 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Sharafi v. Gonzales, No. 05-2388,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the alien failed to obtain judicial review of the BIA's denial of her motion to reopen and because she had failed to present any argument concerning the denial of her most recent motion to reconsider, there was no argument properly before the court, so the alien's petition for review was denied.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Potter, No. 04-3531,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court found that the employee had failed to present the court with evidence sufficient to create a question of material fact as to whether she complied with the 45-day period of limitations set forth in 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1). Therefore, grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States Postal Service was proper.
|
|||||
| Thurman v. Village of Homewood, No. 05-2940,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly entered against an armed shopper in his § 1983 suit. The shopper's U.S. Const. amend. IV rights were not violated when local police officers detained him until they confirmed that he was a Chicago police officer. The officers were not acting under color of state law when they filed a complaint with shopper's employer.
|
|||||
| Torres v. United States, Nos. 06-1364 & 06-1392,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Kelley, No. 05-1884,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's due process and U.S. Const. amend. VI, rights were not violated by district court's consideration of hearsay evidence at supervised release revocation hearing. Sixth Amendment did not apply because hearing was not a criminal proceeding. Hearsay evidence was substantially trustworthy; its admission did not undermine fairness of hearing.
|
|||||
| United States v. Moore, No. 04-2989,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court found that sufficient evidence existed to convict defendant of violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 1001. Appellant engaged in scheme to conceal material facts from city, in its role as administrator of federal block grant funds, specifically withholding material facts from city and consequently HUD about family's violation of conflict-of-interest rules.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
