 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Beech v. Fuller, No. 04-5672,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a § 1983 case, a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of city administrator was affirmed because a former police officer was an at-will employee, who did not have a property interest sufficient to establish a due process deprivation. A city policy manual did not create an implied contract of employment.
|
|||||
| Bleta v. Gonzales, No. 03-4531,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported IJ's adverse credibility determination because there were several inconsistencies between alien's asylum application and his testimony at the hearing, his wife and daughter offered no testimony of harassment, and evidence showed he had left Albania before and had voluntarily returned without apparent difficulty.
|
|||||
| Howard v. McLemore, No. 04-1555,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were not violated because trial court only ruled that the expert could not testify that he interviewed the inmate at the jail's psychiatric unit, the inmate was allowed to present a diminished capacity defense and the location of the interview was not relevant to the success or failure of the defense.
|
|||||
| Hughes v. Birkett, No. 05-1411,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prisoner was not "in custody" for § 2254 habeas corpus relief when later major misconduct convictions meant that even if conviction at issue were expunged, he would not be able to leave prison any sooner. Prisoner was not deprived of liberty interest by failing to accumulate time that he would have then lost as result of later convictions.
|
|||||
| Liebhart v. Comm'r, No. 05-3825,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Orzechowski v. York Int'l Corp., 05-3301,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although an employee in a wrongful termination action specified the wrong court in its notice of appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(C), that careless but obviously unintentional technical error did not divest the court of jurisdiction to hear the appeal. There was no prejudice to the employer, and the employee eventually corrected the error.
|
|||||
| Sisk v. Commer. Furniture Group, Inc., No(s) 04-5407/5876,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The employee offered no evidence that he was replaced by a younger employee or that a comparable non-protected employee was treated better, and thus he has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADEA.
|
|||||
| United States v. Blanton, 05-5116,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 151-month prison sentence for bank robbery was affirmed because he had waived any objection he had to the district judge's determination that a Virginia burglary conviction should be considered a prior conviction for a crime of violence for purposes for U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.2.
|
|||||
| United States v. Butcher, No. 04-4504,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated and remanded for resentencing because the district court sentenced defendant under the then-existing statutory provision, since invalidated, that made the guidelines mandatory, not merely advisory.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
