 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ali v. Gonzales, No. 05-1338,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Citizen's challenge to IJ's denial of his motion for continuance was rendered moot by the dismissal of his wife's I-130 petition. Alternatively, 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(a)(2)(B) stripped the court of jurisdiction to review the citizen's request for a continuance because § 1252(a)(2)(B) does not allow courts to review discretionary rulings.
|
|||||
| Arrington v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 05-2472,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006 * , Submitted* After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employee's appeal of his retaliation claim failed because it mattered only that the decision-makers at the employer really believed that the employee had aided a co-worker in committing theft, and the co-worker's written confession that prompted her termination was enough to demonstrate the absence of any material dispute concerning that question.
|
|||||
| Campbell v. City of Chicago, No. 05-3160,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006 * , Submitted* After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed inmate's § 1983 action because he sought to proceed in forma pauperis, had accumulated "three strikes" under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(g), had been warned about strikes and that he would have to pay filing fee in full before bringing further actions, and consciously failed to inform district court of strikes.
|
|||||
| Hanaj v. Gonzales, No. 05-1836,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien was improperly denied asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42)(A) based primarily on testimony that a birth certificate was forged; the IJ used the alleged forgery to negate the relevance of other corroborating evidence offered by the alien concerning his claim of persecution in Kosovo, including medical evidence that he had been tortured.
|
|||||
| Hays v. Bryan Cave LLP, No. 05-2154,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff's legal malpractice case against law firm and lawyers who represented plaintiff in federal criminal case because suit was not removable as elements of legal malpractice in Illinois were independent of federal criminal statutes that law firm and lawyers allegedly botched.
|
|||||
| Hofslien v. Barnhart, No. 05-2649,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Holman v. United States, No. 06-1588,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lenoir v. United States, No. 05-4702,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Nehan v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., No. 05-1066,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 3, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jury verdict in favor of employer was affirmed because having all-white jury in employee's racial discrimination action did not violate his right to due process as he was not entitled to jury composed of members of his race; because he failed to challenge any claim of discriminatory use of peremptory challenges during voir dire, claim was waived.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
