 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Directv, Inc. v. Treesh, No. 06-5523,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Decided , May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of satellite companies' claim that Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 136.660(4) and (5) violated the dormant Commerce Clause, U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3, was affirmed because the state had simply prevented localities from mulcting cable companies through franchise fees, and substituted a uniform state taxation scheme.
|
|||||
| Lucre, Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., No. 06-1144,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State public services commission did not violate a corporation's due process rights by refusing to reopen the administrative record to allow it to introduce evidence of its own course of performance and of another company's invoicing for multiplexing because the claim for breach of contract was brought against a private party, not a state actor.
|
|||||
| Nailor v. United States (In re Nailor), No. 06-6445,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Decided , May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prisoner's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) motion was correctly determined to be a second 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion because it could be read to attack the court's resolution of his previous § 2255 motion which raised similar arguments; furthermore, the court denied to authorize a second § 2255 motion because he had not pointed to any new evidence.
|
|||||
| Taylor v. UPS, No. 06-5813,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals upheld the district court's judgment dismissing an employee's action claiming that his employer committed racial discrimination and illegal retaliation when it reduced the hourly wage he earned after he was given a new job because the employer had a legitimate basis under a CBA for paying the employee a lower hourly wage.
|
|||||
| United States v. Duncan, Case No. 06-1129,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in resentencing defendant to original 151-month sentence upon remand following conviction under 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 922(g)(1), 921(a), 924(e); sentence within Guideline range was presumptively reasonable, and district court explained reasoning. Absence of reference to each 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factor was not plain error.
|
|||||
| United States v. Eversole, No. 06-5215,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Decided , May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 327-month sentence of imprisonment was upheld by the appellate court because it held that no impermissible double counting occurred in calculating the offense level in the case, the counts of conviction were properly grouped under the Sentencing Guidelines, and the sentence was not based on an impermissible factor.
|
|||||
| United States v. Vining, No. 05-2125,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a district court instructed defense counsel to confine his argument to the facts as they had been established at trial, the appellate court found that there had been no abuse of discretion on the district court's part because there had been no undermining of defendant's U.S. Const. amend. VI right to present a defense.
|
|||||
| Vang v. Gonzales, No. 06-3600,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture was proper because the IJ noted that the State Department reports indicated that since 1980, thousands of Laotian refugees had safely and successfully returned to Laos from abroad to visit relatives, permanently resettled, or even reclaimed their citizenship.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
