 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allison v. City of East Lansing, No. 06-1173,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2007, Decided , April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where city failed to move for judgment as a matter of law post-verdict as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b), court dismissed appeal to review entry of judgment in favor of seven university employee's § 1983 action for Fourth Amendment violations that occurred during a fire department's response to a possible anthrax contamination at the university.
|
|||||
| Bryan v. Brandon, Case Nos. 05-5705/5823,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a state prisoner was sentenced to 60 years in prison for second-degree murder due to his designation as a persistent offender, he was properly granted habeas corpus relief based on the vacation of the underlying convictions supporting that designation as his sentence then violated the Fourteenth Amendment and his conviction had to be vacated.
|
|||||
| Hubert Enters. v. Comm'r, Nos. 05-2616, 05-2617, 05-2619,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court deemed it prudent to vacate the decision of the Tax Court with respect to the effect of a DRO and the extent to which it placed the holding company "at risk" for a portion of another's recourse obligations under 26 U.S.C.S. § 465. The Tax Court had to determine whether or not the DRO rendered the company the payor of last resort.
|
|||||
| Lynch v. Sease, No. 06-5719,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in denying plaintiff's Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 motion for judgment as matter of law on defendant's promissory estoppel counterclaim in action arising from dispute over entitlement to finder's fee; defendant did not present evidence of promise without consideration, and breach of contract and fraud counterclaims provided remedies.
|
|||||
| Tilley v. Gonzales, No. 05-3901,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where it was determined that the AEDPA was to be retroactively applied, the court granted the immigrant's petition for review, vacated the BIA's 1997 order of deportation, and remanded for proceedings on the merits of the immigrant's application for § 212(c) relief and for further proceedings that were consistent with the opinion.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Manitowoc Boom Trucks, Inc., No. 06-5145,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 30, 2007, Decided , April 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a proposed witness had presented evidence that boom crane trucks similar to the one defendant manufactured currently had an interlocking outrigging system in place, which indicated that interlocking outriggers had become generally accepted within the truck crane industry, the proposed testimony fit well within one of the Daubert principles.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
