 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bassiouni v. FBI, No. 04-3888,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the FBI refused to amend a person's file, which contained 25 to 30-year-old memoranda pertaining to his activities concerning the Middle East, the district court properly granted the FBI summary judgment on the person's action under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C.S. § 552a, because the memos were pertinent to the FBI's law enforcement activity.
|
|||||
| Carter v. Grams, No. 05-2201,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of an inmate's application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 was affirmed where a witness's identification could not have resulted in actual prejudice where the inmate confessed his crime to three people and an eyewitness (in addition to the witness) placed him at the scene of the murder.
|
|||||
| Chen v. Gonzales, No. 05-3101,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court dismissed alien's petition for review, which had been transferred to court pursuant to § 106(c) of the Real ID Act, because petition was filed after enactment of Act, transfer back to district court would result in dismissal and could result in re-transfer to court, and case could not be transferred under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1631.
|
|||||
| Gjerazi v. Gonzales, No. 04-2344,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an IJ ignored the beating sustained by an Albanian citizen, the fire that destroyed his home, the undeserving warrant issued for his arrest, and, most misleading, the timing of the events and the political statements accompanying these instances of persecution, the IJ's decision to deny asylum was not supported by substantial evidence.
|
|||||
| Kmart Corp. v. Capital One Bank (In re Kmart Corp.), No. 05-1488,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Phillips v. Ford Motor Co., No. 05-8031, No. 05-8032,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Remand of two class action suits was affirmed because, since Illinois allowed named plaintiffs to be substituted with relation back, the addition of new plaintiffs in the two cases did not commence new suits, and thus remand was required under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-2, 119 Stat. 4.
|
|||||
| United States v. Blaylock, No. 03-1549,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence imposed upon defendant's conviction for armed bank robbery, conspiracy, and carrying and using a gun during the robbery was affirmed because defendant offered no reason to rebut presumption of reasonableness attached to her correctly calculated sentence and court could not say that sentence was unreasonably long.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cassano, No. 01-3857,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because the district judge stated that she would have given defendant the same sentence even though the USSG were now advisory. Additionally, the sentence was within the USSG range and, therefore, presumptively reasonable, and defendant did not rebut that presumption.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gilbertson, No. 05-2923,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case involving tampering with vehicle odometers, defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was not violated when odometer statements made by previous owners were introduced into evidence; these were not testimonial because the statements were not initiated by the Government in the hope of using them in a later criminal prosecution.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
