 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Shields v. Gov't Emples. Hosp. Ass'n, No. 05-2346,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Decided , June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An insured could not overcome the plain statutory language that provided for attorney fees only in relation to an action for insurance benefits which were overdue, pursuant to Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 500.3148(1). Her claim against one insurer fell within the provision, but the claim against another insurer did not.
|
|||||
| Speedy Mulch LLC v. Gadd, No. 06-3430,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although a plaintiff showed that it had engaged in protected conduct, and that an adverse action was taken against plaintiff that would have deterred a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that conduct, plaintiff was unable to show a causal connection between plaintiff's speech and defendant's conduct.
|
|||||
| Srisavath v. City of Brentwood, No. 06-6067,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sergeant's conduct was objectively unreasonable because his basis for the Terry stop was an uncorroborated anonymous tip, and other circumstances he relied upon were insufficient to provide the reasonable suspicion required by the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, the sergeant was not entitled to qualified immunity.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gapinski, No. 05-1166,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When district court imposed 156-month sentence under mandatory application of USSG and announced alternate 120-month sentence, which was intended to be imposed if USSG did not apply, defendant was entitled to resentencing. USSG did apply; however, USSG was advisory in nature, and it was only one factor under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) to be considered.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garner, Nos. 05-4215 / 05-4337,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Decided , June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the appellate court found that the jury's findings, together with the sentencing enhancement for a prior drug conviction, placed defendant squarely within 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(b)(1)(B)(2) where he faced a mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months of imprisonment and a maximum sentence of life, the court vacated the 96 month imprisonment sentence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Kathman, No. 06-5669,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Decided , June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Following Alford plea to 18 U.S.C.S. § 1112 involuntary manslaughter arising from automobile accident, district court did not clearly err in awarding U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 acceptance of responsibility notwithstanding defendant's amnesia. Fifty percent downward variance was not substantively unreasonable in light of explanation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Nelson, No. 06-3027,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly granted continuance constituting excludable delay regardless of whether the Speedy Trial clock was tolled for defendant's discovery motion, there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's drug conviction, amount of drugs utilized for sentencing purposes was based on testimony and defendant never asked for new counsel.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ponder, No. 06-3843,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Exigent circumstances supported the warrantless search of a house because it was reasonable for the officers to fear that the brother had both a weapon and a willingness to use it since the victim had indicated that defendant and the brother had illegally fired shots near his home less than an hour earlier and the brother had fled into the house.
|
|||||
| United States v. Summers, No. 05-4610,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant had failed to present sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could have found entrapment, the district court did not improperly deny his request to instruct the jury on entrapment. In particular, defendant presented insufficient evidence to prove his lack of predisposition to engage in criminal activity.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
