 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. Bartholomew Consol. Sch. Corp., No. 05-1526,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal filed by parents who had challenged a school district's individualized educational program (IEP) for their autistic son was moot because the parents had moved to a new district and agreed to a new IEP. Any claim that the parents had for reimbursement of expenses during the disputed years was not in their complaint, and therefore abandoned.
|
|||||
| Davit v. Davit, No. 05-1061,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed former husband's RICO claims against former wife and state court judges who presided over divorce proceedings because factual particularities required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) that district court found missing, even after husband amended complaint, doomed his RICO claims.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Ill. Commerce, No. 05-3251,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed customer's action against Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) because ICC was a state agency and, thus, immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment, and the customer presented no argument that an exception to sovereign immunity applied in the case.
|
|||||
| Jones v. Burton, No. 05-4084,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed inmate's Bivens action against prison officials, alleging that officials confiscated his wristwatch in violation of his right to procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment, because prison grievance procedure provided adequate post-deprivation remedy, regardless of whether inmate agreed with outcome.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. Abbott Labs., No. 05-3471,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an employee was fired for falsifying a work order and excessive time away from work, summary judgment for the employer was properly granted in the employee's discrimination action under Title VII, 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e et seq., because there was no evidence that the person who fired him did not honestly believe that termination was justified.
|
|||||
| Nance v. Chi. Christian Indus. League, No. 05-2353,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly granted summary judgment to former employer on former employee's Title VII and ADEA claims because employee failed to show that characteristics he shared with interns were relevant to his position or that he was similarly situated to case managers with less seniority who were retained after he was terminated.
|
|||||
| Raymond v. Ameritech Corp., No. 05-1855,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee failed to make out her prima facie case of discrimination because there was no evidence that the employee was treated differently than a similarly situated employee outside her protected class. The district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to consider the employee's brief, which was filed past an already extended deadline.
|
|||||
| Stanton v. Pausma, No. 05-2794,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The inmate could not state a procedural due process claim because the punishment he received - 8 days in adjustment segregation and 180 days in program segregation - allegedly in retaliation after he reported witnessing an officer attack an inmate, did not constitute a deprivation that implicated a protected liberty interest.
|
|||||
| U.S. Bank N.A. v. United Air Lines, Inc. (In re United Air Lines), Nos. 05-1752 & 05-1814,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 29, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
