 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Emplrs Ins. Co. v. Century Indem. Co., 05-3437,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Whether the reinsurer and the insurer's agreements forbade consolidated arbitration concerned the kind of arbitration proceeding the parties agreed to. Because that arbitration question concerned contract interpretation and arbitration procedures, arbitrators were well situated to answer it, and the district court was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Kusilek v. Barnhart, No. 05-2010,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Given uncertainty in law regarding formulation of hypothetical questions accounting for mental limitations, district court did not abuse its discretion in finding SSA's litigation position in claimant's disability case was substantially justified and properly denied claimant's request for attorneys' fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2412(d)(1)(A).
|
|||||
| Lindell v. Houser, No. 04-2020,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a prison sergeant was affirmed because a white-supremacist inmate had no constitutional right to be housed with members of his own race, culture, or temperament, and there was no compelling reason to believe that the inmate was at serious risk by being housed with a Black inmate.
|
|||||
| Mlynczak v. Bodman, Nos. 04-3238 & 04-3369,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employees' discrimination and retaliation claims, 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 2000e-16, 2000e-3, against DOE failed. Existence of affirmative action policy did not permit factfinder to attribute illegal manipulation to decisionmakers; defamation lawsuit, shunning by co-workers, and decline in performance ratings were not actionable adverse employment actions.
|
|||||
| Swinson v. Wallace, No. 05-3666,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Tomic v. Catholic Diocese of Peoria, No. 04-4219,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because plaintiff's job duties as music director and organist of Catholic diocese had a significant religious dimension, the ministerial exception, which prevented federal courts from exercising jurisdiction over internal affairs of religious associations, prevented the exercise of jurisdiction over his age discrimination suit against the diocese.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gilbert, No. 05-3136,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court previously held the jury could have gone either way on the evidence remaining after the exclusion of defendant's wife's statements; the appellate court never hinted that as a matter of law the evidence could not support a conviction. Accordingly, the Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar retrying defendant.
|
|||||
| United States v. Smith, No. 05-2526,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's counsel was allowed to withdraw after filing two Anders briefs in sentencing appeal. Even if district court erred by failing to reconsider 18 U.S.C.S. § 3353(a) factors during resentencing, the error was harmless. Defendant's sentence was presumptively reasonable because it fell within applicable, advisory sentencing guidelines range.
|
|||||
| Velez v. City of Chicago, No. 05-3298,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A city was properly granted summary judgment on claims of hostile work environment brought by two Hispanic American employees under Title VII, 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000e et seq., because the person accused of harassing them was not their supervisor, and there was no evidence that the city was negligent in discovering or remedying the person's harassment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
