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.
	Federal Courts - 7th Circuit Court of Appeals - February 7, 2007
	Call v. Ameritech Mgmt. Pension Plan, No. 05-4592, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Pension plan's petition for rehearing was denied because § 12.1 of ERISA plan did not track language of 29 U.S.C.S. § 1054(g) and was not materially identical to IRS manual that suggested language for inclusion in ERISA plans; subject phrase in § 12.1 implied that plan reserved right to eliminate optional benefits but not early-retirement benefits. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc., No. 06-2009, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: District court properly granted summary judgment to manufacturer in trademark holder's infringement suit. Mark at issue was descriptive mark. Even though presumption of validity applied under 15 U.S.C.S. § 1115(a), mark was not entitled to legal protection because it had not acquired secondary meaning. Holder had not sold many products using name. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Heard v. Blagojevich, No. 06-2251, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007 *, Submitted* The appellees notified this court that they were never served with process in the district court and would not be filing a brief or otherwise participating in this appeal. After an examination of the appellant's brief and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus the appeal is submitted on the appellant's brief and the record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: District court was not authorized to dismiss an inmate's complaint under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915A based on its view that the inmate had committed a fraud on the court. While the court had the discretion to dismiss the case as a sanction for fraud, because it appeared that the district court was relying on § 1915A, the decision was vacated and remanded. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Mannoia v. Farrow, No. 06-1430, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: District court properly determined that detective was entitled to qualified immunity in arrestee's § 1983 suit. The arrestee did not show that detective intentionally misrepresented any fact that was necessary for probable cause determination. No U.S. Const. amend IV violation was shown. Probable cause existed to support issuance of arrest warrant. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Northern Contr., Inc. v. Ill. DOT, No. 05-3981, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Redwood v. Dobson, Nos. 05-4324 & 06-1165, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Dismissal of couples' 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 1983, 1985 claims was affirmed, but attorneys from both sides were sanctioned under Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 for conduct unbecoming a member of the bar; in particular, one attorney was sanctioned for directing deponent not to answer a question and yet not applying for a protective order. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Sina v. Gonzales, No. 05-2755, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B), court affirmed IJ's denial of asylum because IJ's conclusion that alien was not credible was supported by substantial evidence, including submission of false documents, inconsistencies between alien's testimony and embassy report, and inconsistencies between alien's asylum declaration and his testimony. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Barian, No. 05-1482, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Spano, Nos. 06-1562, 06-1585, 06-1604, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Sentence imposed following first defendant's convictions for fraud and RICO offenses, which were treated as one group for sentencing, and tax offenses, which were treated as another group, was affirmed because under USSG § 3D1.4, sentencing range was 135 to 168 months, and defendant pointed to no circumstances that made his sentence unreasonable. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Tejeda, No. 06-1492, No. 06-1622, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 7, 2007, Decided View this case - free   Overview: District court erred in imposing drug testing as a supervised release condition under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3583(d) without setting limits on testing. The improper delegation of authority to probation agents was not plain error under Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b) because defendants' substantial rights were not affected and fairness of sentencing was not impugned. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Back to Top
	www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us   CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.