 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Citizens Ins. Co. of Am. v. MidMichigan Health ConnectCare Network Plan, No. 05-1237,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided , June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the ERISA employee benefit plan was in full force at the time of the individual's injury, and the plan did not expressly disavow coverage for medical benefits otherwise payable under a no-fault policy, the plan, and not the insurance company, was first in priority for payment of the individual's claims for medical expenses.
|
|||||
| Hatchett v. Health Care & Ret. Corp. of Am., No. 05-1790,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An African-American employee was unable to establish racial discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act when she could not establish that a more highly paid worker was similarly situated or that a causal connection existed between disciplinary action against her and her complaint about pay disparities.
|
|||||
| Krcic v. Gonzales, No. 05-3424,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The motion of aliens, who sought asylum and withholding of removal, to reopen their case was denied because the motion was untimely, new allegations of past persecution could have been presented at the original hearing, and changed conditions did not warrant reopening.
|
|||||
| Rutherford v. City of Cleveland, Case No. 04-3904,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Given a modest workforce target, a sunset provision, and the various flexibility provisions, a race-based plan to advance the hiring and promotion of minority police patrol officers was narrowly tailored to remedy a city's past discrimination. The city did not violate non-minority applicants' rights under the Equal Protection Clause or Title VII.
|
|||||
| United States v. Fraser, No. 05-1423,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided , June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Excerpts from a book written by defendant were admissible under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) to prove defendant's specific intent because when he argued that he was "duped" by the victim to engaged in the counterfeit-check scheme defendant put his intent to commit fraud at issue and the evidence was not unfairly prejudicial under Fed. R. Evid. 403.
|
|||||
| Barnes v. Wright, No. 04-6288,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 2, 2006, Decided , June 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred by denying conservation officers qualified immunity in an arrestee's 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 lawsuit alleging a retaliatory arrest and prosecution violated the First Amendment; the existence of a grand jury indictment conclusively established that the arrest and prosecution were supported by probable cause.
|
|||||
| Giles v. Schotten, No. 04-3708,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 2, 2006, Decided , June 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the inmate had not shown that the state trial court's denial of his request for independent psychological and medical examinations of the alleged victims resulted in a denial of fundamental fairness, the district court's denial of the inmate's 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 habeas petition was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Hegger v. Visteon Auto. Sys., No. 05-5256,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employers were entitled to summary judgment on disparate treatment and retaliation claims filed under Title VII and the Tennessee Human Rights Act because an employee failed to rebut the employers' evidence showing that the employee was administratively disciplined for absenteeism and for engaging in inappropriate behavior in the workplace.
|
|||||
| Noland v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., NO. 05-5798,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decisions of the insurance company to deny the claimant further benefits under the ERISA long-term disability plan was not arbitrary and capricious where the evidence belied the assertion that the insurance company acted unfairly and the decisions were thoroughly investigated and reasonably substantiated by specific citation to medical findings.
|
|||||
| United States v. Bustos, Nos. 05-5297, 05-5342,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because he acknowledged in both his guilty plea and his plea hearing that under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(b)(1)(C) the statutory maximum for the conspiracy charge was up to 30 years in prison and based upon Booker, any judicial fact-finding within that legislatively-mandated range did not implicate the Sixth Amendment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
