 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Clark v. City of Dublin, No. 05-3186,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for employer was proper in employee's lawsuit alleging retaliation and age and disability discrimination; Title VII did not bar age and disability discrimination, and employee failed to respond to employer's arguments for summary judgment on his discrimination claims under the ADEA, ADA, and Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ch. 4112.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. Renico, No. 04-1854,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court noted that federal habeas relief based on a missing transcript would only be granted where the inmate could show prejudice. The appellate court noted that the inmate could not show that prejudice.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. United States, No. 04-2565,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After noting appellant's history of drug dependency, and his repeated supervised release violations, and after noting that it could have imposed a prison term of up to five years when it revoked his supervised release, the district court's imposition of a 48 month sentence was not plainly unreasonable given the facts of the case.
|
|||||
| Kraemer v. Luttrell, No. 05-5431,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patrolman's retaliation claim against county failed because he had no right under Tennessee law to file grievance to enforce memorandum of understanding and because grievance was not matter of public concern for purposes of U.S. Const. amend. I; sergeant's 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e-2 claim failed because three other African-Americans received promotions.
|
|||||
| Lamar Adver. Co. v. Charter Twp. of Van Buren, Nos. 04-2500, 04-2521,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where, through a consent decree, media companies obtained all of the relief they sought--an order prohibiting a township from causing the removal of particular billboards--the media companies were "prevailing parties" and the district court properly awarded them attorney fees under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1988.
|
|||||
| McDermott v. City of N. Olmsted, No. 05-3392,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In ADEA suit, totality of circumstances showed employee had been given reasonable period of time to consider settlement agreement, as required by 29 U.S.C.S. § 626(f)(2), where there was no evidence employee tried to revoke agreement before filing suit 16 months after signing agreement. Thus, agreement's waiver of claim raised in suit was valid.
|
|||||
| Mitan v. Duval (In re Mitan), Nos. 04-2020, 04-2524,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Bankruptcy court erred by reinstating Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition and converting case to Chapter 7 proceeding; as secured creditor listed on debtor's schedules, per 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 102(1)(A) and 1112(b) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(a), debtor's father was entitled to notice of other creditors' motion for reconsideration of dismissal of case.
|
|||||
| Mohamed Hisam Najib v. Meridian Med. Techs., Inc., No. 05-3704,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a consumer had tried to use a device that contained a dose of epinephrine to combat an asthma attack, and that device failed twice, the appellate court found that granting summary judgment on the issue of defect was erroneous. Although there was no direct evidence, the circumstantial evidence created a genuine issue of material fact.
|
|||||
| Overley v. Covenant Transp., Inc., No. 05-5280,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where there was no evidence that permitted a finding that similarly situated male drivers were treated more favorably, and where it was found that employer did not violate ADA by threatening adverse employment action in response to employee's demand for an accommodation to which she was not entitled, summary judgment against employee was proper.
|
|||||
| Parlak v. United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement, No. 05-2003,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Once BIA issued final removal order, government's authority to detain alien was governed by 8 U.S.C.S. § 1231 and not 8 U.S.C.S. § 1226. Thus, government's appeal from grant of habeas writ in which government challenged finding that alien's continued detention under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1226 was unconstitutional was rendered moot by final removal order.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
