 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bach v. First Union Nat'l Bank, No. 06-3660,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a bank violated the FCRA, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1681 et seq., a $ 2,228,600 punitive damages award to an elderly plaintiff, who was awarded $ 400,000 in compensatory damages, violated the Fourteenth Amendment as the bank's actions were not especially outrageous, and its wealth and her vulnerability were insufficient to justify such a large award.
|
|||||
| Dean v. City of Bay City, Nos. 06-1192 and 06-1657,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a § 1983 action alleging wrongful termination, a reconsideration motion after a grant of summary judgment to defendants was properly denied as, though the motion was couched as one for reconsideration, they were attempting to assert a new claim; and, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 leave to amend was denied as it would cause defendants substantial prejudice.
|
|||||
| Henley v. Bell, No. 03-5891,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly denied a state death row inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus because, inter alia, counsel's failure to investigate inmate's background and present mitigating evidence at sentencing hearing did not cause prejudice; further, jury instructions did not require unanimous finding of existence of mitigating factors.
|
|||||
| Kloots v. Am. Express Tax & Bus. Servs., Inc., No. 06-3916,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in dismissing state law claims without prejudice to refiling in state court; claims arising from accountant's valuation of stock held in Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) were not preempted under 29 U.S.C.S. § 1144 of ERISA because ESOP trustees' claims did not seek enforcement of legal duties imposed under ERISA.
|
|||||
| Livermore v. Lubelan, No. 06-1465,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Mitchell v. McNeil, No. 06-5631,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Parents of a child struck by an informant driving a vehicle borrowed from a police officer failed to state a viable Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim by alleging that defendants had a custom of encouraging police officers to provide automobiles to informants with known histories of drug and alcohol use in exchange for information.
|
|||||
| Muhameti v. Gonzales, No. 06-3421,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court denied petition for review of the BIA's denial of petitioners' motion to reopen a decision in which the BIA dismissed their appeal from the denial of their asylum applications because the BIA did not abuse its discretion in refusing to accord equitable tolling in petitioners' favor as they did not show due diligence.
|
|||||
| NetJets Aviation, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Airline Div., No. 06-3851,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Decided , May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Aviation company was not entitled to vacate pilot reinstatement arbitration award; assuming public policy review was permitted under 45 U.S.C.S. § 153 of Railway Labor Act, arbitrator's decision that single poor judgment incident did not constitute "just cause" for termination did not violate public policy related to aviation or workplace safety.
|
|||||
| Simmons v. Kapture, No. 03-2609,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
