 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. Palmer, No. 05-1320,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Decided , March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no error in grant of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 based on insufficient evidence where, although facts may have created "reasonable speculation" that inmate aided and abetted carjacking and armed robbery, district court highlighted absence of facts demonstrating that inmate in fact provided assistance or encouragement to gunman.
|
|||||
| Cleveland Elec. Illuminating Co. v. Util. Workers Union, Local 270, No. 04-3566/04-3567,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Decided , March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employer waived issue of who had power to decide arbitrability; employer submitted question of arbitrability to arbitrator, and nothing in record indicated employer wanted to reserve question for court. Decision drew essence from CBA; absent forceful evidence of purpose to exclude claim from arbitration, arbitrator's determination stood.
|
|||||
| Genord v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield, No. 04-2486,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Decided , March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parts of the Michigan Health Care Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2006, were not an integral part of the policy relationship because the policyholders were largely unconcerned with how the gynecologists were paid, so long as the holders were provided with gynecological services. Reverse preemption claim under McCarran-Ferguson Act failed.
|
|||||
| Sims v. Landrum, No. 05-1322,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) inmate's § 1983 action alleging violation of U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV right of access to court; prison manager's failure to timely send inmate's application for leave to appeal to Michigan Supreme Court was, at most, negligent because action complied with prison mail policy.
|
|||||
| Thompson v. Konteh, No. 04-3631,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's habeas petition was properly denied because he did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel because the instructions clearly indicated that the crime charged was aggravated murder and that the state had to prove every element of aggravated murder and that the requisite mental state was an element of an aggravated murder charge.
|
|||||
| United States v. Perez, Nos. 04-5440; 05-5373,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Decided , March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to suppress evidence of cocaine was properly denied; reasonable suspicion of drug activity justified vehicle stop, continued detention of defendants for hour between stop and drug detection dog's alert to vehicle parked at motel did not impermissibly extend scope of stop, and positive alert provided probable cause to search parked vehicle.
|
|||||
| United States v. Matthews, No. 04-6398,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2006, Decided , March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In defendant's trial for violation of 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1), district court properly admitted evidence of prior uncharged drug sale under Fed. R. Evid. 405 through cross-examination of defendant's character witness and under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) through rebuttal witness who testified that he purchased cocaine from defendant eight years earlier.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
