for asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158(b), and therefore the case was remanded for further proceedings.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gibson, No. 04-2046,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly enhanced defendant's sentence under USSG § 3B1.1(a) where inclusion of fifth individual in count of individuals involved in criminal activity was not clearly erroneous because fifth individual's participation was uncontested fact, and district court did not err in concluding that defendant held leadership role in drug ring.
|
|||||
| United States v. Williams, No. 05-5416,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Decided , January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeals court credited a sentence properly calculated under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual with a presumption of reasonableness. District court could apply that same presumption when determining defendant's sentence, and district court had considered 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors when determining what sentence to impose.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
