 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Delawder v. Platinum Fin. Servs. Corp., No. 05-3318,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1692-1692o, and Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act, Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 1345.01-.99, an appellate court lacked jurisdiction to review a district court's partial denial of a dismissal motion as there was no absolute advocacy immunity providing basis for an interlocutory appeal.
|
|||||
| Kalaj v. Gonzales, No. 05-3172,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: IJ's three independent reasons for the denial of asylum supported the conclusions that the IJ did not deny the alien's Fifth Amendment due process rights and that the alien and his family were given a full and fair hearing. Thus, the IJ did not mischaracterize the alien's testimony in a manner that violated his due process rights.
|
|||||
| United States v. Goins, No. 05-5199,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for engaging in sexual acts with federal inmates in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 2243(b) was affirmed because allegedly excessive hearsay was not plain error. His case was remanded for resentencing to allow him the right of allocution because the district court did not comply with Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(4)(A)(ii).
|
|||||
| Campbell v. Eckerd Corp., No. 05-5771,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former employee's lawsuit against her former employer under the ADA, the Tennessee Handicap Act, and the FMLA was properly summarily dismissed as she did not establish a genuine issue of fact as to whether the employer perceived her as disabled nor sufficiently rebut the employer's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for termination.
|
|||||
| Gilmore v. Davis, No. 05-5176,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An ex-wife's state law tort claims against her ex-husband and a music publisher, alleging entitlement to music royalties from a song that the ex-husband co-wrote, were improperly summarily dismissed as time-barred because the discovery rule applied to the case and she was entitled to have a trier of fact decide when the cause of action accrued.
|
|||||
| McCormick v. Braverman, No. 04-1708,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 20, 2006, Decided , June 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In § 1983 action in which purported property owner alleged that numerous defendants illegally interfered with ownership, district court erred in concluding that all claims were barred by Rooker-Feldman because only two claims asserted injuries from state court judgments. Remaining independent claims, however, were barred by collateral estoppel.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. City of Clarksville, No. 05-5924,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for municipalities was properly granted in action by African Americans and Native American alleging denial of facilities use based on discriminatory animus in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because there was no evidence that similarly-situated members of nonprotected class received more favorable treatment.
|
|||||
| Roll Rite Corp. v. Automated Integrated Sys., No. 05-1366,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendant corporation when plaintiff corporation failed to demonstrate non-functionality, which was an essential element of its trade dress infringement claim under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125. A magistrate did not clearly err in denying plaintiff's motion to compel.
|
|||||
| Singh v. Gonzales, Nos. 04-4352/4353,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, June 21, 2006, Decided , June 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA's history of imputing parents' knowledge of ineligibility for admission or of intent to abandon residency status to their children did not establish reasonable basis for imputing fraudulent conduct to children; thus, BIA erred when it imputed fraud to minor child in finding her removable under 8 U.S.C.S. §§ 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), 1227(a)(1)(A).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
